HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rick@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu (Richard Warner)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: CD-ROM and NT (was Re: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2 and NT)
Date: 28 Aug 92 15:47:41 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: San Jose State University - Math/CS Dept.

bill@snoopy (Bill Poitras) writes:

>fred j mccall 575-3539 (mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com) wrote:
>: In <1992Aug20.185825.16102@microsoft.com> philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:

>Forcing users to use CD-ROM is a "arrogant" SunSoft concept as well.  You
>can no longer get SunOS on tape.  You have to buy it CD-ROM.  I don't
>think Sun is going out of business anytime too soon.

There is a BIG - VERY BIG - difference between the Sun and MS
scenarios.  And that is how they handled the affair.  Sun started
telling its customers 3 years ago that this would happen, and
then offered attractive bundles of CD-ROM drives with their machines.
Every Sun SERVER configuration sold now includes a CD-ROM drive and
you only need one on a network.  After this 3 year lead in, Sun's
first CD only release came out last month.  Much, much different than
the 'surprise, surprise, tactic of MS (0 lead time).

>Microsoft isn't just tarketing typical micro vendors anymore, they are
>targetting the large PC developers and the workstation market.  If you
>can't afford a CD-ROM setup to use NT, then Microsoft doesn't think you
>are big enough to worry about. 

MS does not care about developers.  Developers are the chaff that MS
will use from the OS side to create market penetrance of NT, and then
will try to steamroll over them from the applications side of the
house.

>--
>+-----------------+-------------------------------+-------------------------+
>| Bill Poitras    | Molecular Simulations Inc.    | Tel (408)522-9229       |
>| (bill)          | Sunnyvale, CA USA             |                         | 
>|                 | FAX (408)732-0831             | bill@msi.com            |
>+-----------------+-------------------------------+-------------------------+
From: remilld@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Jason Remillard)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: HELP WITH DEC LN03|NOVELL|MS-DOS
Date: 1 Sep 92 15:57:34 GMT
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

Hello there,

	I need a big favor from someone who has created and/or ported
over a Printer Definition File (PDF) for use on Novell Netware 3.11
to be able to use a Digital LN03r Scriptprinter (PostScript) on the
network..  I can run the printer through Windows 3.1 using their 
Digital LN03r printer driver and it works wonderfully.

	The book for the printer states that I should use the Apple
Laserwrite PLus printer driver, but since when does Digital know anything
about their own products.  I called DEC and they told me to look at 
CompuServe, call Novell and/or Microsoft and ask them for printer drivers.

	I guess that's what you get with 5 figure hardware/software
support charges.....   :.(



Anyways, if anyone knows of someone, or is that someone, please contact
me....




			Thank-You.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jason L. M. Remillard		        remillard@ceddwntwn.lan1.umanitoba.ca
University of Manitoba DOWNTOWN			  --   or   --
MicroLab Assistant			    remilld@ccu.umanitoba.ca
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Winnipeg, Manitoba - Way up in the Great White North, eh!!!               
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: richs@microsoft.com (Rick Schaut)
Subject: Re: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2 and NT
Date: 29 Aug 92 01:09:59 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation
Reply-To: richs@microsoft.com (Rick Schaut)
Distribution:  na

In article <1992Aug19.185634.28448@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>In <1564@anagld.analytics.com> sammy@anagld.analytics.com (Sam Blackburn) writes:
>>Which is easier to manufacture?  Tape or CD?  Which is cheaper to distribute?

>Yes, it is quite nice FOR THE SELLER.  But then, I'm not the seller.
>I'm the CUSTOMER.  Remember us, Microsoft?  We're the folks who buy
>your products.  Or don't.

Has it occurred to you that we listened to our users, and so few of them
actually shared your views that the costs of pleasing those who share your
views were greater than the costs of not pleasing them?

BTW, might I also suggest that you find an accountant who is capable of
explaining to you the tax ramifications of depreciation on capital assets?



-- 
Rick Schaut
UUCP:...{uunet | uw-beaver}!microsoft!richs

Microsoft doesn't speak for me, and I don't speak for Microsoft.
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: randyd@microsoft.com (Randy (William R.) Day)
Subject: Re: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2 and NT
Date: 28 Aug 92 18:39:07 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation
Distribution: na

Fred:
You've identified a problem: NT SDK access for people
without CD-ROMs. I offer a solution that I hope you
will take advantage of.  If you're willing to send me
$69 for the SDK plus $150 media-conversion fee, I will
send you the SDK plus a set of floppies that contain the
contents of the SDK CD-ROM.  I will ship either UPS or
Federal Express, you pay the charge in either case.
I make this offer as individual seeking to fill a need
in the marketplace.  The offer has no connection
with Microsoft, who happens to employ me.

