HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bgm@cray.com (Bert Moshier)
Subject: Last week and revised notice - MN OS/2 End-user Group July Meeting
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 26 Jul 92 12:02:28 CDT

                         MN OS/2 End-user Group
                              July Meeting
                             Revised Notice

Reservations requested!  Please call 612/397-6444 and register using
                         course code OS2.

When:   July 30, 1992 - 19:00 (7PM CDT) to 21:00 (9PM CDT)

Where:  New IBM Building
        Room 304
        Third Avenue South
        Minneapolis, MN   55402

        IBM Customer Center
        Third Floor - Signs will be out showing the way

Agenda: Business Meeting

        Questions and Answers

        Vendor Presentation
                Asynchronous Communications and OS/2 2.0
                  By Brady Flowers of Oberon Software (TE/2)
 |                                 and
 |                   Mark Olson of The Keller Group (PMFAX)

        Member Presentation
                None (yet) scheduled.

Refreshments provided.

 Door Prizes:
         Two copies of "Writing OS/2 2.0 Device Drivers in C" signed
         by the author, Steven J. Mastrianni
         Two copies of issue three - OS/2 Monthly Magazine
         Two copies of issue four  - OS/2 Monthly Magazine
         Other prizes as they become available
From: timbol@netcom.com (Mike Timbol)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Paid Microsoft employees
Date: 22 Jul 92 08:22:58 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <1992Jul21.041629.17955@midway.uchicago.edu> soh3@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <1992Jul20.193354.22275@microsoft.com> philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:
>>>>>  Also have you seen
>>>>>many people other than microsoft employees defending windows?  
>>>>
>>>>      Yes.  Which newgroup have you been reading?
>>>
>>>The same news group as you are in, and still I have only one person
>>>denying this point (of course, he was not from MS).  One does not make
>>>many.  Get the fact, Phil.
>>
>>     Maybe your newsfeed isn't working properly...
>
>Get the fact and count the posts.   My newsfeed works just fine.
>
>Min

Well, Min, maybe I was the one person you were counting, but I'll step
in here anyway.  I like OS/2 because it's pretty neat and works well for
some people.  I like Windows, too, because it's pretty neat and works
well for me.  No, it can't do everything OS/2 can do.  (BTW, I also like
Windows NT because it *should* be able to do everything OS/2 can do.)

So, just because *you* hate Windows (and Microsoft, and everything they
make) doesn't mean that everybody else does.  (And I'm not speaking of
Microsoft employees, either.)

- Mike, who doesn't work for Microsoft and can count pretty well :)
From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Impressions of the July NT Release
Keywords: NT
Date: 27 Jul 92 17:04:06 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <Brv5t9.BMq@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> cebarton@napier.waterloo.edu (Casey Barton) writes:
>
>    IBM's marketing division could give Douglas Adam's "Sirius Cybernetics"
>marketing division a run for the money, any day.

Sadly, you're right.  At least Sirius Cybernetics was funny to watch
in action.  Share and enjoy...


-- 
   |)  David Charlap           "I don't even represent myself
  /|_  dic5340@hertz.njit.edu   sometimes so NJIT is right out!.
 ((|,)
  ~|~  Hi! I am a .signature virus, copy me into your .signature file.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: pshuang@athena.mit.edu (Ping-Shun Huang)
Subject: Re: Origins of IBM / Microsoft rift
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
	<r5nmfzl.xtifr@netcom.com> <1992Jul30.094508.29104@microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 07:44:52 GMT

In article <1992Jul30.094508.29104@microsoft.com> petesk@microsoft.com (Pete Skelly) writes:

 > The difference is, the Macintosh is an established system.  MS has no
 > obligation to write Apps for any system.  Neither does anyone else
 > (okay, there may be a few legal contracts, but very few).  App
 > developers write apps for systems that sell.  This includes WordPerfect,
 > MS, Frame, etc.  If OS/2 looks like it'll sell well, then MS may write
 > apps for it.  However, the general though is that it makes more sense to
 > write for Win32 at this point in time.

