HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mmtl@hobson.cc.flinders.edu.au (T.Lampre)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Rest In Peace MicroSoft
Keywords: MicroSoft, Operating Systems
Date: 18 Aug 92 06:46:22 GMT
Organization: Flinders University

In article <1992Aug15.175348.16872@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> mlevis@ringer.cs.utsa.edu (Mike Levis) writes:
>In article <1992Aug15.163726.13675@fics.uucp> ekl@fics.uucp writes:
>>In article <1992Aug14.091301.3969@microsoft.com> petesk@microsoft.com (Pete Skelly) writes:
>>>In article <1992Aug13.022737.17146@ccu.umanitoba.ca> rwalker@next02.cc.umanitoba.ca. (Robert Walker) writes:
>>>>Bill Gates' nightmare is coming true. OS/2 is gainig momentum.
>>>                                               ^^^^^^
>>>
>>>I have a question, did you use the DOS version of PETE.EXE, or the
>>>OS/2 Version ?
>>>
>>>petesk@microsoft.com
>>>Just doing a marketing analysis on PETE.EXE ;)
>>>
>>
>>There is an os/2 version available???? I though all support was dropped!
>
>There is a free clone of PETE.EXE called REPETE.EXE.  It is a full

This isn't GPETE is it? You know, the GNU version :-)

>32-bit app for OS/2 2.0.  It has a spell wrecker, a grammar mangler,
>an arithmetic messer, and designed to handle some foreign languages
>(detail unknown at this time :( ).  I heard it was on a BBS somewhere.
>Can someone download and ftp it to ftp-os2?  Thanks in advance!
>
>>(Hmm... the error looks like one produced by earlier versions of PETE.EXE,
>>maybe version 1.x, which runs under os/2)
>>
>>Eiryck
>>
>>Hey! Stop that! No pete.exe on my name, please...
>>
>>Eirik
>
>
>-- 
>==== Mike Levis   mlevis@ringer.cs.utsa.edu ====
>::   ftp ftp.cs.widener.edu (147.31.254.132)  ::  .--.
>::   for ``The Simpsons'' information.  Get   :: (OS/2)
>:::: ``Simpsons'' FAQL in dir /pub/simpsons ::::  ~--~
From: mlevis@ringer.cs.utsa.edu (Mike Levis)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Rest In Peace MicroSoft
Keywords: MicroSoft, Operating Systems
Date: 15 Aug 92 17:53:48 GMT
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio

In article <1992Aug15.163726.13675@fics.uucp> ekl@fics.uucp writes:
>In article <1992Aug14.091301.3969@microsoft.com> petesk@microsoft.com (Pete Skelly) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug13.022737.17146@ccu.umanitoba.ca> rwalker@next02.cc.umanitoba.ca. (Robert Walker) writes:
>>>Bill Gates' nightmare is coming true. OS/2 is gainig momentum.
>>                                               ^^^^^^
>>
>>I have a question, did you use the DOS version of PETE.EXE, or the
>>OS/2 Version ?
>>
>>petesk@microsoft.com
>>Just doing a marketing analysis on PETE.EXE ;)
>>
>
>There is an os/2 version available???? I though all support was dropped!

There is a free clone of PETE.EXE called REPETE.EXE.  It is a full
32-bit app for OS/2 2.0.  It has a spell wrecker, a grammar mangler,
an arithmetic messer, and designed to handle some foreign languages
(detail unknown at this time :( ).  I heard it was on a BBS somewhere.
Can someone download and ftp it to ftp-os2?  Thanks in advance!

>(Hmm... the error looks like one produced by earlier versions of PETE.EXE,
>maybe version 1.x, which runs under os/2)
>
>Eiryck
>
>Hey! Stop that! No pete.exe on my name, please...
>
>Eirik


-- 
==== Mike Levis   mlevis@ringer.cs.utsa.edu ====
::   ftp ftp.cs.widener.edu (147.31.254.132)  ::  .--.
::   for ``The Simpsons'' information.  Get   :: (OS/2)
:::: ``Simpsons'' FAQL in dir /pub/simpsons ::::  ~--~
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Pricing of apps
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 04:05:05 GMT
Reply-To: margoli@watson.IBM.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In  <1992Aug14.005444.25731@hellgate.utah.edu>  brian%jaguar.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:
> In general OS/2 products cost 10 to 50 percent more.
> Example, the Brief editor as shown in Programmer's Connection catalog:
>      DOS: $129
>      OS/2: $169

An OS/2 product can be a lot better than a DOS product, as well.  If there
is no difference between the two, you can get the DOS version and run it in
VDM.

