HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 09:35:50 +0200
From: Martin_Schloeter@eurologic.fido.de (Martin Schloeter)
Subject: Re: Windows == OS
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
X-Comment-To: tguez@jade.tufts.edu (Name)
Organization: Die ersten 100.000 Jahre... 

N > Unix's system calls are not the same as window's API functions.  On
N > unix you can use ONLY the system calls to do certain things.  For
N > instance try accessing process PCBs (processes control blocks)
N > directly in machine code without using any of UNIX system function
N > calls- your appllication will be terminated before you release the
N > return key (this is because unix takes advantage of the OPERATING
N > SYSTEM BIT or PRIVILEGE BIT).  Now you can freely do this on DOS, and
N > in ms-windows.  You can very easily play with the PCB of windows
N > engine itself.  This is because DOS does not take care of this (I am
N > sure that on 286 and up has this bit).  This means that DOS still
N > has a higher role than just a "device-driver for windows."  Hence,
N > windows does not releave DOS of it's most fundamental operating system
N > duties, and therefore, windows IS NOT an OP.
N > 
N > The protected mode windows is so famous for is either not the same
N > thing as I described in the previous paragraph or windows is not doing
N > the job properly because it's not windows job but DOS's job.  Just
N > yesterday I downloaded winvn, I executed from file-manager, and QEMM
N > wrote on window's screen like it did not exist, and it complained that
N > the CPU informed QEMM that the application *** executed a bad
N > instruction and it gave me the option to reboot the system.  Now if
N > DOS would of taken care these things like on unix, the application
N > would of terminated and UNIX would of cleaned up after it (more or
N > less) without rebooting.  Yet, it was not windows that complained, it
N > was QEMM which is DOS's baby.  There is another example of where DOS
N > still serves as an operating system were windows does not take serious
N > duties.
You are ONLY describing the lack of security in the OS Windows. The main reason 
for that is, that all apps and the system are running on the same CPU 
protection ring.
BUT AN OS HAS NOT TO BE SECURE TO BE AN OS.
But of course, if security is the point of view Unix or OS/2 is the better OS.

Martin
From: kazak@triton.unm.edu ()
Subject: Re: Fonts
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 04:52:14 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
Distribution: usa

In article <1992Sep1.225840.6137@leland.Stanford.EDU> chetter@leland.Stanford.EDU (chet pager) writes:
>
>Once I copy *.ttf (fonts) into my c:\windows\system directory,
>how do I get them to appear when I choose fonts in W4W?  Should
>this happen automatically (and if not, what went wrong?)?
>PS: how do I turn on screensaver without having to manually
>	edit win.ini?
>	**please email responses to chetter@leland.stanford.edu**
>
	All you have to do is go under control panel fonts and add the new
	fonts. Of course, you must know where the fonts are located. There
	is an option at the bottom for copying the font to the windows
	directory if they are not located in the windows\system directory.

	No fuss, no muss!

	Kazak@triton.unm.edu



Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: macole@wam.umd.edu (Mario A. Cole)
Subject: Re: Speeding up Windows
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 04:08:23 GMT

In article <Sep.2.08.09.51.1992.3949@ratt.rutgers.edu> andrewsr@ratt.rutgers.edu (Rich Andrews) writes:
>In article <1992Aug28.222436.7248@wam.umd.edu> macole@wam.umd.edu (Mario A. Cole) writes:
>
>
>> this sounds very familiar!)  Other pointers...don't put Windows on a Stacker
>> drive, trash Himem.sys, don't blame Smartdrv for everything, and most 
>> important of all...give Windows every bit of memory you can spare.
>> 
>
>> Mario
>> 
>
>Wouldn't putting Windows on a stacker drive speed up performance?  
>

Nope...Stacker compresses (or tries to) everything...whatever is on the stacker
drive will have too be decompressed first...hence, any disk i/o operations will
take a tad bit longer.  Of course, if you have files that are loaded in all at
once..then you can save space by keeping them on the stacker drive.  I keep all
of my windows apps on the stacker drive...except for windows itself and Norton
Desktop.

