HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Morris Kwok
Subject: Trident & TCP/IP 1.2
Organization: Computer Services Center, The Chinese University of Hong Kong
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 04:28:52 GMT

I am using the Trident 8900C with 1MB RAM video adapter and running the IBM
TCPIP 1.2 for OS/2 on OS/2 v1.3 (I don't have luck to get 2.0 early)

The PMX works fine when I used the standard VGA comes with OS/2 v1.3. However,
when I installed the 800x600x256c driver from hobbes (trid256.zoo), the X
client cannot display with error message "Can't open display". Does anyone
outthere have sucessfully used 256 color on a Trident card with the PMX X
Server? I don't mind 640x480, but I need 256c!

I have tried to download the trid256a.zoo (patch for trid256)from hobbes.nmsu,
but the file it corrupted (CRC errors), does anyone know whether the patch is
for the problem with the X server?

Moreover, I have heard that the latest TCP/IP version is 1.2.1, how can I know
that my version is 1.2 or 1.2.1?

Thank you very much.

morris@next.csc.cuhk.hk

OS/2 it !
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: haghi@caen.engin.umich.edu (Mehrdad Haghi)
Subject: Data acquisition/Control software for OS2??
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 13:16:58 EDT
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor

I'm wondering if anybody knows of data acquisition/control software
which runs under OS2 (for example like Labtech Notebook or Labview
which run under MS-DOS, MS Windows and on Macintoshes). If such a
thing exists, do you know what A-to-D,D-to-A boards it supports?
From: gt0040a@prism.gatech.EDU (Thomas Michael Sorensen)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: Re: WIndows 3.1 Apps don't run under OS/2
Date: 8 Apr 92 18:42:43 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In <1992Apr7.193743.26031@hemlock.cray.com> bgm@cray.com (Bert Moshier) writes:

>IBM showed OS/2 2.0 GA with modification running Windows 3.1 applications
>at COMDEX (4/7/92).  Lee Reiswig did not say when the modifications would

Er, he wasn't running a modified version of OS/2 there- he was running Win 3.1
under a full-screen DOS box in GA (or at least that's how *I* saw it). If you 
want Windows 3.1 you can have it.

But yes, Win 3.1 support will be put into OS/2 2.0 direct in the Summer CSD
release. Also supposed to have SVGA seemless Windows and some other stuff.
           Tom Sorensen

-- 
Tom Sorensen              gt0040a@prism.gatech.edu
Georgia Tech 
And no, I don't like this .signature.
From: lairdkb@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Kyler Laird)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: Re: WIndows 3.1 Apps don't run under OS/2
Date: 10 Apr 92 23:00:32 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center

In article <10APR199212152043@oregon.uoregon.edu> tsavola@oregon.uoregon.edu (Tom Savola) writes:
>How about Win 3.1 multimedia compatibility, being able to access MM hardware
>within a Win-OS/2 session? 

What's the deal with MM and OS/2?  When will I be able to use Compton's
under OS/2?  How do the MM extensions for 3.0 fit into all of this?

I installed a system for my boss' family.  A major part of it is the
CD-ROM drive.  I'm earning a (not entirely wanted) reputation, and may
be doing some installs for their friends.  (This system is running
DOS 5.0/MS Windows 3.0.)

I thought as part of the deal, I'd require that OS/2 2.0 be installed.
BUT, if the CD-ROM drive and sound boards (another part of my deal)
become unusable, I can't do this.

--kyler
From: amund@itk.unit.no (Amund Skavhaug)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: Re: Data acquisition/Control software for OS2??
Date: 17 Apr 92 14:39:18 GMT
Organization: Norwegian Institute of Technology / SINTEF, Trondheim, Norway

Labwindows 2.0 and 2.1 uses a DPMI dos extender, and should be compatible with
os2 2.0. "PMINFO" which is a dos program bundled with Labwindows reports that
Labwindows should work...It reports some statistics, the time it used for
switching modes, that it uses DPMI and such stuff.
TOO BAD when Labwindows starts up it stop after a few seconds, and reports a
"protection violation", NB it's the dosextender which reports that, os2
has no problems.
(If you could call National Instruments and check this out, you (and later I)
would end up with a nice product...if they fixes it, I like Labwindows , but I\
 sure would like to write some documentation while using it....)
-- 

Regards, Amund Skavhaug

Division of Engineering Cybernetics	: Phone +47 7 594376
The Norwegian Institute of Technology	: Fax   +47 7 594399
N-7034 Trondheim                        : Email amund@itk.unit.no
NORWAY
From: haen@veces.stgt.sub.org (Herbert Neugebauer)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: printer driver
Date: 8 Apr 92 19:10:08 GMT
Organization: Me? Organized?