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
From: varmint@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Samir Varma)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: It's Official: 1 Million Copies of OS/2 sold
Date: 13 Aug 92 13:32:08 GMT
Reply-To: varmint@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Samir Varma)
Organization: Center for Particle Physics, University of Texas
Originator: varmint@huey.cc.utexas.edu


So it's finally official.  Today's NYT business section reports that
IBM has announced 1 Million copies of OS/2 sold and that analysts
expect 2 to 4 Million total by the end of the year.

Now where are the f**king apps, drivers, utilities etc. etc.?!!!!  Get
to it vendors (excluding MS, of course).

Samir Varma

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.misc
From: bdubbs@cs.tamu.edu (Bruce Dubbs)
Subject: Re: I've seen NT......and I'll take OS/2 2.0 thanks!
Organization: Computer Science Department, Texas A&M University
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 23:48:16 GMT

In article <1992Aug18.090822.696@calmasd.prime.com> kjb@calmasd.prime.com (Ken Brucker) writes:
>In article <1992Aug17.201353.3278@news.columbia.edu>, mig@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Meir I Green) writes:
>> In article <SXMRP.20.0@orca.alaska.edu> SXMRP@orca.alaska.edu (Michael R. Platzke) writes:
>> 
>>>** Although those who don't need it will have to pay for it.
>> 
>> Please explain this.  It costs IBM a fixed amount to write the software.
>> Distribution on CD-ROM means it doesn't cost them extra disks.  I would pay
>> the cost of the disks to get TCP-IP.  But I can't justify several hundred
>> dollars so that I can run TCP-IP unless I am making money from it.  The fact
>> is, I am a home user, and all of my network access is for hobby.  I would
>> like to run TCP-IP over Amateur Packet radio using IBM's TCP-IP package, but
>> I don't have that kind of money to spend.  IBM's package is inaccessable to
>> the typical home user who, in my opinion, is likely to have a spare machine
>> or laptop which he will want to network on occasion.  It is too bad that I
>> can't use IBM TCP-IP, since it would cost me more than it is worth to me.
>
>Let's put this into a little more of an extreme...DEC is distributing nearly
>their entire product suite on a set of 7 CDRoms right now.  By your logic I
>should be able to pay for the cost of the 7 disks to gain access to almost all
>of their products since it cost them a fixed amount for the
>development and the distribution isn't costing extra.
>

Actually, you have all their software on those CD-ROMs. You only need
the secret password to install product 'x' on you system.  Of course
you have to pay for the license...



--
Bruce Dubbs                   |  Oxymorons of note:
bdubbs@neuron.tamu.edu        |  Honest Politician, Political Science,
bdubbs@sadis01.sa.aflc.af.mil |  Scrupulous Lawyer
From: bill.dehaan@canrem.com (bill dehaan)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: "my opinions"
Date: 21 Aug 92 05:00:36 GMT
Reply-To: "bill dehaan" <bill.dehaan@canrem.com>
Distribution: comp
Organization: Canada Remote Systems

In message <k57mq7f.xtifr@netcom.com>, xtifr@netcom.com (Chris Waters)
writes:

CW>Well, I've gotten email from one MS employee (who shall remain nameless)
CW>who prefers OS/2 to NT.  This is person has not posted to the net that
CW>I've seen, however.  Perhaps MS employees *are* allowed to post their
CW>opinions _as_long_as_those_opinions_match_the_official_company_position_!
CW>:-) :-) :-)

When I  was at  IBM they  had a  strict policy  about what you could and
could  not  say  regarding  the  company.  Most large corporations will.
Seriously, If an  MS employee started  flaming MS's own  products on the
net, people  (including his/her  management) would  haveto ask  why that
person worked at MS. I think that most of the MS posts that I have  seen
here have been reasonably objective; I haven't seen a lot of "NT reeks",
but neither  have I  seen a  lot of  "OS/2 reeks",  either. At least not
recently.