(Bill Gates, in a 1990 interview)

Gates: "After mid-1990, Microsoft will ship PM versions of applications
at the same time or before Windows versions. We can see the opportunity
to create much better applications under OS/2. The OS/2 market is
growing sufficiently that it is a good business decision to do this.
                                ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ [emphasis mine]

(Note: at the time, perhaps a total of 125,000 copies of OS/2 1.x had
shipped in the previous four years.)

Comments? This quote is from an interview for IBM's programmer journal
for OS/2, I believe. That shouldn't make much difference, though, since
Bill would never modify the truth just because of the audience he is
speaking to, right? How did the boundary for which profitable appl.
development get changed 16-fold?

--
Ping Huang (INTERNET: pshuang@athena.mit.edu), probably speaking for himself

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: praetzel@marconi.waterloo.edu (Eric Praetzel)
Subject: Re: nt, an assessment
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 19:31:13 GMT

In article <1992Jul22.161715.7441@njitgw.njit.edu> dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:
>If NT isn't for the average user, the average user will want to go
>elsewhere, in many cases.  Whether that's to OS/2 or to some other
>system, I can't say, but they won't want to stick with DOS/Windows
>forever. 
  Gee.  I like DOS.  Can I run interrupts at 20kHz under OS/2 ?
Ok so I will probably move some of the computing that I am doing in S/W to
H/W once I get to like OS/2 but all that stuff is standalone and I would not
want to do anything else at the same time.
  DOS still has a place for people who just want to grab and chew data.  But
now a-days they call that an imbeded system.  Now if only I can get OS/2 to
work with my HD life would be a lot simpler.  The faq and ftp-os2 are great
resources.  Thanks to all that put them together.
  - Eric 
Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.advocacy:3054 comp.os.os2.misc:25083 comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:1476
From: johnt@pilot.njin.net (John Thiruvathukal)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: O Things OS/2 has or can do that Windows doesn't or can't do. (Grammar?)
Keywords: Scroll
Date: 22 Jul 92 01:02:37 GMT
Followup-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


Just an other addendum to the growing list of things that OS/2 has
that Win 3.1 doesn't:

SCALABLE SCROLL BOXES

Did you ever work on a long files in some Windows app which was too
long to all fit on one screen that you really did't know how long it
was?

Or worse, one that was just small enough to fit on one screen with
nothing over the edges?

I'm sure you have, but the Windows scroll boxes don't give you any
real indication as to how long the file really is, which can sometimes
drive you insane.

In OS/2 the scroll boxes in the those handy dandy little scroll bars,
scale themselves automatically to show you what proportion of the
current document you are currently viewing with respect to the size of
the whole document.

For example:  If you are looking at half of a document, the scroll box
would scale itself so that the scroll box is half the size of the
scroll bar.  And if you are looking at the whole document the scroll
box occupies the entire area of the scroll bar, and will no move.

Pretty nifty, huh?!

George Thiruvathukal
From: nan@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Nan Zou)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: OS2 Good news and Bad news (OS2 & a little windows too)
Date: 29 Jul 92 21:27:56 GMT
Article-I.D.: matt.1572gsINNgs0
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

genie@netcom.com (The Genie) writes:

>There's been some talk/argument about people
>comparing DOS/OS 2 to System 7 for the MAC.  I'd just
>like to remind people that this is actually a OS/2 advocacy
>group.  If you think a MAC suits your purpose, go ahead
>and buy a MAC.  If you think OS/2 serves your purpose,
>go ahead and buy and IBM compatible.  But PLEASE
>refrain from replying with long flame wars that waste
>our time and bandwidth...

But... I thought this group was DESIGNED for long flame wars that waste time
and bandwidth. ;-)  I'd still like to see more comparisons between these
two.

A couple questions I hope some knowledgable Mac folks can answer for me:
someone told me that MacOS has memory protection, implemented by a program
called Crash Barrier that costs $50, anyone know more about this?  If it
truly does what it's supposed to do, why is it not more well-known?

Since I've only read the first two volumes of Inside Mac, I don't know how
AppleEvents and Publish and Subscribe works.  Anyone care to explain it to
me?  Or at least tell me which volume of Inside Mac it's covered so I can
check it out myself?