Hello,

I know this was asked several times ago, but I'm currently using
6.304e, and there is no real driver support for HP DeskJet (only
in Epson mode). But now GA is available, and I would like to
know if ther is a driver know.

Thanx in advance

    Herbert

~~~~~~ Herbert Neugebauer ~~~ Eberhard Str. 5 ~~~~~~ W-7038 Holzgerlingen ~~
~~ haen@veces.stgt.sub.org ~~~ phone:  07031-603164 ~~~~~    Germany	  ~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~  This sentence in English is difficult to translate into German.	 ~~~
~~					   -  D. R. Hofstadter		 ~~~
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: tanith@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Michael D Kretzer)
Subject: Re: Upgrade:  Prog. Tools & Info Kit
Originator: tanith@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Reply-To: tanith@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 23:44:05 GMT

From article <FXP4iB2w164w@cellar.org>, by wtw@cellar.org (Bill Warner):
>    I have version 1.3 of IBM's Programming Tools and Information kit
> for OS/2 1.3.  Is there an upgrade offered for OS/2 2.0?  I haven't
> heard anything from IBM.  Should I call 1-800-3IBM-OS2?
> 
>    If anyone knows the story on this, let me know!  Thanks in advance.

As far as I know, there is no upgrade offered from OS/2 1.3 Tools &
Information to 2.0.  When I called IBM about this, I was told that I
can still create 16-bit apps with the 1.3 tools/compiler, therefore
no upgrade will be offered.  This seems fair to me, and I have had no
problems creating 16-bit apps for OS/2 2.0 with the old tools...it looks
like if you want to go up to 32-bit, you have to pay for it :)
From: swyatt@bach.udel.edu (Stephen L Wyatt)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: Upgrade from Windows/DOS to os 2.0
Date: 6 Apr 92 17:53:53 GMT
Organization: University of Delaware

Alright, forgetting all of the technical stuff that I have been hearing about
for the past months, should I upgrade from the following situation:

I use dos 5.0, windows 3.0, and basically lots of normal dos/windows 
applications.  I have a 386 and 4 megs, 80 meg disk (formatted dos, of course)

Should I upgrade?  Will it be advantageous?  Can I run it under my setup and
will it be fast enough?  Faster than my current situation?  will I have
to re-format my hardisk? and can I use my tape backup player? etc...

thanks.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: bgm@cray.com (Bert Moshier)
Subject: Re: OS2 and Stacker.......
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 7 Apr 92 19:33:31 CDT

In article <2321@accucx.cc.ruu.nl> nevries@accucx.cc.ruu.nl (Nico de Vries.) writes:
>In <1992Apr5.012233.4365@zip.eecs.umich.edu> tazzzzz@sparky.eecs.umich.edu (Kevin Dangoor) writes:
>
>>In article <1992Apr4.215007.17207@descartes.waterloo.edu> dsladden@descartes.waterloo.edu (Darryl Sladden) writes:
>>>would not allow OS/2 to access files on stacked drives.  STacker technology 
>>>will be in future updates of OS/2 but right now, unstack that drive, or there
>>>will be no OS/2 for you.
>
>>On Compuserve, an IBM press conference was quoted as saying that IBM was
>>"working closely with Stac" or some such. More specifically, however, is
>>that Stac will be participating in a big rally/show for OS/2 on Tuesday.
>>I, for one, would like to see at least an official announcement then.
>
>>--Kevin Dangoor
>>Internet: tazzzzz@eecs.umich.edu
>>
>
>It seems Stacker for OS/2 already exists. Egghead seems to start selling it
>in some days. Very positive surprise I must say. Can anyone confirm this?
>
>Nico de Vries (nevries@cc.ruu.nl)              
>
>#include <std disclaimer & my personal opinion.h++>     - O   Don't

This is incorrect.

I spoke on Monday with Gary Colw, President of Stac Electronic.

Bert Moshier
From: eagle@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (Daniel L'Hommedieu)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: Re: General suite of apps
Date: 11 Apr 92 14:11:54 GMT
Organization: North Carolina State University

sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples) writes:
>Which man?  He is wrong; Lotus has just announced that they'll port
>their entire suite of applications to 32-bit OS/2 2.0.  Some are
>already available for OS/2 (1-2-3, Freelance, and Notes).

His name was Robert.  Didn't catch the last name.  I hope that what
you're referring to is a new product, and not just a recompilation for
OS/2, like it appears that Microsoft Word for OS/2 was.

>Excel 3.0 does exist in an OS/2 version.  Wingz, Lotus 1-2-3, and
>Multiplan are also available.  I use 1-2-3/G 1.1 and I like it.

This may be a stupid question, but who makes Wingz?  I think I'll give