----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
Deus Ex Machina                   | Internet:   bill.dehaan@rose.com
Software Consulting and Gator Pit | Eradicate Hunger - Eat the homeless
----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
---
 ~ SLMR 2.1a ~ Always place your clothes and weapons where you can find 
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario/Detroit, MI
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
From: sjb5@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (STACY JOHN BEHRENS)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: superVGA  (and misc top-blowing)
Date: 14 Aug 92 02:07:18 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <SXMRP.13.0@orca.alaska.edu>, SXMRP@orca.alaska.edu (Michael R. Platz
ke) writes:
>In article <1992Aug13.080540.17580@actrix.gen.nz> Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.
nz writes:
>>From: Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz
>>Subject: Re: superVGA  (and misc top-blowing)
>>Date: 13 Aug 92 08:05:40 GMT
>
>>In article <1992Aug12.125401.18428@hellgate.utah.edu> brian%jensen.cs.utah.edu
@cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:
>>>
>>> beta.  Borland said at the NT developers conference that they will
>>> have the NT version out within 2 months of NT's release.
>
>>That should sometime in September next year then......go on! Hold your breath!
>>
>Come on, every indication is that NT will be available in early 93.  Or maybe
>they could release a beta version in December of 92 without DOS or Windows
>16 or OS/2 1.3 support and just sell it as an LA release.  Then they could
>promise to have OS/2 2.0 support out in a month or two and delay it until
>September.  :-o

Really?  Every indicator?  Well early '93 is about 4 1/2 months away.  The
alpha release has been out for about a month now.  Beta could probably at best
be expected in another 3-4 months.  Allow another 3-4 months for the various
betas and you are already in mid-'93.  And that is assuming that MS really has
everything moving like crazy.  Considering that the alpha and beta cycles of
most products are longer than that, even for ones that are considerably
simpler, it does not appear likely that NT will be out in early '93.
Also without DOS or Windows support, it will be DOA.  It needs those apps to
get it off the ground initially.  They won't have OS/2 2.0 support anytime
within the next year if ever.
>

>-Michael R. Platzke (sxmrp@orca.alaska.edu)
>


                                                    Stacy John Behrens
                                                    *===)-------------
From: yuk@hpopd.pwd.hp.com (Yuk Lun Chan)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 13:39:34 GMT
Subject: Re: Replicated data
Organization: Hewlett-Packard ISG-SBU-PWD, UK.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy

>comp.os.os2.advocacy / craigdo@microsoft.com (Craig Dowell) /  8:31 pm  Aug 17, 1992 /
>>In article <-159819989@hpopd.pwd.hp.com> yuk@hpopd.pwd.hp.com (Yuk Lun Chan) writes:
>>>>With the NT system, You can use most advanced Windows software as it comes
>>>>out.  And when the main box goes down, everyone can continue to work locally.
>>>
>>>O.K. Can I still working when all my accessing file dead?

>Actually, in replicated systems you can work until the minimum quorum of voting
>replications is reached.  You can continue to work in case of a network 
>partition (Joe Admin tripped over the repeater and pulled out the drops. :-)
>You can continue to work in case of server failure (Jane Admin dumps an iced
>latte on the disk controller). 

>In the case of a replicated file, a number of copies of your file are
>distributed around the network; and if one server dies, you switch to another.
>The system deals with the intracacies of ensuring coherency between copies.

>Try this with a terminal server :-)

Well, where is my application running? In my local machine? Why should I need
NT if it is just a file (or whatever) server? May be replicated system has
some real advantage. In case of networked client server, I already can
access to Unix with user id and so on with LM/X or to a NetWare file server
or an OS/2 server from my DOS and OS/2 workstation. How much more NT can
offer? I want to run my application in the server and doing something else
in my local machine (if I have a reasonable power machine).

When a LAN is broken, depends on its type, some of them would bring the 
whole LAN down, i.e. all servers and clients cannot talk to each other. Where
is the replicated file come from even if I have tens of copies of file in
different servers (if I have not one in my local machine). In case of
direct connection, I can reconnect a few minutes later in the same point
it was broken after setting all attributes (at least it work in my
connection). Unless you break the main connecter, most likely, only one
or two terminals would be out of action.


Yuk
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Who's problem \*are\* SVGA drivers?
Date: 21 Aug 1992 11:53:39 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <1992Aug20.170503.6314@microsoft.com> gregde@microsoft.com (Greg Demichillie) writes:
>No, that isn't correct.  It's just that 800x600x16 is the only
>video mode that all the SuperVGA chip sets implement in the same
>fashion.

