HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: agriffin@mitre.org ((James) Artch Griffin(W20))
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: IT'S FINALLY STARTED!!!!
Date: 15 Apr 92 10:59:46 GMT
Article-I.D.: tsfsrv.agriffin.703335586
Organization: The MITRE Corporation

Actually, on 4/9 in the WSJ, same ad in section A.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: cdfannin@engws9.ic.sunysb.edu (Chris D Fanning)
Subject: Re: Bad Karma? The install adventure continues!
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 23:08:12 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.025612.27333@midway.uchicago.edu> sip1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <54345@hydra.gatech.EDU> ce1zzes@prism.gatech.EDU (Eric Sheppard) writes:


>>3.  The first time I rebooted after install, I got the tutorial window.  I
>>    clicked Exit, and the system locks up.  This has happened often.  When
>>    I reboot, it reports an allocation error with SWAPPER.DAT, then about
>>    ten minutes later, I _finally_ get a desktop after an unhelpful generic
>>    dialog box: "Cannot find file."  This time around, I notice I now have
>>    two objects called 'os2 desktop'.
>
>You aren't trying to install over a previous beta, are you?

Actually, I don't think he's completing his install.  I think his "lock-up"
is OS/2 trying to complete the install and create the desktop.  This would
explain why he hardly has a desktop.  <grin>  "Hmm... doesn't seem to be
doing anything..." <click>  and a recycle of power.

Chris
From: teverett@jarthur.claremont.edu (Toby Everett)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Is OS2/2.0-DOS faster than plain Dos??
Date: 12 Apr 92 16:52:25 GMT
Article-I.D.: muddcs.1992Apr12.165225.478
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711

In article <1992Apr12.204738.2983@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au> u1665462@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au writes:
>In article <rdippold.703057981@cancun>, rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) writes:
>overhead is canceled out by the increase in execution speed. This should hold
>true for Windows 3.0 full screen emulation as well.
	I got a hold of the PM Benchmark for Windows, version 2.0.  I ran it
in full screen Win-OS/2 mode, Windowed and maximized, and then dual-booted to
Win 3.1 (last beta, I believe) with the shipped VGA drivers and then with the
640x480x16 SpeedSTAR driver I have.  I then took Win 3.1 VGA speed to be 1,
average with in categories, and then averaged the categories.  This may not
be the most valid way to interpret the tests, but it worked.  
	Under WinOS/2 it reported my 40 MHz 386 as a 20 MHz chip, and 18 MHz 
in a windowed session.  The Full-Screen Win-OS/2 session was 0.612 times as 
fast as the Win 3.1 session.  The Windowed Win-OS/2 session (maximized) was 
0.772 times as fast as the Win 3.1 session.  The SpeedSTAR 640x480x16 
driver was 1.003 times as fast.  The areas the Windowed Win-OS/2 session
fell down in were Fill Ellipses, Draw Single Lines, Draw Lines In All
Directions, Draw Wide Lines, Area Alternate Fill, Area Winding Fill, Draw And
Fill Rectangles, Mixed Fonts, Image Data, Dialog Boxes, and Rubber Banding.
Everything else was with in 20 of Win 3.1.  Draw Arcs was actually faster than
the Win 3.1 VGA, but the SpeedSTAR driver was also markedly faster here too.
I have yet to try different video modes in Full Screen Win-OS/2, mostly because
I find windowed Win-OS/2 to be fast enough, and much easier to work with.
	Since Win 3.1 is supposed to be "Break through to a new world of
graphical power" (from What's Hot At Egghead), i would expect that Win-OS/2 is
faster than Win 3.0.  This means that once IBM releases Win 3.1 support, OS/2
should rock.  :)
>
>Also remember that when OS/2 gets the 32-bit graphics engine (next update) this
>will also boost video performance (which is already very good due to multi-
>threading).
	This plus 3.1 support:)

        --Toby Everett
        --teverett@jarthur.claremont.edu
        "I'm rooting for Boca.  How about you?"
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc,comp.windows.ms
From: rafetmad@cheshire.oxy.edu (David R. Giller)
Subject: Re: Is OS/2 2.0 faster than Windows??
Organization: Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA 90041 USA.
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 05:07:23 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.033638.20876@access.usask.ca> lowey@jester.usask.ca writes:
>More OS/2 and DOS benchmarks.  Please skip now if you aren't interested