them a call or write them for some info.
--
Daniel L'Hommedieu / CSC Major, NC State U, on the 6-year plan :) 
Internet: eagle@{catt.ncsu.edu,Salzo.Cary.NC.US,grunt.Berkeley.edu}
10215 Hanover Glen Road / Charlotte NC 28210 / 704-541-5116
"Windows 3.1 is Microsoft's $50 bug-fix to Windows 3.0."-JWL
From: peter@pgeck.sub.org (Peter Gahbler)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: Re: Re: What's the deal with OS/2 2.0 and upgrade prices?
Date: 9 Apr 92 20:39:21 GMT
Organization: Private site

n9046319@waldorf.cc.wwu.edu (Jeremy Corley) writes:

> 	That's too bad.  I would then suggest you overseas types
> send your windows manual to a friend in the states with the money
> have them buy OS/2 2.0 and then ship it to you.

Well, meanwhile I came to the same conclusion :-)). And what is 
more I found someone willing to do as suggested :-)).
I will wait until the IBM roadshow will have taken place. Perhaps 
they will have some promotion prices (though I doubt it). If not 
my windows cover will be on the way overseas...

Bye
  Peter
From: rem@buitc.bu.edu (Robert Mee)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: Re: OS/2 upgrade and Egghead
Date: 13 Apr 92 17:50:30 GMT
Reply-To: rem@buitc.bu.edu (Robert Mee)
Organization: Boston University

Whoops, I guess I'm sorry I made the post!
I should have looked at the form a bit 
(NOT!) closer. 

Sorry for generating more noise than 
necessary.

Rob

-- 

Robert Mee     Boston University Information Technology      (rem@bu-it.bu.edu)


Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain)
Subject: Re: Upgrade:  Prog. Tools & Info Kit
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 92 23:18:32 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

no.
-- 
Bob Cain    rcain@netcom.com   408-358-2007

"There are some strings.  They're just not attached."
                                                    Victoria Roberts
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: bgm@cray.com (Bert Moshier)
Subject: Re: WIndows 3.1 Apps don't run under OS/2
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: 13 Apr 92 14:19:32 CDT

In article <10APR199212235483@rigel.tamu.edu> wjb5106@rigel.tamu.edu (Walter Barnett) writes:
>Just how important is it that OS/2 provide complete, immediate
>compatibility with Windows 3.1?  I can't imagine that very many (if any)
>software vendors are going to write applications that won't run on Win-3
>(except, perhaps, Microsoft with their applets).  I just got an upgrade
>notice for MS-Excel v4.0 for Windows and it requires Win-3.  There is no
>mention of Windows v3.1.  It is one thing to take advantage of
>additional capabilities (Truetype is the only obvious one) but quite
>another to cut yourself off from a large installed base of users.
>Eventually, of course, 3.1 compatibility might be an important asset for
>OS/2 but what difference (except to a few braindead applets) if it comes
>now or somewhere down the road? 
>_______________________________________________________________________
>Walter Barnett        Aerospace Engineering        Texas A&M University 

Walter:

Actually, IBM at COMDEX showed Windows 3.1 running in a DOS session with
Windows 3.1 applications.  I believe this was Windows 3.1 running in
Standard mode (not real).

I agree with you it is not that important but it is nice to know IBM already
has it working.

Bert Moshier
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: GD.SAR@forsythe.stanford.edu (Sandy Rockowitz)
Subject: Re: WIndows 3.1 Apps don't run under OS/2
Organization: Stanford University, California, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 22:29:59 GMT

In article <1992Apr08.195923.23493@watson.ibm.com>,
dwl@watson.ibm.com (David W. Levine) writes:
>I chased this down. He was showing a modified OS/2 2.0+ (Beyond GA) running
>seamless 3.1 on the OS/2 2.0 desktop. This is a rather strong statement
>of intent and capability. This will be in the update stream. And you will
>be able to run your Windows 3.0 applications that don't run on Windows 3.1
>and your Windows 3.1 applications...  Thats more compatible with Windows
>than Windows 3.1, you know.

David,

Thanks for tracking this down. Lots of us seem to have seen and
heard different things in the Comdex broadcast.

I certainly hope that OS/2's Windows support allows both 3.0 and
3.1 apps to run.  (Perhaps a settings item for WPS desktop
apps that indicates 3.0 vs 3.1 mode?)  This would make OS/2 very
attractive to users with apps that don't run under 3.1.  This would
give real meaning to the slogan "a better Windows than Windows".

Sandy
gd.sar@forsythe.stanford.edu
From: tsavola@oregon.uoregon.edu (Tom Savola)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: Re: WIndows 3.1 Apps don't run under OS/2