OK...if that's the case, then there already exists 800x600x16 drivers for the
Trident chipset; those should work on other VGAs as well, complete with
seamless Windows.

Anyone feel adventurous?
-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
  "Anything that an F-4 can outturn is not maneuverable." -- Mary Shafer
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: brian%jensen.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill)
Subject: Re: Release dates ( was Re: superVGA (and misc top-blowing) 
Date: 12 Aug 92 14:08:56 MDT
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept


  > From:  dab6@po.CWRU.Edu (Douglas A. Bell)
  > In-reply-to: Your message of "12 Aug 92 19:27:27 MST."
  >              <1992Aug12.192727.3841@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> 
  ...
  > >apps... to me this in inconceivable... why restrict yourself to
  > >Describe, Object Vision and free/shareware.  I find it hard to believe
  > >that anyone can't find at least one Microsoft app they really like
  > >(I very much like Word and Visual Basic).
  > 
  > There are a wealth of DOS apps that simple perform better than windows
  > apps.  
Name a DOS app that does word processing nicer than the WYSIWIG
approaches possible under Windows?
Harder still name a DOS drawing app that does a better job than Windows Draw?
Games are still better under DOS, but I can't think of much else I'd
miss.  (Others would miss databases, they still aren't all that available
under Windows.)  Clearly Excel 4.0 is better than any spreadsheet around
anywhere.

I know people that swear that vi/emacs and troff/TeX are the best way to
word process too.... I also know these same people haven't checked out
the abilities of modern programs.

Certain apps are simply better in a GUI environment.

Oh, one other thing... have you USED Windows 3.1... a lot of the performance
lag you might have seen under 3.0 has gone away.

  > >Oh... one other thing... Borland has now said that the compiler for
  > >OS/2 will not be available till year's end.  It's about to enter
  > >beta.  Borland said at the NT developers conference that they will
  > >have the NT version out within 2 months of NT's release.
  > 
  > Oh, so they will have it out in September '93 ?
  > Get real, Borland once said that they would have their OS/2
  > complier released at the same time as OS/2 2.0.  Everyone lies
  > when it comes to release dates.  Borland is just worse than most.
  > It is almost on par with Microsoft.
I think it more likely that Borland has placed a higher emphasis on
the NT version than the OS/2 version and have pulled resources from
the OS/2 to be used on NT.  The slippage of Borland's OS/2 delivery
dates correspond suspiciously with announcements of a stronger and
stronger presence in the NT world.

Brian
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: jwh@citi.umich.edu (Jim Howe)
Subject: HPFS File Names (Was Re: Damned good recovery)
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 92 15:02:12 EDT
Organization: IFS Project, University of Michigan
Reply-To: jwh@citi.umich.edu

In article <1992Aug20.142854.5032@gw.wmich.edu>, x90wardell@gw.wmich.edu writes:
|> > 
|> > I'm a Mac user who simply follows the competition out of interest, but
|> > something I wonder about. Isn't OS/2 supposed to come with HPFS which means
|> > you can use decent filenames that use upper and lower case and spaces, have
|> > file types attached and can be reasonably long? If so, why are you people
|> > all using these ridiculous names like SVGADATA.PMI? Do you realize how
|> > childish thsi makes your OS look? I might at some point switch to OS/2, but
|> > certainly not while all public evidence I see of it makes it look like ist
|> > still has all the gorgeous DOS file system features as far as the user is
|> > concerned.
|> > 
|> > Maynard Handley
|> 
|> 	The reason for that is because you can use the DOS file system if you
|> want to to install os/2 onto.  With this in mind, the install files have to
|> have that silly old 8.3 format.  On my system, for example, I have folders
|> with names like "Other files" or "Archived Shareware".
|> 

What would be really nice is if you could assign your own 8.3 name to
any file and have DOS applications use that filename instead of 
simply being blind to the file.  For example, I would like to have
some subdirectories which contain only 8.3 names.  Unfortunately all
parent directories must also conform to 8.3 names for DOS applications
to see the files.  For example, I might want to have a directory 
called 'My Subdirectory' and have a subdirectory called 'Word Perfect 5.1'
and then have files contained in the 'Word Perfect 5.1' directory
which conform to 8.3.  If you define a program object for Word Perfect
and tell it that the working directory is 'c:\My Subdirectory\Word Perfect 5.1',
Word Perfect is completely blind to any files in the working
directory, even if they meet the 8.3 criteria.  As a result, I have
to resort to primitive names or come up with an alternative (and
probably less intuitive) directory structure.