>What is wrong with HIMEM.SYS?

Nothing...I just hate using MS supplied utils...it's liking using Paintbrush or
Write instead of using PhotoStyler or MS Word.  I got hold of QEMM and I like
it very much...of course, only after months of taming it.

>
>TO increase my performance, I disabled the RAMDISK and gave the memory
>to SMARTDRV.  I installed Stacker to increase (double) the size of
>SMARTDRV's cache and decrease the size of files on the disk.  But,
>adding an ATI Ultra also made a gain in speed.  Not as much as I
>expected, however.

Once again...your caching has to be decompressed and recompressed before any
action is taken.  If you're running a 486-50 there probably wouldn't be any
problems...but for me and my 386-25...I would rather keep any disk i/o 
intensive action away from Stacker.

Mario


-- 
Mario A. Cole			     |  HJ Ford Associates Incorporated
macole@wam.umd.edu		     |  1111 Jeff Davis Hwy Suite 808
University of Maryland College Park  |  Crystal City, Arlington, VA 22202
(301) 868-9249 		             |  (703) 553-5580
From: droufa@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Donald J Roufa)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: WNQVTNET - Help
Date: 27 Aug 1992 08:25:02 -0500
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

sbjie@engr.psu.edu (Sanjay Joshi) writes:

>HI,

>I am having some problems with using wnqvtnet, especially when using the
>gateway and namesever.  No matter what i specify to telnet it always
>logs me into the namesever.

>Can someone using the namesever and gateway in thier qvt_tcp.rc file
>send me copy of the file, so i can see what i am doing wrong.

>Also, I have been playing with version 2.1, is there a newer version
>around. and where can I get it.

>Thanks,

>sanjay joshi.


I have been using wnqvtnet for over a year and am quite happy with it.
The two additions that I would like to see them make involve expanding
the POP3 mail server to include a few more ammenities (such as the
ability to insert the message received during the editing of a reply)
and, although this is major, the ability to emulate an Xterminal.
From what you describe, I would bet that there are errors in your
"qvt_tcp.rc" file.  Finally, the current version of wnqvtnet is 2.7,
available on "ftp.cica.indiana.edu" in the subdirectory
"/pub/pc/win3/uploads".

Don Roufa
-- 
    Don Roufa        DROUFA@MATT.KSU.KSU.EDU
Division of Biology  Kansas State Univ.   Manhattan, KS  66506           


Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: d89os@efd.lth.se (Ola Sigurdson)
Subject: Re: Windows 4.0 (really DOS 6.0)
Organization: Lund Institute of Technology, Sweden
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 22:37:09 GMT

Hear, hear! Well said, if only MS could think too...

(Mr) Ola Sigurdson      Internet: d89os@efd.lth.se
(Hi! I'm a mutant .signature virus. Let me kill your old .signature virus.)
From: peskin@epx.cis.umn.edu (Yury Peskin)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: Undocumented win.ini settings
Date: 27 Aug 92 23:36:13 GMT
Organization: University of Minnesota

In article <1992Aug27.092743.24039@doug.cae.wisc.edu> terryh@cae.wisc.edu (Terry Henning) writes:
>Hi,
>
>I just wanted to say thanks to all who replied to my post.  I was not aware
>that the Resource Kit was available via ftp. I thought it had to be purchased.
>
>Terry Henning
>
Sorry, I'm late to this thread but could someone post the ftp site the WRK can
be found on?
Thanks.