>So, there is some validity in saying that OS/2 is slower at running
>MS-DOS programs than when you run MS-DOS applications by themselves.
>I assume the same thing goes for MS-Windows applications (at least in
>this Beta drop).  However, the difference, when OS/2 is run in full
>screen, is minimal (one second on this test).
>
>Some people argue that "A better DOS than DOS" and "A Better Windows
>than Windows" has to translate into "FASTER" than DOS or Windows.
>Personally, I'm quite willing to run my DOS programs marginally slower
>in order to run more than one DOS program at once.  I'm also quite
>happy to run MS-Windows a bit slower if it means I get better
>protection, and can run more than one Windows desktop on the machine
>at the same time.

OS/2 can be and often IS faster than DOS alone.  This is when you are using
the HPFS file system.  Can anyone do any benchmarks of disk-intensive or
both disk- and CPU-intensive tasks?

-Dave
-- 
David Giller, Box 134 | Q: How many Oregonians does it take to screw in a light
Occidental College    | bulb?  A: Three.  One to replace the bulb, and two to
1600 Campus Road      | fend off all the Californians trying to share the
Los Angeles, CA 90041 | experience. ---------------------------rafetmad@oxy.edu
From: dwl@watson.ibm.com (David W. Levine)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Windows 3.1 on OS/2 2.0 demo at Comdex (Definitive word)
Date: 9 Apr 92 17:31:23 GMT
Reply-To: dwl@watson.ibm.com
Organization: IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM

Here's the most definitive word you are likely to get about what
was demoed at Comdex:

I just pulled this off our internal conferencing system: 

>Article 6069 of ibm.ibmpc.os2arena:
>Path: yktnews!admin!watson!tools!yktvmv.vnet.ibm.com!ibmpc
>From: lrr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Distribution: ibm
>Newsgroups: ibm.ibmpc.os2arena
>Message-ID: <920409164346.os2arena.ibmpc.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: OS/2 Live at Comdex & Windows 3.1
>Date: 09 Apr 92 16:43:46 GMT
>References: <920408123813.os2arena.ibmpc.pebly@bcrvm7.vnet.ibm.com>
>Lines: 6
>Approved: ibmpc@yktvmv.vnet.ibm.com>
>
>I showed "seamless" 3.1 support integrated into a special 2.0 GA
>level driver. It is not in the shipped 2.0 product and it was a full
>"seamless" implementation, just as the 3.0 support in 2.0 is.
>
>Lee Reiswig
>

I hope this settles any lingering questions about what was demoed.

By the way, yes, Lee shows up in our internal conferences from time
to time, just like any other IBMer. 

David W. Levine      -- IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center
dwl@watson.ibm.com   -- (914) 784-7427 

My Opinions, IBM's hardware. -- 
Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.misc:10613 comp.windows.ms:11739
From: johnson@spectra.com (boyd johnson)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc,comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: Win3 --> OS/2 2.0 upgrade for $49!!!
Date: 6 Apr 92 23:32:48 GMT
Article-I.D.: spectra.1992Apr6.233248.25899
Organization: Spectragraphics Corporation

In article <1992Apr03.201336.10039@watson.ibm.com> dwl@watson.ibm.com writes:
>Absolutely. Just call up the IBM number and then send them the
>lisence page from your windows package. IBM doesn't care where it
>came from, who sold it to you, or anything like that. 
>
>David W. Levine      -- IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center
>dwl@watson.ibm.com   -- (914) 784-7427 

OK, let's see if I have this right:

We can upgrade from Windows 3.0 to OS/2 2.0 for $49.95 & the title page 
from the Windows 3.0 manual.

We can upgrade from Windows 3.0 to 3.1 at Egghead for $47.99 by turning 
in _either_ the title page or the first Windows diskette.  (turn in the 
diskette & you can use the title page to upgrade to OS/2 also)

So far Desqview/X can be upgraded to for $100 only by sending in the
serial number from _any_ Quarterdeck product.  No upgrade from Windows
...yet.

$200 for all of these products.  Not bad!  Now I just need to buy a BIG
hard disk for all that stuff!