Now a question for the OS/2 gurus.  What are the capabilities of OS/2's
IPC?  Specifically, I want to know how powerful OS/2's namepipe, semaphore
and message passing mechanisms are.  Can I for example write a namepipe and
send a message to another program telling it how to operate on the data
contained in the namepipe and receive message back?  If you have knowledge
on how other OS's (Mac, Unix) IPC mechanism works, could you post a compa-
rason?

I know I should've picked up _Design of OS/2_ by Kogan and Keitel, but my
school bookstore tried to rip me off (as usual) with a sticker price of $45
for this little book.  I've heard people getting it for half as much,
anyone know where I can buy one cheaply?  Thanks.

-- Nan
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: ballard@ucs.ubc.ca (Alan Ballard)
Subject: Re: Dvorak next to quit?
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 20:53:20 GMT

In <1992Jul25.163710.7228@sygnus.uucp> tpurves@sygnus.uucp (Tim Purves) writes:

>>Anyone see the Dvorak column in the August '92 PC Mag?  Something must be
>>seriously wrong!!!  He raves about OS/2 2.0.  I just don't get it
>>anymore.

>Sorta makes Zacherman look like a lier, no?

Zachmann (not Zacherman) has said repeatedly that his complaints are
with PC Week, not PC Magazine.  He writes for both mags under one
contract with ZD, so his problems with the PC Week editors have resulted in
his terminating the contract with Ziff. 
-- 
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
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.windows
From: sorrow@maple.circa.ufl.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: What's wrong with Windows (Re: MS grasping at straws?...)
Date: 24 Jul 92 09:26:50 GMT
Reply-To: sorrow@maple.circa.ufl.edu
Organization: Center for Instructional and Research Computing Activities



Edlin?  We don't need no stinking edlin....how about:

COPY CON START.BAT

or

TYPE CON >> START.BAT

:-)

Brian
From: henshaw@emperor.gatech.edu (Andy Henshaw)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Portable?
Date: 24 Jul 92 19:22:08 GMT
Organization: CERL-EE, Georgia Institue of Technology

This may or may not be an incredibly perceptive comment. :)

>petesk@microsoft.com
>My Opinions....

Andrew Henshaw
andrew.henshaw@ee.gatech.edu
From: martelli@cadlab.sublink.org (Alex Martelli)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM Market Control (was: Missing Hardware..)
Date: 24 Jul 92 12:26:09 GMT
Organization: CAD.LAB S.p.A., Bologna, Italia

fred@polaris.async.vt.edu (Fred Homan) writes:
	...
:	I fail to see your logic on this point.  A trust must involve an
:entire industry.  In this case we are talking about the computer industry

It's NOT that simple.  Indeed, many have expressed harsh criticism of
the arbitrariness of antitrust laws on this and similar points.  A recent
antitrust case against Kodak, for example, saw them condemned as trying
to corner the market for maintenance of their upmarket photocopiers (by
overcharging would-be independent maintainers for spare parts, etc);
Kodak did try to defend itself by pointing out that, even narrowly
defining the market as "upper-end photocopiers", they only had some
FAR from controlling % of it (I don't recall, maybe 20%).  Kodak lost.
[All I know about this is what I read in the Economist - maybe we can
find a more appropriate newsgroup and people better informed on the
details and implications].
-- 
Email: martelli@cadlab.sublink.org                   Phone: ++39 (51) 6130360
CAD.LAB s.p.a., v. Ronzani 7/29, Casalecchio, Italia   Fax: ++39 (51) 6130294 
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.apps
From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Subject: Re: The Ultimate OS/2 FTP Source
Followup-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Keywords: FTP, OS/2, FREE, SOFTWARE
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 01:49:16 GMT

Please avoid crossposting so widely in the future.  Follow up to
comp.os.os2.advocacy.

In article <19356@plains.NoDak.edu> person@plains.NoDak.edu (Brett G Person ) writes:
>   On another topic.  I recently attended a Microsoft Windows 3.1
>technical seminar ( for free). Is IBM doing/going to be doing the same
>thing with OS/2?  