James W. Howe                  internet: jwh@citi.umich.edu
University of Michigan             uucp: uunet!mailrus!citi.umich.edu!jwh
Ann Arbor, MI   48103-4943         


Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: rdixon@gemini.cs.nps.navy.mil (robert dixon)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Hasta la Vista, OS/2
Date: 17 Aug 92 03:19:03 GMT
Organization: Naval Postgraduate School,Monterey,CA


  I guess I'm posting this to document some OS/2 2.0 problems as well
as to blow off some steam. I was an OS/2 fan until about six hours
ago, when it decided to trash the DOS partition of my hard disk.

  I was running an old lotus clone when I got a trap, my first
legitimate OS/2 crash. Rebooted, reran the same operation, same trap.
Then I ran CHKDSK on the drive, only to find something like 1500
disassociated file chains comprising about half the stuff on my DOS
partition.

  I'm sure it was probably an old BIOS, or something the program
decided to do that wasn't strictly kosher, and I don't necessarily
mind the system crash. That goes with the territory in an operating
system that is as big as OS/2. I could put up with the sluggish
performance of the Workplace shell, because it was really neat. I
could put up with not being able to back up the whole HPFS partition while
the shell was running, and having to boot from a floppy to run CHKDSK
on it.

  I can't put up with an operating system that trashes my hard disk
during a system crash. I really dislike Windows, but at least it never
repaid my disdain by eating subdirectories.

  So, it's back to DOS, and I can multitask during downloads only by
using two computers, but at least I don't have to look over my
shoulder for the next "gotcha".

  I'll be back when 2.1, or the next stable OS/2 release comes out. I
think it was Dvorak or somebody who said that you should always wait
for the X.1 release, after all the X.0 bugs have been fixed. Seems
like good advice.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Dixon                          "My opinions may not necessarily
Low-Life Grad Student,              be my own . . ."
Naval Postgraduate School,
Monterey, CA                        rdixon@cs.nps.navy.mil
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: SXMRP@orca.alaska.edu (Michael R. Platzke)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: superVGA  (and misc top-blowing)
Date: 14 Aug 92 18:42:35 GMT
Organization: University of Alaska Computer Network

In article <19920814.022509.50@almaden.ibm.com> AV@vnet.ibm.com (Anton Versteeg) writes:
>From: AV@vnet.ibm.com (Anton Versteeg)
>Subject: Re: superVGA  (and misc top-blowing)
>Date: 14 Aug 92 09:25:14 GMT

>In <SXMRP.13.0@orca.alaska.edu> Michael R. Platzke writes:
>>
>>Remember, you were looking at a pre-beta release
>>
>>-Michael R. Platzke (sxmrp@orca.alaska.edu)
>>
>Pre-beta? Most people would call that alpha.
>Also note that lots of functionality was still missing like
>DOS, Windows, OS/2(?) compatibility, so it can only become bigger imho.

>Anton Versteeg - IBM - Uithoorn Netherlands - TEAMOS2 NL

As I understand it, the SDK does include DOS and Windows compatibility, it
is still in the rough and has not been thouroughly debugged.  The point
that I was trying to make with regards to the fact that it was Alpha (I
don't mind calling it that) was that Microsoft still had a work to
do with optimizations.  The final release should be faster and yes, proabably
bigger.

-Michael R. Platzke (sxmrp@orca.alaska.edu)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: scdorcy@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (JAMES DORCEY)
Subject: Re: Rest In Peace MicroSoft
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Keywords: MicroSoft, Operating Systems
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Date: 17 Aug 1992 12:07 EST  

In article <1992Aug14.091301.3969@microsoft.com>, petesk@microsoft.com (Pete 
Skelly) writes...
>In article <1992Aug13.022737.17146@ccu.umanitoba.ca> rwalker@next02.cc.umanitoba.ca. (Robert Walker) writes:
>>Bill Gates' nightmare is coming true. OS/2 is gainig momentum.

>I have a question, did you use the DOS version of PETE.EXE, or the
>OS/2 Version ?

>petesk@microsoft.com
>Just doing a marketing analysis on PETE.EXE ;)

Must have been a DOS version.  Microsoft doesn't support OS/2 :-)