-- 
========== Boyd Johnson	   nosc!spectra.com!johnson ==========
From: terryk@terminus.gatech.edu (Terry Kane)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Possible Reason for no OS/2 in Stores?
Date: 13 Apr 92 14:47:40 GMT
Organization: Georgia Tech College of Computing

dch2@engr.uark.edu (David Hobbs) writes:

>At the OS/2 rollout, I jokingly asked an IBM rep. why they didn't let 
>Microsoft do their OS/2 marketing.  The rep (believe it or not she did not
>get pissed) said that since so many 'popular' packages were being released
>right now (she didn't mention names:), there was somewhat a shortage on
>floppy disks right now.

Absolutely possible...  I went to the local CompUSA last week for supplies,
and guess what they were *completely* out of.  Right.  There were zero
boxes of 3.5"DSHD diskettes. :-<  3M must be making a killing. :->
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Terry Kane (terryk@cc.gatech.edu)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
I am a .sig file virus. Copy me into your signature file please.
From: jstewart@desire.wright.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Unix under OS/2
Date: 10 Apr 92 11:33:45 GMT
Organization: Wright State University

In article <92100.143840TURGUT@FRMOP11.BITNET>, TURGUT@FRMOP11.BITNET (Turgut Kalfaoglu) writes:
> In theory, you should be able to - if you can boot it from floppy.
> At least, this is my understanding of Virtual Dos Machines.
>  -turgut

	BUT, it MUST be an 8086/8 vs. of unix...the VDM is an 8086 virtual
machine.  I think coherant can do this...but I know of no "real" unix for
8086's.

					John Stewart
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc,comp.windows.ms
From: tinyguy@cs.mcgill.ca (Yeo-Hoon BAE)
Subject: Re: Is OS/2 2.0 faster than Windows??
Organization: SOCS, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 03:00:37 GMT

In article <1992Apr12.194647.17010@midway.uchicago.edu> sip1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <1992Apr12.175705.10643@wes.on.ca> tomh@wes.on.ca (Tom Haapanen) writes:
>>			WINOS2		WINOS2		Windows	
>>			full-screen	seamless	3.1
>>---------------------------------------------------------------
>>BitBlt			1.1		1.2		1.0	
>>Arcs			1.2		1.5		1.0
>>Lines			1.1		1.8		1.0
>>Area fills		1.1		2.6		1.0
>>Rectangles		1.1		1.3		1.0
>>Patterns		0.9		1.1		0.9
>>Text & fonts		2.2		2.3		1.1
>>StretchBlt		1.2		1.2		1.0
>>Images			0.6		1.4		1.0
>>Dialog Boxes		1.2		2.7		0.6
>>Rubber Banding		1.1		2.6		1.0
>>Scrolling		1.0		0.2		1.0
>>Erasing		1.0		0.2		1.0
>>Clipping		1.1		2.7		1.1
>>Average	(unweighted)	1.1		1.6		1.0
>>All numbers indicate times relative to Windows 3.0; lower numbers indicate
>>better performance.  All tests run using 640x480, 16 colours.  Each set of
>>tests included a Windows 3.0 test as well as the WINOS2 or Windows 3.1 test.
>>Each subsystem time indicates composite performance of individual tests.
>
>This is pretty darn impressive when you think about it.  (I also
>expected better numbers for Windows 3.1, what with all the talk of
>improved performance.)  The scrolling numbers are particularly
>surprising.
>
>-- 
>Timothy F. Sipples       Keeper of the OS/2 Frequently Asked Questions


Also, would you expect the same type of result with SVGA display?
From my wimpy Paradise card, I got huge speed improvement in 800x600x16
by changing from Paradise driver to Windows 3.1's own SVGA driver,
and when I say huge, I mean at least of magnitude 2, more like 3.

Any comments?