I do not know about North Dakota, but here in Chicago IBM hosts the
OS/2 Users Group's monthly meetings at their offices downtown.  Each
month they hold seminars on various OS/2 topics (e.g. how to perform
remote LAN installation, programming, etc).  They are free of charge.
I know similar events are held at other sites around the country.  All
you need to do is contact your local IBM branch office and ask for
details.  Most offices have OS/2 seminars and meetings.

-- 
Get the OS/2 FREQ. ASKED QUESTIONS LIST | Timothy F. Sipples
from 128.123.35.151, anonymous ftp,     | Internet: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu
directory pub/os2/all/faq, or from      | Dept. of Econ., U. Chicago, 60637
LISTSERV@BLEKUL11.BITNET (send "HELP"). | Tsongas > Perot > Clinton.  Yay.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: wader@watson.ibm.com
Subject: Re: Portable?
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 23:39:33 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

In  <1992Jul29.214801.13081@microsoft.com>  petesk@microsoft.com (Pete Skelly) writes:
> >Parts of OS/2 probably do fall into this category.  Just as an example,
> >tell programmer A to write a new file system from scratch in C with the
> >following specifications (insert those for HPFS).  Tell programmer B to
> >translate the assembly code for HPFS (assuming it was written in assembly
> >to begin with and has already been debugged) to C.  Which of the two will
> >likely have fewer bugs?  Depends on the talents of the programmer, but I
> >wouldn't be surprised if programmer B introduced fewer bugs.  Other parts
> >probably also fall into this category, but I don't know just how modularized
> >OS/2 is, though it's hard to imagine an operating system as complex as this
> >being monolithic rather than modularized.
>
> Programmer A is doing Top Down design, while programmer B is doing
> bottom up design.  Programmer A can take into account the archetectural
> quirks of a number of different systems.  Programmer B is going from an
> archetectural spec for a limited number of systems.  In B's case, translating
> to C may not be that difficult.  Translating to C for another processor
> or system may be.  It's the hacks introduced in doing that that can cause
> problems.  In addition, in 'B's case, you have two programmers working on
> the project.  One who wrote the assembly, and 'B'.  The assembly coder may
> not have had the same objectives as B, and B may have to hack around
> some stupid performance things.  Given that A and B are equal programmers,
> I'd suspect that B would have a far worse time of it.
>
> >> Taking up someone elses code can be a pain in the *** sometimes, especially
> >> if their coding style is different from your own.
> >
> >Agreed.
>
> Let's kill this thread (i.e. This'll probably be my last post on
> this thread unless something interesting comes up).
>
     I agree on killing this thread - this seems to have become an
issue better suited to <pick any appropriate> software process-related
newsgroup.  Possible lumping of design scope and implementation decisions
may be a hidden assumption here, which could make this discussion
as futile as it has become frustrating.

Just an opinion ( can't help it . . . using "design" always
gets me going ;).

> petesk@microsoft.com
> My Opinions.
>

Wade R. Boaz
TJ Watson Research Center, Hawthorne
wader@yktvmh.vnet.ibm.com
From: sjb5@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (STACY JOHN BEHRENS)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 3.1 hardware requirements.
Date: 24 Jul 92 04:27:40 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <92205.134355F0O@psuvm.psu.edu>, F0O@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>In article <BruIr8.Hx1@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, tamu@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (Todd
>Henderson) says:

>
>>I think the point was that by the time you get rid of your windows, dos,
>>memory managers, and all the junk you have to use to do work arounds the disk
>>space will be much more comparable.  Maybe not the same, but comparable.
>
>   Let's see.  On my system Windows takes up around 8 megs.  I have DOS
>4.01, which takes up just a little over 1 meg.  So we're talking let's say
>9.5 meg.  This is pretty much a minimal setup.  I don't have any "add-ons".
>   What is the amount of space os/2 needs for a minimal setup?  From
>figures I've heard it's around 16-18 meg.  I'd hardly call this comparable.
>
>                                                                [Tim]
>
Well, add in a memory manager, and remember that OS/2, Window, and DOS come
with OS/2 and yes it most certaintly is equivelant.  (Notice, not equal,
equivilant) Quite worth the space IMHO.