-- 
We The Willing, Lead By The Unknowing, Are Doing The Impossible
For The Ungrateful.  We Have Done So Much For So Long With So
Little, We Are Now Qualified To Do Anything With NOTHING.
Yury Peskin at peskin@epx.cis.umn.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: mguyott@eriador.prime.com (M. Guyott)
Subject: Re: Mouse drivers: mouse.com mouse.sys mouse.drv
Keywords: mouse drivers
Organization: /etc/organization
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 14:01:44 GMT

mouse.sys - used in config.sys (device=mouse.sys)
mouse.com - used in autoexec.bat
mouse.drv - used by Windows.

Marc
----
Two of the worst things we teach our children are that a knowledge of science
is nice but not necessary, and a knowledge of sex is necessary but not nice.

Marc Guyott              Constellation Software, Inc.          (508) 620-2800
                         Framingham, Mass. 01701 USA                Ext. 3135
mguyott@primerd.prime.com       ...!{uunet, decwrl}!primerd.prime.com!mguyott
mguyott@eriador.prime.com       ...!{uunet, decwrl}!eriador.prime.com!mguyott
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: jchrissi@afit.af.mil (James W. Chrissis)
Subject: Re: WINSPEED DRIVERS LOCATION (not?)
Organization: Air Force Institute of Technology
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 19:18:57 GMT

[stuff deleted]

>> 
>> >Anyone got any idea where the winspeed drivers can be located?
>> 
>>     Isn't Winspeed (the software windows accelerator) commercial software?
>> I've seen it being sold in a local software store, too.
>> 
>> Timothy
>> 

>Every mention I have seen of WinSpeed (the video drivers, not the benchmarking
>utility) has mentioned that they are commercial software and NOT shareware.

WinSpeed IS commercial software.  It is published by Panacea.

>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
James W. Chrissis                      |   No time to find
Air Force Institute of Technology      |   a snappy quote.
Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio             |

From: Monroe.Thomas@ttlg.UUCP (Monroe Thomas)
Sender: postmaster@ttlg.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: Monitor
From: edowdy@vax1.umkc.edu
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 05:11:46 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri - Kansas City

In article <897.5.uupcb@uttsbbs.uucp>, reza.naima@uttsbbs.uucp (Reza Naima)  writes:
>   I'm not sure if this is appropriate, but a friend pointed this out to 
> when I was over at his house.  He runs windows under 800X600 (or something 
> like that) mode, and although he has a non-interlaced monitor and card, he 
> has to run a program which makes his monitor run non-interlaced.  I am not 
> positive but I believe he has a trident card.  
  From what he told me and showed me 
> about interlaced monitors, if you look at it from the corner of your eye, 
> it flickers.  And that is exactly what his monitor did if he didn't run 
> the program, and that is exactly what my monitor does right now. 
> 
>    I also always thought that the monitor made the difference between 
> being interlaced or not, and not the card?  I guess I'm just a bit 
> confused.  Any suggestions/info?
> 
> Reza Naima
> reza.naima@uttsbbs.uucp
> 
> --- WinQwk 1.10a #0
>                                                        

	On trident boards (this may be the same for others, I think you have to
set a jumper to run it non-interlaced mode. Also to achieve the higher vertical
scan rate than the default, you have to also change a jumper. Both of these may
be causing your problems. I had to set these on my card.
Hope this helps, I sure other suggestions will follow..................
From: doug@hparc0.aus.hp.com (Doug Parsons)
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 07:41:15 GMT
Subject: Re: another place to get .snd and .wav files???
Organization: HP Australasian Response Centre (Melbourne)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4


I found a huge cache of sound files, but all in Sun .AU format.  I used
SOX to convert them to .WAV.  Note that alot of them are in the 1mb range,
like the complete final credits to Star Wars II - about 4 minutes long, as 
is Axel Foley (Beverly Hills Cop).

