HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: linville@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (John W. Linville)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: Why I'm sticking with Windows
Date: 14 Apr 92 23:01:12 GMT
Organization: NCSU CATT Prog

In article <1992Apr14.213530.25749@CERIS.Purdue.EDU> tfisher@CERIS.Purdue.EDU (Tom Fisher) writes:
>Well said, Andy.  I hear you saying, "If it ain't broke, don't
>fix it!"

That is the comment that has kept PC users running DOS for years and years.

Besides, who said that Windows isn't 'broke'?  :-)

John W. Linville




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  John W. Linville                Amateur radio:  KD4KHC                  |
|  #include "std_disclaimer.h"     E-mail:  linville@catt.ncsu.edu         |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: murph582@Armstrong.EDU (Charles R. Murphy Jr)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Where can I find a database program for Win 3.0?
Date: 10 Apr 92 14:14:39 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Armstrong State College, Savannah, GA

Newsgroups: Comp.archives,Comp.windows.ms
Subject: Where can I find a database program for Windows 3.0?
Distribution: usa
Organization: Armstrong State College, Savannah, GA

I would like to know if someone could tell me where or if I can find a
database program for Windows 3.0 from anonymous ftp.  

	Thanks
		CRM

-- 

Charles R. Murphy Jr	        | "Tomorrow is tomorrow." 
murph582@pirates.armstrong.edu  |
	                        | "Never pet a burning dog." 
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
From: bbrown@infonode.ingr.com (Bailey Brown)
Subject: Re: Why go to 3.1 if 2.0 works
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, AL.
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 16:39:17 GMT

karu@nevada.edu (N.H.A. KARUNARANTE) writes:

>In article <moore.703043080@pv34c1.vincent.iastate.edu> moore@iastate.edu (Brian J Moore) writes:
>>In <1992Apr11.132541.26604@engr.uark.edu> dch2@engr.uark.edu (David Hobbs) writes:
>>
>>>At the rollout at my local IBM yesterday, I saw the film at Comdex where
>>>IBM was running 3.1 in a OS/2Win along with DOS and other OS/2 programs.
>>>Reiswig(sp?) joked and said something to the effect of "Look what we've
>>>done just 24 hrs. after 3.1 was released..."
>>
>>And now I'll ask the question everyone really wanted to know....
>>
>>Will OS/2 run my DOS games in a box? (or at all?)
>>
>>-- 
>>   ________________________________________________________________________
>>  /                                  /                                    /
>> /  Brian J. Moore                  /                  moore@iastate.edu /
>>/__________________________________/____________________________________/
>Yes, and it does that better than my Windows.
>You can run Apogee games that use graphics, Wing Commander, etc.
>really nice.
>Note that I am not "selling OS/2" but simply answering a question.
>Thanks.
>Karu.

Will OS/2 2.0 run games that use the soundblaster?  I tried this with
SWOTL under win 3.1, and my soundblaster started making these awful noises.
However, the I can use the soundblaster to play sound samples from a dos
box, which is nice.

>karu@nevada.edu

------------
Bailey Brown                               "Above all else, confusion reigns."
Intergraph Corporation                                  
bbrown@casca.b11.ingr.com                              Procol Harum
From: Mike_Quigley@mindlink.bc.ca (Mike Quigley)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: My opinion on 3.1
Date: 7 Apr 92 04:25:20 GMT
Article-I.D.: mindlink.11290
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada

The first thing I did after installing the new Windows was run Telix, which
I've been running in a Window with a PIF I made for weeks with no problems,
multi-tasking with other programs simultaneously. Under 3.1 it works in the
Window, but when I switch to full screen, the text disappears and all that is
left are some junk characters where certain graphics like the borders are
supposed to be (the program will still run in this state, though a lot of good
that does me, when I can't see what's going on). That was just the beginning of
nine hours of misery. I finally gave up, deleted the whole Windows directory
and reinstalled 3.0. So far I am very disappointed in 3.1.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you're going to reply in E-mail, please don't quote my whole message back to me -- it costs me money!!! (so does this extra line)
Mike Quigley, Vancouver, B.C., Canada             Mike_Quigley@mindlink.bc.ca
Xref: sparky comp.windows.ms:12463 comp.os.os2.misc:11562
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms,comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Why go to 3.1 if 2.0 works
From: Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 01:00:03 GMT
Organization: Actrix Information Exchange

In article <lrvjgcg.rcain@netcom.com> rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain) writes:
> After spending half the evening trying to get OS/2 to know about the
> modem card that's been on com3 of one of my machines for a lonnnng time
> talking to you all, I know full well why OS/2 ain't goin nowhere.  It's
> great but it sucks if you don't have a guru or the internet.  I'm doin'
> this from DOS 'cause I have to.  It is a corporate operating system.
> -- 
> Bob Cain    rcain@netcom.com   408-358-2007
> 
> "There are some strings.  They're just not attached."
>                                                     Victoria Roberts

By the same argument, Windows won't go anywhere either. It defaults to 2e8 on
Com3 and 2e0 on Com4. I don't know about the rest of the world, but my machine
thinks otherwise. So Com3 and Com4 wouldn't work until I changed the sys.ini
file.........
 
Steve


-- 
Steve Withers - Wellington, New Zealand | "But the glory kept shining
Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz         |  and bright in my eyes, 
Ph. +64 4 478-4714  /                   |  And the stars going round in 
FAX between 6am and 1pm Eastern ST      |  my head." R. L. S.
From: rscott@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Richard Scott)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: NDW Backup Problem with WIN 3.1
Date: 15 Apr 92 14:51:29 GMT

In article <167C9B971.JWEST@r3vm.dsd.trw.com> JWEST@r3vm.dsd.trw.com (Judson  
West) writes:
> In article <2138@transfer.stratus.com>
> rscott@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Richard Scott) writes:
<stuff deleted>
>...However, when I tried to do a full backup that required more
> >than one floppy, it bombed and I got tossed out into DOS when NBW asked for  
and
> >tried to detect the second floppy.
<more stuff deleted>
>  
> I don't think Symantec is supporting NDW 1.0 under WIN 3.1. I didn't have
> those problems but I had a number of other problems until I installed
> NDW 2.0. The upgrade package is available directly from Symantec for $49+
> shipping, handling, fondling, tax, license, and insurance.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> | Judson West                          Phone:     (310) 812-4394            |
> | VM System Programmer                 Internet:  JWEST@r3vm.dsd.trw.com    |
> | IBM Operating Systems                IBMMail:   IBMMAIL(USTRW001)         |
> | TRW/Electronic Systems Group, One Space Park, Redondo Beach, CA 90278     |
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The problem I had seems to be transient.  It happened twice; but I tried again  
the next day and everything worked fine--no recurrences.  Everything else in  
NDW 1.0 seems to work fine (or at least not blow up), but I'm still planning to  
upgrade to 2.0.
-----
Richard Scott
Stratus Computer, Inc.
rscott@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
From: becap@cs.mcgill.ca (Brian CAPSON)
Subject: Re: Win 3.1 PC speaker MM driver?
Organization: SOCS, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 14:55:58 GMT

In article <198@bsc835bsc.edu> ehunt@bsc835bsc.edu (Eric Hunt) writes:
>Does anyone know if Microsoft ever plans to, or has released previously in
>the beta drops, a driver to allow .WAV files to be played through the regular
>PC speaker?
>-- 

They had a speaker driver available for a while during Beta Testing, and
they said they will make it available through Compuserve or their
Windows Driver Library disk as soon as they get the bugs out of it. You
might want to try calling them or checking Compuserve periodically (GO
MDL).

- Brian


Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms,comp.os.os2.misc
From: gnash@ee.uts.edu.au (Greg Nash)
Subject: Re: Tastes gross/more fattening (repost (last attempt only got ~1 site))
Organization: University of Technology, Sydney, Australia
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 05:04:23 GMT
Keywords: (hex encoded ASCII) 3A 2D 29



>> Reality check: most Win apps which UAE under Windows will do something
>> similar under OS/2 2.0.  The difference may be that OS/2 2.0 recovers more
>> gracefully; this has to be tested in the field first.  The fact is that
>> in most cases a UAE is saying that the application did something bad, typically
>> loading an invalid segment register, read/writing past the end, or
>> writing into a read-only place.  Changing the OS to OS/2 can't fix a bad
>> app (i.e. one that doesn't quite get its far arithmetic right).

Consider this...

  OS/2 -- the windows development platform!!

(Ignoring the implications of actually writing windows code..)
Developing under OS/2, when your application gives you a UAE,
OS/2 will tell you what it was trying to do at the time...
A good debugging tool?