-TG


+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Yeo-Hoon Bae                                   Undergrad. U3/4, soon U5 :(  |
| tinyguy@cs.mcgill.ca           __o             Computer science             |
| (514) 939-9560                -\<,             McGill University            |
| ............................(*)/(*)............Montreal, Quebec, Canada     |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: shan@ms.uky.edu (Minghua SHAN)
Subject: Re: OS/2 on 386SX 16MHz?
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 16:22:56 GMT
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences
X-Bytes: 

In article <1992Apr8.113934.28010@trantor.harris-atd.com> mmccolli@ess.harris.com writes:
>I know that IBM's requirement for OS/2 is a 386SX w/ 4 Megs RAM.  This is the
>setup that I have right now.  How realistic is IBM's requirements?  I would like
>to try OS/2 but I don't want to waste my time just to find that I don't have enough
>memory.
>
>I would like more memory, but my mother board is maxed out to 4 Megs.  I need to
>purchase a memory card for about $100 (with 0K installed). Ugh.
>
>Mike McCollister
>
>
I am in exactly the same situation. And, as I understand, it will run
at a lower speed if more memory is installed (through memory card).
Is it practicle to run OS/2 on such a system?

shan@s.ms.uky.edu



Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Subject: Re: Setting the path
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 16:57:29 GMT

In article <sridhar.703345176@fir.cs.scarolina.edu> sridhar@cs.scarolina.edu (M. A. Sridhar) writes:
>>I realize the path gets setup in the autoexec.os2 file but how I can I get
>>more than the paltry 137 characters?
>I don't know the answer to this one, but I'd sure like to know!

I don't know what the PATH limit is in DOS, but it is a fixed DOS
limitation.  There are several kludgy ways of getting around the
problem (I believe 4DOS helps, for example).  In OS/2 I believe there
is no limit to PATH (in its CONFIG.SYS), at least none that will
matter.

To get around DOS's limitation, set the path selectively in batch
files.  Use a batch file to launch each application, and manipulate
the PATH before and after each application starts.

As an aside, having such a long path is extremely detrimental to
performance on FAT disks.  Best to have PATH point to one subdirectory
with lots of batch files (say, \BAT).
-- 
Timothy F. Sipples       Keeper of the OS/2 Frequently Asked Questions
sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu  List, available via anonymous ftp from
Dept. of Economics       128.123.35.151, directory pub/os2/faq, or via
Univ. of Chicago  60637  netmail from LISTSERV@BLEKUL11.BITNET.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: jokim@jarthur.claremont.edu (John H. Kim)
Subject: Re: GA directory move bug?
Organization: Harvey Mudd College
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 19:58:42 GMT

ballard@ucs.ubc.ca (Alan Ballard) writes:
>jokim@jarthur.claremont.edu (John H. Kim) writes:

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

>Probably a bug.  Practically every problem I've found so far with GA
>has involved the "drives" object, directly or indirectly.  It is by
>FAR the worst part of the release. ... They should have put the 1.3
>file manager  back in for GA, and redone drives for a later release.

Is it possible to take the file manager from 1.3 and add it as an
OS/2 app to 2.0?  Which files are needed?

While I'm at it, how do you set as default which type of window -
Icon, Tree, or Detail - comes up by default when you double click?
Icon looks nice, but Detail is much more useful when dealing with
the "Drives" object.
-- 
John H. Kim                 | (This space to be filled when I
jokim@jarthur.claremont.edu | think of something very clever 
uunet!jarthur!jokim         | to use as a disclaimer)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: MLONG@isucard.card.iastate.edu
Subject: IA State University OS/2 Demo
Organization: CARD
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 23:29:23 GMT

'Why be content to run when you can fly'                                                                                                              
'Challenge your existing boundaries for success.  Then rise above them with                                                                           
the new 32 Bit IBM OS/2 Version 2.0. ...'                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                                      
OS/2 Demonstation                                                                                                                                     
Monday, April 13                                                                                                                                      
9 am to 3 pm                                                                                                                                          
Memorial Union Terrace                                                                                                                                
For more information call Denise McDaniel  1-800-766-4426 ext. 2871                                                                                   
(Rain date Tuesday, April 14)
From: s6883289@titan.ucc.umass.edu (Peter Hawkins)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: os/2 2.0 order number?
Date: 6 Apr 92 21:35:36 GMT
Article-I.D.: nic.1992Apr6.213536.23790
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst

i just ordered the win3.0 upgrade to os/2 2.0. and my sales number is 216099.
does it mean i am the 216,099th person to upgrade from win3.0 or the 216,099th
person to order os/2 2.0?? also, apparently IBM did add more sales rep. i got
thru in 5 minutes whereas last week i waited some 20 minutes...
From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: HPFS question...
Date: 12 Apr 92 16:35:20 GMT
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago

In article <1992Apr12.015048.81334@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu> ry01@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (ROBERT YUNG) writes:
>Does HPFS "self-unfrag"??? I remeber reading a long while ago that some new
>file system actually checks itself for fragmentation and tries to correct it.
>Is this true for HPFS or was I reading about Microsoft's "improved" file
>system for NT????