                                                Stacy John Behrens
                                                *===)-------------
From: sjb5@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (STACY JOHN BEHRENS)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: PC Week dumps on NT
Date: 30 Jul 92 21:32:29 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <1992Jul30.092847.22122@spider.co.uk>, mikeo@spider.co.uk (Mike Overt
on) writes:
>In article <1992Jul29.133118.25496@scott.skidmore.edu> pvonk@scott.skidmore.edu
 (Pierre VonKaenel) writes:
>>Someone recently posted a description of the latest PC Week's article
>>on NT and how it won't run all DOS and Windows programs.  As I read
>>through the magazine, I was amazed to find article after article
>>dumping on NT or raising doubts about its capabilities in the initial
>                                                               =======
>>release.
>>Talk about an about face!
>
>The word 'initial' says it all - NT isn't even a true beta yet, and MS
>have said all along that the DOS and Win support is still not
>finalised. (Although I hear a new july release is better).
>
>The current NT is for developers only, who I am sure a sensible enough
>not to think it is a final release.
>
>Mike Overton.
>

 While I am not so sure about some of the above, it does raise an interesting
question.  As we all know, much of the press has been much harder on OS/2 than
it probably deserved.  At the time, it looked like NT was getting nothing but
good press.  Now lets assume that this is the beginning of a trend.  Lets say
that a number of magazines start dumping on NT much in the same way as they
did OS/2.  It makes one wonder, do these people ever want to move away from
DOS?  Eventually we all will have to, as machines and apps get more complex.
Windows has shown people this pretty well, although it would seem some don't
want to listen.  Windows apps push the capabilities of DOS right to its
limits and often beyond.  Whether we eventually move to NT or OS/2 or
something else doesn't appear to be as much of an issue as getting people to
even think about moving, whether that be now or in the future.  A point to
ponder...

                                                Stacy John Behrens
                                                *===)-------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: smsmith@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Smith)
Subject: Re: O Things OS/2 has or can do that Windows doesn't or can't do. (Grammar?)
Keywords: Scroll
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 04:50:12 GMT

lai@seas.gwu.edu (William Y. Lai) writes:

>I have heard about this "list," but have yet to see one.  Would the official
>list keeper mind posting it?  

There have only been about 10 changes to the list since it was last
posted, and the changes are interspersed throughout the list.  So
to save bandwidth I'll just email it to anyone interested, and then
post it again in about a month.

   Steve Smith       | __|__ |    " #*&<-[89s]*(k#$@-_=//a2$]'+=.(2_&*%>,,@
<smsmith@magnus.acs. |   |   |      {7%*@,..":27g)-=,#*:.#,/6&1*.4-,l@#9:-) "
  ohio-state.edu>    |   |   | 
  BTW, WYSInaWYG     |   |   |                           --witty.saying.ARC
From: ejdeal@terri.austin.ibm.com
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: The NT file system
Date: 27 Jul 92 13:44:46 GMT
Reply-To: ...@cs.utexas.edu:ibmchs!auschs!terri.austin.ibm.com!ejdeal
Followup-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Organization: IBM Advanced Workstation Division


In article <1682C71A7.CIVENBAH@mizzou1.missouri.edu>, 
> From: CIVENBAH@mizzou1.missouri.edu
>  
> >What will the NT file system offer that HPFS doesn't?  I believe I
> >heard something about multi-user protection, but does that make sense
> >for a non-networked computer?  And OS/2 supports file protection for
>  
> Sure, it does.  For example, how about a stand-alone computer used by
> many students at a school.  Each has his homework password protected from
> all other students.....
>  
> Brian.


I can see it now... A stand-alone computer used by hundreds of students,
all trying to complete their homework.  And I thought it was 
difficult to find an unused VT-200 terminal (of the hundreds on
campus)...  ;-)  

Eric Deal 
EE at Texas A&M