  :-)
                  -- Greg
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
From: garygm@leland.Stanford.EDU (Gary Brainin)
Subject: Wanted: Win 3.1 printer driver for Star SG-10
Organization: Stanford Law School, Stanford University
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 92 03:59:11 GMT


   Okay, I bought Win 3.1, and not too surprisingly it doesn't come
with a driver for my ancient 8-pin (8-pin!?) dot matrix printer.  Not
a shock, as 3.0 didn't either, but now there's these neato-keen True
Type fonts, and running as a generic printer just ain't gonna make me
happy anymore.

   So, does anyone know where/how I could get a driver for this beast,
or which other driver is close enough for government work?

			-Gary
-- 
|Gary Brainin                     |BITNET: garygm%leland.stanford.edu@stanford|
|garygm@leland.stanford.edu       |UUCP: ...decwrl!leland.stanford.edu!garygm |
|"...the right to be let alone-the most comprehensive of rights and the right |
|most valued by civilized men."    Olmstead v. U.S. (Brandeis, J., dissenting)|
From: ppritche@digi.lonestar.org (Paul Pritchett)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: Video 7 drivers for Windows 3.1?
Date: 15 Apr 92 04:37:32 GMT
Organization: DSC Communications, Plano Tx.

In article <92105.000521KTK-VK@finou.oulu.fi> KTK-VK@finou.oulu.fi (Vesa Komulainen) writes:
>I wonder if anyone has tested if the V7 drivers (1024x768x16 and 800x600x16)
>written for Windows 3.0 can still be used with Windows 3.1. Unlike Win3.1
>-specific drivers for many other VGA cards, I have not seen any mention yet
>of ones for the Video 7 series so anyone who knows better, please let me know.
>
I was using the 800x600x16 driver with Win3.1 (I did the upgrade from 3.0 to
3.1, no problems encountered BTW :), but setup did not change my driver).

I have had no problem with Win31 using that driver but switched to the 
SUPERVGA driver that came with Win3.1 out of curiosity.  I have not done much
testing but the SUPERVGA driver appears to be faster.  I have not used the
1024x768x16 as my monitor only supports interlaced at that resolution and I
have the VRAM card (non-interlaced).

Hope this helps.

Paul Pritchett
----------------
Paul Pritchett			Internet: ppritche@digi.lonestar.org
DSC Communications		All opinions expressed are strictly my own
----------------


-- 
--------------------------------------------------
Paul Pritchett		ppritche@digi.lonestar.org

--------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
From: ebergman@isis.cs.du.edu (Eric Bergman-Terrell)
Subject: Re: more bugs in 3.1
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 92 04:43:19 GMT

In article <74167@netnews.upenn.edu> lchang@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Ling Chang) writes:
>Doug said:
>
>>1) a bad one: the clock appears to only run once, no multiple copies,
>>   and, far worse, you can't make it the active window by clicking
>>   just anywhere on it - you have to use the "move bar" area.
>>   Whoever at microsoft that did this, it was dumb.
>
>	Actually the reason that clock only able to run once is becuase
>of win 3.1 new feature of remembering the position of the applications,
>as mentioned in the latest issue of PC Magazine's excellent coverage on
>win 3.1
>	If you want to run more clocks, just reinstall the clock from
>win 3.0 (which is basically  the same).  You only need the clock.exe
>(probably can rename this if you still want the 3.1 clock) and digital.fon
>in the windows directory and away you go.
>
>Hope this helps,
>Ling S. Chang
>lchang@eniac.seas.upenn.edu
>
>
>

And you can run twice as many clocks as in 3.0 (32 vs 16).

Terrell
From: pkss@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (philip.k.sikora)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: 3.1/Logitech mouse/DOS WP problems
Keywords: help
Date: 14 Apr 92 12:43:09 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T

I installed Windows 3.1 over the weekend & I can't get my Logitech series 9
serial mouse to work when bringing up DOS WP in a window or even outside of
windows (that last part really doesn't make any sense).  The way the mouse
moves in WP now redefines the term "ballistic".  It reminds me of the 
Joshua (sp?) light shows at the old Fillmore East - things blinking all over
the place and menus popping up and disappearing right and left ( & up & down).
This is a note in one of the .wri files to supposedly take care of this but
it hasn't helped - there is no correlation between the way I move the mouse
and the way it responds (other than random).  I've tried various combinations
of the old driver & the new stuff, but I can't seem to get back to a pre-
windows level of just being able to use WP outside of windows w/ the mouse.
Any thoughts?

later
From: mleiber@hpwad.WAD.HP.COM (Michael Leiber)
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 08:00:22 GMT
Subject: Re: Win 3.1 and 32K colors
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Waldbronn, Germany
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms


From my memories:

I bought a new Speedstar HiColor a while ago and it came with a disk
containing a program called "iconfix". If I remember correctly, it sole
purpose was to fix a bug in the .ICO files preventing the wrong (as you
say 2-color) images to be displayed in HiColor (32K) mode. Drop me a note
if you're interested in this program and I'll try to send it to you
(hope there's no legal stuff on it).

		Regards Michael

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Leiber				Phone:          Germany (7243) 602-527
Research & Development			FAX:            Germany (7243) 602-414
Hewlett Packard				HPDesk:       Michael Leiber/HPB400/R1
Waldbronn Analytic Division		Unix Mail:  mleiber@hpwadlk.wad.hp.com
Hewlett Packard Str. 1			               7517 Waldbronn, Germany
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: 11458747@eng2.eng.monash.edu.au (CHRISTIAN WILSON)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Windows 3.1 - Paradise VGA 640*480*256 Drivers
Date: 13 Apr 92 04:24:43 GMT
Organization: Faculty of Engineering, Monash University

Has paradise released an update for windows 3.1 for their 256 colour VGA 
mode???

Will this (hopefully yes) be around on the public domain SOMEwhere???

Or, alternatively, could I purchase Winspeed and using their drivers for win 
3.1, or is this not advisable?

Thanks,
Christian.
From: cap@mb5000.anes.upmc.edu (chris pilewski)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: Fastdisk or 32 bit access in Win 3.1
Date: 17 Apr 92 14:04:00 GMT
Organization: UPMC

In article <1992Apr16.184941.22516@news.Hawaii.Edu>, lauch@wiliki.eng.hawaii.edu (Chung Lau) writes:
|> In article <14387@pitt.UUCP> cap@mb5000.anes.upmc.edu (chris pilewski) writes:
|> >WHAT IS FASTDISK FOR?
|> >At the moment, FASTDISK is used only in 386 enhanced mode for
|> >fast access of virtual memory (the swapfile).  FASTDISK will
|> >not speed up any disk operations that don't use virtual memory.
|> 
|>   Hmmm I thought I read somewhere that another reason 32bit access
|> speed up file operations is that in 386 enhanced mode the CPU doesn't
|> have to switch out of protected mode for file operations (i.e. in 3.0
|> it has to switch to real mode and use Dos).  I thought it was in PC
|> Magazine, and it seems to contradict what I've heard about 32bit access
|> (i.e. I think your definition is right).
|> 

The article that I read was in Info World.  After looking at it again, it
is a little ambiguous on this issue.  But, consider this:

Windows has never had its own file system.  It has always used the DOS
file system.  So, the file I/O functions in the Windows Libraries probably
just switch the processor mode and map to real mode DOS.  That means that
file I/O operations performed by Applications are still going through DOS.
In order for Applications to use the FASTDISK technology, the file I/O in
the Windows Libraries would have to be rewritten to use FASTDISK; and the
Applications would have to be re-linked with the new Libraries.

If I am wrong about Windows file I/O being mapped to DOS, I invite someone
more knowledgeable to post on the issue.

Incidentally, rewriting the file I/O portions of the SDK to use FASTDISK
would be a good idea if we are going to be stuck with the DOS file system
for the foreseeable future.  Does Bill Gates read this group? 

						- Chris Pilewski
						- pil@med.pitt.edu
From: cchapman@matd.gatech.edu (Charles H. Chapman)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: Win 3.1 and WinGif?
Date: 16 Apr 92 13:03:15 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <1992Apr16.051649.22273@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> echuang@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Ernest Y. Chuang) writes:

>Does anyone out there with Windows 3.1 use WinGif?  It worked fine
>for me under Windows 3.0, but after I upgraded to 3.1, it gives me
>an error every time I try to load a .gif file (it still seems to
>load other formats ok).  I'm just wondering if it's a real 
>incompatibility, or if it's just my system.  I think the version of
>WinGif I have is 1.0.


I'm using WinGif version 1.4 and it works fine with GIF files under Win 3.1.
You should get the new version off cica or wuarchive.


Chuck


Charles H. Chapman  (GTRI/MATD)             (404) 528-7588
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp:     ...!{allegra,amd,hplabs,ut-ngp}!gatech!matd!cchapman
Internet: cchapman@matd.gatech.edu
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
From: akm@getafix.cs.uoregon.edu (Anant Kartik Mithal)
Subject: placing folders on the desktop with NDW 2.0
Organization: University of Oregon Computer and Information Sciences Dept.
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 05:47:13 GMT

There are a couple of folders that I keep accessing on my hard disk
(work in progress folders), and I would like to be able to leave them
on my desktop. I am running NDW 2.0 and win 3.1.

The manual doesn't seem to indicate that this is possible, (nor does
it indicate that this is *not* possible). But, this is a reasonable
thing to want, so I was wondering.

thanks,

kartik



-- 
Anant Kartik Mithal                                     akm@cs.uoregon.edu
Network Manager, Phd Student				(503)346-3989
Department of Computer Science,                         (503)346-5373 (fax)
University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403-1202
From: eagle@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (Daniel L'Hommedieu)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: Windows NT - is it a Unix "remix"?
Keywords: NT
Date: 12 Apr 92 00:10:00 GMT
Organization: North Carolina State University

becap@cs.mcgill.ca (Brian CAPSON) writes:
>NT has alot more cool stuff on it than either of them. For instance, you can
>"own" a whole suite of resources, from files, to printers, etc, and assign  
>permissions to not only the 3 groups in UNIX (Owner, Group, and Everyone), but
>to individual users, or hierarchies of users, or other groups of users, all  
>from within the new "Windows" revamped interface. That's something a user
>can't do in UNIX. 

Sure you can.  All you need is AFS.  We use Andrew File System here at
NC State, and AFS allows me to give privs (read, write, look, delete,
administrate, insert, and one other; not sure what the "k" is for)
selectively to groups I create, to individual users, and to the entire
system list (system:everyone, dclhomm:cooldudes, gbmull--for examples of
everyone, a list I created, and an individual user).  

Now, granted it is not running on any "new 'Windows' revamped interface"
but you CAN do it.

Also, you are correct that you cannot "'own' a whole suite of resources"
under Unix.  But, then, I don't need to.

Still sounds to me like another Unix variant, but with the Windows API
instead of the (standard Unix; POSIX?) API.

Still, I would like to know where I can read more about it.

Daniel
--
Daniel L'Hommedieu / CSC Major, NC State U, on the 6-year plan :) 
Internet: eagle@{catt.ncsu.edu,Salzo.Cary.NC.US,grunt.Berkeley.edu}
10215 Hanover Glen Road / Charlotte NC 28210 / 704-541-5116
"Windows 3.1 is Microsoft's $50 bug-fix to Windows 3.0."-JWL
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
From: chuj@horton.Colorado.EDU (CHU JEFFREY)
Subject: Re: Setting up a '286 clone for max perf.
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 04:40:07 GMT

In article <1992Apr15.143901.27865@alw.nih.gov> donnel@helix.nih.gov (Donald A. Lehn) writes:
>In article <N!DL2&H@ais.org> impster@ais.org (Charles Budensiek) writes:
>/>I have a 80286 PC clone with the following stats:
>/>
>/>1 meg of memory
>/>BOIS and VIDEO Shadow RAM capabilities
>/>40 meg hard drive
>/>16 MHz clock speed
>/>
>/>Now, what exactly should I put in my config.sys and autoexec.bat files to
>/>maximize the performance of windows 3.1?
>/>
>/>impster@ais.org
>
>Contrary to what many people are probably going to say, you have a fairly
>good computer for running Windows applications.  For a modest investmant
>you can get really decent performance out of the system that you will be
>happy with for several years yet.
>
>These include:
>
>1. Buy a disk compression program like Stacker.  It will double your
>disk size for around $80.00.
>
>2. BUY AT LEAST 2mb more ram.  You can buy a board with 2mb for <$200.00
>and 4mb for <$300.00.
>
>Therefore, for an investment of much less than $400.00 you will have a 
>system that you will be satasfied with for a few more years and by that
>time the cost of 486 and better machines will have dropped significantly
>and you will be thankful that you didn't do something stupid like upgrade
>to a 386sx motherboard.
>

Why not buy a 386-40DX with 4 Megs (70ns) for $385.00, why worry about
a RAM card.  MB and cpus are so cheap now that prices of improving
a 286 would just jump right into a new 386 top line.
PRICES for the 386-40DX was advertised in "forsale.computers
" these were advertised as new boards, I don't know who sells them, just
seen the ads, sorry.
I think for $400.00, a 386-33DX(w/4 megs), and stacker would be at this
price, and think of it, you can sell your 286-16 cpu w/ MB to help pay
for this $400.00 upgrade.