HPFS is "fragmentation resistant," meaning that on all but the most
heavily used network server or BBS fragmentation is not a problem.
(And even on network servers or BBSes it is not necessarily a problem
either.)  When files are created it places them strategically to
minimize fragmentation, allowing room for them to grow and spacing
files intelligently across the disk.

For the heck of it I occasionally run the GammaTech HPFS defragmenting
utility.  It rarely encounters more than one fragmented file (and
usually not a highly fragmented one at that), even after heavy use.
-- 
Timothy F. Sipples       Keeper of the OS/2 Frequently Asked Questions
sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu  List, available via anonymous ftp from
Dept. of Economics       128.123.35.151, directory pub/os2/faq, or via
Univ. of Chicago  60637  netmail from LISTSERV@BLEKUL11.BITNET.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: bill.dehaan@rose.uucp (bill dehaan)
Subject: Re: Tape Backup ?
Organization: Rose Media Inc, Toronto, Ontario.
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 10:58:45 GMT
X-Gated-By: Usenet <==> RoseMail Gateway (v1.2)


Date Entered: 04-11-92 19:09
Michael Traub writes:

[long discussion on Colorado tape not supporting HPFS under OS/2]

MT>I've got some bad news for you, FAT filesystems cannot be backed up either!
MT>When restoring the backup all the extended attributes are lost. There is
MT>apparently a program called EAUTIL to get around this, but I haven't tried
MT>it yet.

I have. It's part of the 2.0 operating system. In fact, I have a  number
of Rexx execs which traverse the disk and generate an archive file which
contains all of the EAs in a  FAT file, so the tape software *can*  back
up EAs for the FAT disk. Likewise,  I have another set of Rexx execs  to
restore the EAs from the archive file.

Not painless, but  workable. Still, I  will happy when  Colorado finally
supports OS/2 directly, and I don't have to jump through these hoops any
more.

----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
Deus Ex Machina                   | Internet:   bill.dehaan@rose.uucp
Software Consulting and Gator Pit | Usenet  :   bill.dehaan%canrem@uunet.ca
----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
---
   SLMR 2.1a   This unit... must... survive.
   RoseMail 1.70:
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: liggio@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Vincent J. Liggio)
Subject: Re: PC Magazine coverage
Reply-To: liggio@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Vincent J. Liggio)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 19:22:31 GMT

Well, the PC Week from April 6th wasn't any better (so much for it being a
trade paper), nor was it any better the week before (actually, it was a
load of trash).  I loved the extra edition pullout for Windows 3.1 (more
garbage).  At least there were some seemingly unbiased articles this week,
while last week almost the whole magazine said that 3.1 was excellent and
OS/2 was not even worth looking at...  Ah, journalism at work.

Vince
From: woan@soda.berkeley.edu (Ronald Woan)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: mathematica with os2
Date: 6 Apr 1992 16:02:30 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley, CS Undergraduate Association
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu

No, absolutely no way as it uses WINMEM32.DLL which OS/2 2.0
cannot support due to system coherency concerns.
-- 
+-----All Views Expressed Are My Own And Are Not Necessarily Shared By------+
+------------------------------My Employer----------------------------------+
+ Ronald S. Woan                       woan@cactus.org or woan@vnet.ibm.com +
+ other email addresses             Prodigy: XTCR74A Compuserve: 73530,2537 +
From: adrenalin@BEIZ.mediatex.ch
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: RUMBA (AS/400) WITH OS 2 ?
Date: 14 Apr 92 17:14:20 GMT
Organization: MEDIAtex AG, CH-8807 Freienbach/SZ


 There is an application to connect
 things like PS/2 with our AS/400s.

 It seems to work fine with WINDOWS,
 so we would like to buy it.

 On the other hand we would like to
 climb over to OS 2.

 Does anybody know, wheter RUMBA is
 still working with OS 2 ?

 Thank you.
                   adrenalin



|B                                    B|
|E           CH: VTX *3600#           E|
|I           D:  BTX *28881#          I|
|Z                                    Z|
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc