From: keating@casemo.UUCP (John Keating )
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Some questions/comments...
Date: 19 Aug 92 15:39:30 GMT
Organization: Dowty Communications, Inc.

Some questions that someone out there might be able to answer for me:

(1) When I attempted to install IBM's Workframe/2 (development tool),
    it said that I had an out-of-date copy of UNPACK.EXE.  Looking at
    the executable that was installed in \OS2, the time/date/size was:
        11-16-90  12:00p  61168  UNPACK.EXE
    Looking at a co-worker's 2.0 executable,  it read:
         3-30-92  12:00p  68784  UNPACK.EXE
    Checking out a 1.3 machine, the executable read:
        12-12-90   9:34p  57952  UNPACK.EXE
    Replacing my UNPACK with his allowed the Workframe/w install
    procedure to continue.

    The question is, how did I get an older (even older than 1.3's!?!)
    copy of UNPACK.EXE?  Did it have to do with the fact that I won my
    copy at a show?  Do I have to worry about other files being out of
    date?  Should I reinstall my whole operating system?  (Now, that
    would be a pain in the kazuba...)

(2) Why can't I get EPM to save/load any style changes that I've made?
    I believe that it is saving the style, as there always seems to be
    a goodly sized chunk of Extended Attributes after saving, but how
    do I get them to load back in?

(3) A complaint:  Why do PM programmes have to force their way to the
    forefront when they want attention?  In a multitasking system, this
    is not only annoying (all keyboard seems to be re-directed to the
    "intruder" fore-front window), but it could conceivably be a RISK.
    Is there any way to keep these programmes quiet, or at least better
    behaved?  (Other than forcing their creators to rewrite them or be
    forced to attempt to get something done in one window whilst focus
    is constantly and randomly switching to other windows?)

(4) An observation:  How does IBM expect to make friends when they can't
    get their Distribution Center's working properly?  I've had four
    boxes of ES on backorder since April, calling every two weeks ("Two
    to Three Weeks, Sir; Two to Three Weeks, Sir; ad nauseum).  The last
    time I called, (29 Jul 1992), a young lady named "Amy" told me "not
    longer than two weeks".  Yesterday, I received in my mailbox, a nice
    letter from the IBM Redemption Center, saying, "Your shipment is
    expected to leave the week of September 11, 1992."  6 months?!?!?!?!
    That is totally unacceptable!!  I could have walked to Minneapolis
    and back in that time!  I have considered myself calm and patient,
    and have even defended IBM in the past when something didn't go
    exactly someone's way, but six months have passed, and my patience
    is used up.
    I'm not even going to mention the Toolkit that was supposed to
    arrive "within the week", but still hasn't arrived after two
    weeks.  (This is my own order.)  Or the two Toolkit's that were
    "lost in the system" and after much complaint by our purchasing
    department, finally got shipped by Airborne...  (These were ordered
    by me for my company).
    Okay, I'm sorry, the last was more of a complaint than an observation,
    and the focus of this note is supposed to be the first paragraph,
    but I wonder how many customers a day IBM loses to the ever-more
    visible WinNT, because of distribution policies like these.  If it
    wasn't for the fact that I can't justify a CD ROM player, yet, I'd
    have ordered the WinNT developer's beta.  And I like OS/2!

John Keating
(Did you know that Keating is supposed to mean "Calm and Urbane"?  Usually,
it does...)

-- 
    John Wllm Keating, III      | mimsy.cs.umd.edu!casemo!keating
  Dowty Communications, Inc.    | 73737.733@compuserve.com
 formerly  CASE/Datatel, Inc.   | The above message may not correspond with the
                                | views of Dowty Communications, Inc. -JWK3-
Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.misc:27193 comp.os.os2.apps:5228