Unfortunately I don't know which ftp address it is, but it's one of the
following:

128.155.23.64	abcfd20.larc.nasa.gov
128.218.1.13	ccb.ucsf.edu
128.214.87.1	garbo.uwasa.fi
18.99.99.99	ems.media.mit.edu
36.80.0.138	neon.stanford.edu
128.3.254.68	rtag.ee.lbl.gov
192.94.75.2	saffron.inset.com
130.191.224.2	sciences.sdsu.edu
131.123.2.222	snake.mcs.kent.edu (Soundblaster stuff)
sumex-aim.stanford.edu
141.211.164.8	terminator.cc.umich.edu
128.54.16.1	ucsd.edu
138.9.200.1	uop.uop.edu
128.82.8.1	ftp.cs.odu.edu
192.88.110.20	wsmr-simtel20.army.mil
128.8.141.2	bmgt-rt.umd.edu

My best guess is rtag.ee.lbl.gov - my notes say "sounds/*.au"

I got the above list from someone's previous postings about a year ago.
Keep in mind that you'll just end up with about 100mb of sound files, which
you'll never use more than twice - once to impress yourself, then once to
impress your friends...

douginoz
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 09:59:52 +0200
From: Martin_Schloeter@eurologic.fido.de (Martin Schloeter)
Subject: Re: Windows == OS
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
X-Comment-To: tguez@jade.tufts.edu (Name)
Organization: Die ersten 100.000 Jahre... 

N > Execuse me!!!!  Windows WILL NOT touch your malloc memory blocks,
N > and it will sort of juggle with your memory only with near pointers and
N > that is also only because you got the same DS value; that is it does
N > not play with your memory blocks in relation to your malloc calls, it
N > will move your WHOLE program by changing the base address.  Compile
N > in the compact or huge models where everything is far and windows will
N > die a horrible death if it tried to play with it.
N > 
You are definitly wrong. 
Don't mix it up. You description is only correct for static data in the apps 
default data segment(s) and data allocated with the default malloc (identically 
with LocalAlloc-LocalLock) in the Local Heap (which is inside the default data 
segment(s)). Even this problem is better managed with Win 3.1 then with 3.0 (no 
more sandbank effekt with such memory).
Memory allocated with GlobalAlloc-Global lock (also far pointers) is perfectly 
juggled by windows.
Simply write an app which uses such call, start heapwalker and make some memory 
intensive things and you will see your memory blocks juggling around.
And to say it again. Is not aspect of the system design, that malloc of the 
C-Library is translated to LOCALAlloc-LOCALLock, that a decision of the 
compiler factorer. You can make simply a new malloc which works in the Global 
Heap (with real juggling and so on).

Martin
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: sam4628@zeus.tamu.edu (MCCLUNEY, STEVEN ALEXANDER)
Subject: Re: HELP: packet driver bombs windows 3.1 - solved
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 18:02:00 GMT

Thanks to everybody for the advice - the main fix involved setting
the RAM base address to E000 (for some reason D000 froze the system).
The memory chart in my ethernet card manual implies that the range
c800- is free, but when I used this value DOS slowed down to a snail's
pace, and Windows still locked up.  BTW, what is the syntax for
excluding a memory range with EMM386?  My DOS and Windows manuals
don't mention this option.  Thanks a lot!

------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Steven A. McCluney                 |"Strange women lying in ponds    |
| sam4628@zeus.tamu.edu              | distributing swords is no basis |
| I'm a grad student, so my opinions | for a system of government!"    |
|    are worthless anyway            |          Dennis, to King Arthur |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: axa12@po.CWRU.Edu (Ashok Aiyar)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: DR-DOS 6.0 and Windows 3.1
Date: 2 Sep 1992 11:51:30 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: axa12@po.CWRU.Edu (Ashok Aiyar)
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu


One of my users wants to run Windows 3.1/DR-DOS 6.0
combination.  I know that Digital Research has some sort
of "fix" which will let you do this.

Could some one direct me to an FTP site where I can
grab the files?

Thank you,

Ashok
-- 
                          Ashok Aiyar
   		       axa12@po.cwru.edu
                Visit the IBM-PC Sig on Freenet
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: skok@itwds1.energietechnik.uni-stuttgart.de (Holger Skok)
Subject: Re: Speeding up Windows... again...
Organization: Inst. f. Thermodynamik u. Waermetechnik (ITW), U. of Stuttgart, FRG
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 17:35:53 GMT

In article <CMM.0.90.2.715255575.terjeh@maud.ifi.uio.no> Terje Holmboe <terjeh@ifi.uio.no> writes:
[...stuff deleted]
>
>   Hmmm... There is no use for a 387. What I now am wondering is this :
>   Why cannot Windows use the 387 ( if installed ) for some of the more
>   painstaking labour of graphics ? Is this to complicated a task ?
>   
Not a flame, just a question: What kind of graphics calculations would
you want to pass on to the FPU? Usually graphics operations use integer
math and speed is limited more by how fast the CPU can get the millions
of bits onto the screen (=into the VRAM on the graphics card) than by
the calculations.
-- 
*************************************************
*	Those stupid, horse-brained masses! 	*
*			OPUS on honker surgery  *
*******************************************HSK***
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: Screen Dumper
From: hippo@sonoma.edu (Michel Davidoff)
Date: 3 Sep 92 07:55:15 PDT
Organization: Sonoma state university

In article <BtzG09.H7y@comp.vuw.ac.nz> joe@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Joe Galea) writes:
>Subject: Screen Dumper
>From: joe@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Joe Galea)
>Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 03:21:44 GMT
>
>   Could somebody please suggest a reliable public domain screen dumper 
>that runs on Windows?  Preferably one that dumps to a well known file
>format such as gif, tiff or postcript.
>
>   I'd prefer email.  If there's enough interest I'll post a summary.
>
>   Thanks
>
>   Joe
>-- 
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Sender : Joe Galea                  | Address : Computer Science Dept
>Email  : joe@comp.vuw.ac.nz         | Victoria Unversity of Wellington,
>Phone  : +64 (04) 4721000 x8579     | Wellington, New Zealand
Why not use the Alt-PrintScreen Key combination and dump it into W4W ?

Michel
From: karlth@rhi.hi.is (Karl Thoroddsen)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: MS Windows T-Shirts, mugs, etc. Where?
Date: 3 Sep 92 15:46:19 GMT

Can anyone supply me with an address of a post-firm that sells MS-Windows
propaganda stuff?

PS.	It's not intended for me personally, but as a joke gift for a 
	Mac-fanatic friend of mine.

Thanks in advance.

--

\ Internet: karlth@rhi.hi.is             \ Karl Thoroddsen University Of Iceland
 \ And in the end ...          The Beatles\ Department Of Computer Science
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: usenet@nosc.mil (Network News)
Subject: re: 2600   WinQVT tech support   Stephen Gibson
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego, CA
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 23:20:40 GMT


In article <1992Sep2.124357.2564@nic.csu.net>  writes:
>WinQVT tech support:  Is there a phone number available?  How good is their response via
 eMail?
>
>Stephen Gibson
>gibsonst@sonoma.edu


I just asked this question a few days ago.  I got the following response from someone.

 djpk@uhura.cc.rochester.edu

I also found the following Compuserve address for them:

 76676.1420@compuserve.com

I know nothing of their response time as I am still waiting for a reply to a mailing of two
days ago.

I know of no phone number.  I have a regeistered version and all tha was included was a 
snail mail address.  This left me a little concerned when it came to technical support.
Hopefully their email response will be adequate.

Joe Barrus
From: jliukkon@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Juha-Matti Liukkonen)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: Speeding up Windows
Date: 3 Sep 92 15:07:19 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki

In <1992Sep3.040823.9415@wam.umd.edu> macole@wam.umd.edu (Mario A. Cole) writes:

>Nope...Stacker compresses (or tries to) everything...whatever is on the stacker
>drive will have too be decompressed first...hence, any disk i/o operations will
>take a tad bit longer.  Of course, if you have files that are loaded in all at
>once..then you can save space by keeping them on the stacker drive.  I keep all
>of my windows apps on the stacker drive...except for windows itself and Norton
>Desktop.

I found that my Windows works just as fast from a Stacked drive than
from a normal one. I even tested it with a stopwatch - and at least my
reflexes couldn't tell a difference.

>>What is wrong with HIMEM.SYS?

>Nothing...I just hate using MS supplied utils...it's liking using Paintbrush or
>Write instead of using PhotoStyler or MS Word.  I got hold of QEMM and I like
>it very much...of course, only after months of taming it.

I use QEMM occasionally, too, but I really prefer the shareware
UMB_DRVR.  It doesn't slow anything down (actually, it seems to *speed*
things up!), and even though it requires HIMEM.SYS, it lets me to load
it high (!).  626K free RAM down here, 160K of UMB's.  (With QEMM's
Stealth I get my Video ROM 32K as UMB too, but who cares? I seem to
manage with mere 160K.) Windows' TrueType font handling is noticeably
faster with UMB_DRVR than with QEMM.

>Once again...your caching has to be decompressed and recompressed before any
>action is taken.  If you're running a 486-50 there probably wouldn't be any
>problems...but for me and my 386-25...I would rather keep any disk i/o 
>intensive action away from Stacker.

IMO, you're being a little paranoid.  I have a 386SX-25 32C (proven to
be faster than a DX-25, BTW..!), and Stacker performs like it wasn't
there.  With 1.8 average compression, I, for one, do not have any fears
about Stacker degrading my (er, the computer's :) performance. 

-- 
               Juha Liukkonen, aka jliukkon@cc.helsinki.fi
       University of Helsinki, Dept. of Paranormal Investigations
           "Trust me, I know what I'm doing." - Sledge Hammer
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: macole@wam.umd.edu (Mario A. Cole)
Subject: Re: Speeding up Windows... again...
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 22:20:54 GMT

In article <1992Aug31.144856.1@vax1.umkc.edu> edowdy@vax1.umkc.edu writes:
>In article <CMM.0.90.2.715255575.terjeh@maud.ifi.uio.no>, Terje Holmboe <terjeh@ifi.uio.no> writes:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>    Hello again, and thank you ! I have had a lot of replies to my
>>    request for tipson how to speed up windows.
>> 
>>    This posting is hereby to be considered a general THANK YOU !
>> 
>>    The conclusions, just to make myself boring, is this :
>> 
>Excellent summary of steps deleted for space
>

**************** nice little graphix stuff deleted *****************

>  I had heard that if ya had enough ram (say 8mg) it is faster not to have
>any swap file at all running. 

It depends...If you have a shitload of TSR loading high, you may need a small
swapfile to add some memory cushion...but if you just have a few things
occupying high mem...forget the swapfile.  Now using a Ramdrive as a swapfile,
probably won't make much of a difference performance wise (I mean it won't
degrade your performance.)  What I found out to be true is...do whatever it
takes to get "your" system running the way "you" feel comfortable. (Now, if
you are like me...you'll never be comfortable!)

I load everything (and the kitchen sink) into high mem...I'm a dos memory
miser...since I run games that need as much base mem as possible (e.g.,
Falcon 3.0, Wing Commander I & II, etc.) so I have less mem available for
Windows...therefore, I use a 3 meg Swapfile to make up for the lost space.

Gee, I guess 8 megs isn't enough...not for me anyways...hmm...I wonder how
much it costs for 4 meg SIMMs... 

Mario

-- 
Mario A. Cole			     |  HJ Ford Associates Incorporated
macole@wam.umd.edu		     |  1111 Jeff Davis Hwy Suite 808
University of Maryland College Park  |  Crystal City, Arlington, VA 22202
(301) 868-9249 		             |  (703) 553-5580