Date: 10 Apr 92 19:15:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: oregon.10APR199212152043
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Oregon
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <10APR199212235483@rigel.tamu.edu>, wjb5106@rigel.tamu.edu (Walter Barnett) writes...
>Just how important is it that OS/2 provide complete, immediate
>compatibility with Windows 3.1?  I can't imagine that very many (if any)
>software vendors are going to write applications that won't run on Win-3
>(except, perhaps, Microsoft with their applets).  I just got an upgrade
>notice for MS-Excel v4.0 for Windows and it requires Win-3.  There is no
>mention of Windows v3.1.  It is one thing to take advantage of
>additional capabilities (Truetype is the only obvious one) but quite
>another to cut yourself off from a large installed base of users.
>Eventually, of course, 3.1 compatibility might be an important asset for
>OS/2 but what difference (except to a few braindead applets) if it comes
>now or somewhere down the road? 
>_______________________________________________________________________
>Walter Barnett        Aerospace Engineering        Texas A&M University 

How about Win 3.1 multimedia compatibility, being able to access MM hardware
within a Win-OS/2 session?  I know I would appreciate being able to run the
Win 3.1 File Manager -- OS/2 doesn't have any really smart file manager
programs (I've been using Directory Manager/PM, but it is somewhat buggy
and could use some more capabilities.)  I would also assume that the
performance advantages that the 3.1 code has over the 3.0 code would translate
somewhat to a 3.1-compatible Win-OS/2 session (not the direct hardware
accessing, but the tighter code perhaps.)


Tom Savola
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: bgm@cray.com (Bert Moshier)
Subject: Re: WordPerfect for OS/2
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 7 Apr 92 19:07:25 CDT

In article <1992Apr2.191622.25850@zip.eecs.umich.edu> tazzzzz@sparky.eecs.umich.edu (Kevin Dangoor) writes:
>According to IBM's list of applications under development for OS/2 2.0,
>WordPerfect will be making a 32-bit WordPerfect. Does anyone know if this
>would be a PM program, or a 32-bit character mode program?
>
>---Kevin Dangoor
>tazzzzz@eecs.umich.edu

Kevin:

Straight from the IBM press conference on Monday - PM!

Alan Ashton (President, WordPerfect Corporation) was there announcing it.
 
Bert Moshier
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Subject: Re: Databases for OS/2
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 19:30:02 GMT

In article <1992Apr9.150503.13164@acsu.buffalo.edu> v106padf@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (MIKE CARGIAN) writes:
>I am currently thinking of moving to OS/2 and would like to know
>what relational databases are out there for OS/2.

IBM's Database Manager, MS SQL Server, Oracle, R:Base, Paradox, and
Sybase is in the works for OS/2 2.0, to name a few.
-- 
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.
From: chandoni@husc8.harvard.edu (Part of the Problem)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: Help! tcp/ip 1.2, 6.177, wd8013ep
Date: 16 Apr 92 20:02:15 GMT
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

Has anybody gotten tcp/ip 1.2 to work with the 6.177 beta
and the wd8013ep card?  I have level 1.18 of the smcmac.os2
driver.  Since the card is programmable, I have set it
both at int 5, i/o base 240, ram base c800 (which I used under
dos/windows, and still can use in one dos box with FTP
software's dos package) and the default settings of 3/280/d000.
The drivers in config.sys display messages that the driver
is loaded, and inet and ifndis seem to load fine also.

The system will crash if the tcpstart.cmd runs to completion
(I think when it starts routed), or when I stop it and manually
run start.cmd, then ping another system or start routed.  For
some reason, I can ping myself without crashing the system, but
when I ping the machine sitting next to mine, it crashes.

The crash displays trap 0000 or 0012, then a whole lot of register
information, then says I have error ##0160:fff670df-000d:a0df
followed by a line with the numbers 60000,9084 followd by
a line with the number 048600b4.  It then tells me to record
the # and contact a service rep.

My protocol.ini is pretty simple, just:
[protocol_manager]
	DriverName = PROTMAN$

[TCPIP_XIF]
	DriverName = TCPIP$
	Bindings = SMCMAC

[SMCMAC]
	DriverName = SMCMAC$

The smcmac.os2 driver seems to be getting all the info it needs
off the card, because it prints the correct information on the
screen as it loads up.

So, has anybody got this working?

Thanks,
JMC
-- 
chandoni@husc9.harvard.edu    | I will not yell fire in a crowded classroom
John-Marc Chandonia           | I will not yell fire in a crowded classroom
Graduate Biophysics Program   | I will not yell fire in a crowded classroom 
Harvard University            | I will not yell fire ...
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: slumos@lil-ed.cs.unlv.edu (Steve E. Lumos)
Subject: Need help finding an IBM rep with a brain.
Reply-To: slumos@lil-ed.cs.unlv.edu (Steve E. Lumos)
Organization: UNLV Computer Science and Electrical Engineering
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 92 23:36:02 GMT


I'll start from the beginning:

At Comdex (Fall/91), my girlfriend won a copy of OS/2 2.0 at the main IBM booth.
Today, I told her it might be a good idea to call 1/800-3-IBM-OS2 and ask them
what the status of the package was. The answer went something like this:

What is Comdex? <operator then puts her on hold and goes around asking other
people what Comdex is> I think that you will have to talk to the people in
charge of Comdex [yeah, right], I don't know anything about that.

Now, I'm not flaming IBM for hiring dumb operators, everybody else does the 
same thing after all. I would just like to know who I might be able to call to
get a report on the status of our copy. I haven't gotten around to sending in
my upgrade form for 1.3 ==> 2.0 because I was sure that we would get the verison
that she won at Comdex long before we would get the upgrade.

Thanks - Steve
-- 
Steve Lumos - slumos@cs.unlv.edu
From: gezelter@rlgsc.com
Newsgroups: comp.os.vms
Subject: Re: VMS viruses
Date: 16 Apr 92 22:49:39 GMT
Article-I.D.: rlgsc.1992Apr16.174939.45
Organization: Robert Gezelter Software Consultant, Flushing, NY

In article <1992Apr16.135111.1@woods.ulowell.edu>, welchb@woods.ulowell.edu writes:
> I do not know how apropos to the intended subject this reply is; I
> merely offer it for further security thought (probably because I was
> thinking of a recent security hole while I had to do my kid's paper
> route this morning!).
> 
> We have not debugged and printed the instructions yet, for all the possible
> transfers.  When I went to use the setup the other day, I "inherited"
> some of what was the last usage.  This included the fact that someone
> had previously entered SYSTEM as the username, and the password,
> in order to let NFT transfer a file to a Vax account.
> 
> ...
> relatively secure area, although unsupervised student workers could
> access it at night.  My main point is that the opportunity for the
> "hole" comes from a combination of things:  a lack of emphasis by the
> manufacturers that this potential hole would exist; a lack of 
> instructions; the instruction person did not foresee that the user would have
> to be told how to "erase" the info left behind by a privileged user; 
> unforeseen physical access problems; evil intent by semi-privileged
> student.
 
Point well taken. Over 95% of the security loopholes that I have 
seen at most sites are PEOPLE problems not system problems. This 
leaves two issues, are there ways to make things better (or at 
least to reduce the damage caused by the people) or prevent the 
problems in the first place. Unfortunately, the must less 
prevalent, but also extremely technological attacks often get 
first billing.
 
One important question, WHY was the terminal used for copying 
floppy disks and files EVER logged onto the SYSTEM account? 
There should never be a need for a privileged account (if files 
must be moved to a particular account, create some sort or secure 
spooling system or use Email to move the files to the actual user 
account).
 
When reading the "Cuckoos Egg", one of the most striking features 
is the relatively unsophisticated nature of the attack combined 
with the alarmingly high success rate of the attacker! 
 
Better security requires alert users and good software!
-- 

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Robert "Bob" Gezelter                       E-Mail:  gezelter@rlgsc.com  |
| Robert Gezelter Software Consultant         Voic
From: JIMKIRK@corral.uwyo.edu (Jim Kirkpatrick)
Newsgroups: comp.os.vms
Subject: SORT/INDEX so slow -- summary
Date: 15 Apr 92 17:17:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The Internet

I received 4 replies to my query on why SORT/INDEX/OVERLAY was so slow,
and in every case the answer was to not use SORT!  Well, that was sort of
the expected reply though I was holding out for some obscure trick.

CONVERT is indeed faster, and does the sort as well.

Thanks to those who replied:
  Dan Wing
  Tony Scandora
  Harry Flowers
  Wolfgang Moeller

Jim Kirkpatrick   jimkirk@corral.uwyo.edu


Newsgroups: comp.os.vms