I hope you find this offer attractive. You can
contact me at randyd@microsoft.com.  We should take
further discussions off the public bboard.

Thanks,
Randy Day- (randyd@microsoft.com)
(I speak for me, not for Microsoft.)
From: discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: <None>
Date: 28 Aug 92 15:23:47 GMT
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego

In article <1992Aug27.172948.164@indyvax.iupui.edu> jmmadiso@indyvax.iupui.edu writes:
>i thought that CD-ROMs were just ROM?
>i don't think that they're the next _it_ 4 computers.
>-just my opinion.
>give me a confirmation on the first, i'm just
>a comp sci student.


CD-ROMs are just ROMs.  And, no, they probably aren't the next _it_ "4"
computers (if someone can decide what "_it_" is supposed to mean).  However,
it is a good, reliable, and _useful_ (to some) technology... even though
nobody is forcing anybody to buy one.

- just my opinion

Joe
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: gregde@microsoft.com (Greg Demichillie)
Subject: Re: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2 and NT
Date: 03 Sep 92 18:05:39 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation
Distribution: na

In article <1992Sep2.151822.6429@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>In <1992Aug27.171508.8940@microsoft.com> gregde@microsoft.com (Greg Demichillie) writes:
>
>>No, this debate started with the question (and I think it's a fair
>>question):  Should MS have distributed the NT-SDK on CD-ROM.  YOU
>>are the one who turned into a personal crusade against Microsoft.  YOU
>>are the one who characterized our defending the policy as "making excuses."
>
>Well, have you considered that perhaps I view what happened that way
>because the FIRST thing that happened when this issue got raised was
>that 4 people from Microsoft started getting in my face about it?  No,
>I thought not.

Actually, there were so many postings from so many people saying that
CD-ROM was the right way to go that I don't remember 4 Microsoft people
"getting in your face" about it.  I do remember my posting (regarding
FRED.EXE) and I apologize if you were insulted.  But after seeing the
third or fourth posting in a row with "I CAN'T WRITE TO A FRIGGING CD-ROM"
I just got a little tired.  After all, we already have PETE.EXE to 
"correct" spelling and GREG.EXE to erase "vaporware". 

>You know, it's really funny.  Criticizing Microsoft seems to be a
>sure-fire way to get deluged with personal attacks, both in public and
>in private.  Not to say that everyone from MS responded that way (they
>didn't), but there were enough MS people/boosters doing it to
>reinforce every bad impression I've ever heard of Microsoft.

I don't mind criticism of Microsoft if it is reasoned and not just
the typical "Microsoft sucks" or "Micro-shaft" or "Micro$oft" or any
of the 55 other ways people have of flaming.  You disagree with the
decision to ship the SDK only on CD.  That's fine.  Reasonable people
can have such disagreements.  People may try to convince you that 
you are wrong (although on forums like these that never seems to work :-)).


-Greg
 
-- 
Greg DeMichillie          
gregde@microsoft.com      -- All opinions are mine, not Microsoft's --
From: rwb00@loon.as (Robert W Beveridge)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft bashing (was: Re: Some more misconceptions...)
Date: 3 Sep 92 18:19:14 GMT
Reply-To: rwb00@loon.as
Organization: Sun Microsystems


In article 85mu02Yr20qE01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com, rwb00@loon.as (Robert W Beveridge) writes:
>Well, I think this is short sided... 

well, actually its shortSIGHTED
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: sammy@anagld.analytics.com (Sam Blackburn)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: program manager lacks!
Date: 29 Aug 92 00:30:08 GMT
Organization: Computer Sciences Corporation - Systems Engineering Division

jmmadiso@indyvax.iupui.edu writes:

>what's up with the prog manager... why can't you perform file
>operations from there?  did you not think of that or you just didn't

These operations are handled under FILE manager.  I guess MS wanted to
divide an conquer the problem of programs amnagement and files management.
Someone probably has written a prog/file manager combination somewhere.
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: kurt@alumni.cs.colorado.edu (Kurt Olender)
Subject: Re: Microsoft bashing (was: Re: Some more misconceptions...)
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 15:19:05 GMT

The question then needs to be asked if MS did indeed "hurt" people
and or companies by doing a 180 degree turnaround on OS/2.
Personally, I think, yes.
In the long run, the increased competition will only be good for all
of the user community (i.e. better products at lower prices), so I'm
not really going to complain loudly ( a little grumbling under my 
breath perhaps), but I seriously doubt MS had such high minded ideals
when they decided to drop OS/2.
From: discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: program manager lacks!
Date: 28 Aug 92 15:33:15 GMT
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego

In article <1992Aug28.093815.3354@cs.hw.ac.uk> neilp@cs.hw.ac.uk (Neil Postlethwaite) writes:
>In article <1992Aug27.180950.165@indyvax.iupui.edu> jmmadiso@indyvax.iupui.edu writes:
>>to one of you microsoft people...
>>what's up with the prog manager... why can't you perform file
>>operations from there?  did you not think of that or you just didn't
>>know how or will it be there in the next release? (i'm not even THINKING about
>>purchasing NT, i'm just a student) please do something about this.
>>
>
>Beacuse Windows is so dense, it needs loads of extra config info from win.ini
>which means stuff won't work optimally from the ok(ish) file manager. Thus
>the Program Manager was created which is entirely seperate from the file one.
>
>This twin way of working is one of my mayor gripes about Windows. It
>is a very crap way of going about things and helps keep data files hidden
>away from applications. 

Well, I won't say that I am not frustrated with FileManager's slowness.  But
it *does* have some advantages.   If you're installing an workstation
for a non-computer-literate... it helps to be able to "protect" the hard
disk by simply not giving access to the file manager.  Sure, the user could
still accidentally delete an icon from progman, but the application itself
will still be there.

>
>On the other side of the fence on the Mac, the file *is* the application or data
>double-click and run.

One of the most fantastic things about the Mac.  It's a wonder than someone
has not yet programmed a version of progman that allows this (I wouldn't think
it would be hard).

If Apple would stop suing everybody that came out with an OS that had a
Mac look and feel, I am sure that Windows would have this feature as well (as
it is, Apple was actually suing Microsoft for OVERLAPPING WINDOWS for crissake!)

>
>Neil
>
>P.S. Take a look in your /windows directory. What a disgusting mess, no wonder
>     windows is such a nightmare to run.

Take a look at an Apple's System folder....

BTW:  I will admit that I prefer the MacOs (system 7) look and feel over
Windows.  But System 7 does not run on a PC, and Windows does (as well as OS/2
and DOS for that matter).
From: discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows == OS
Date: 1 Sep 92 15:22:39 GMT
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego

In article <1992Aug31.184607.12142@seachg.uucp> burke@seachg.UUCP (Michael Burke) writes:
>Gee - this has gone on forever.  And I thought this was pretty simple
>question. 
>
>Call me old fashioned, but to my mind, an Operating System provides the
>means for application programs to operate on a hardware system. The test is
>easy - boot the test code on the hardware, if it runs it is either an O/S
>or an application that internally provides some O/S functions. If it does not 
>run (ie it needs an O/S) then it is not an O/S.

This is not the "old fashioned" definition of an operating system.  The
textbook definition of an operating system is MUCH more vague... basically
defining an OS by the functionality it provides: resource management,
process management, interface between the application program and the
underlying hardware, etc.

From the "textbook" standpoint, Windows is an operating system--note that
NO "textbook" definition that I've found disallows an operating system
from being built atop another operating system (in fact, several texts
have EXAMPLES of operating systems running under other operating systems--
but as virtual machines).

The point is almost arbitrary.  It really doesn't matter how a programmer
or user views Windows... and I feel that as time goes on, nobody is
really going to care (as if anyone cared at the nonce).

Mind you, although, by strict definition Windows *is* an operating system
(it does provide all the functions required by an operating system)... it
does not mean that it is a *good* operating system.  


>
>An application the that provides some O/S functions but can not run other
>applications - also fails the O/S test.

Process management is also a requirement for an O/S.  Windows does this
by making calls to the underlying DOS.
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: burke@seachg.uucp (Michael Burke)
Subject: Re: Windows == OS
Reply-To: burke@seachg.UUCP (Michael Burke)
Organization: Sea Change Corporation, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 18:46:07 GMT

Gee - this has gone on forever.  And I thought this was pretty simple
question. 

Call me old fashioned, but to my mind, an Operating System provides the
means for application programs to operate on a hardware system. The test is
easy - boot the test code on the hardware, if it runs it is either an O/S
or an application that internally provides some O/S functions. If it does not 
run (ie it needs an O/S) then it is not an O/S.

An application the that provides some O/S functions but can not run other
applications - also fails the O/S test.
-- 
---
Michael Burke

Sea Change Corporation
6695 Millcreek Drive, Unit 8 
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada L5N 5R8
Tel: 416-542-9484  Fax: 416-542-9479
UUCP: ...!uunet!uunet.ca!seachg!burke
Xref: sparky comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:2052 comp.os.os2.advocacy:4682
From: jon@alpha.ee.ufl.edu (Jon Mellott)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: CD-ROM and NT (was Re: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2 and NT)
Date: 28 Aug 92 20:26:40 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: EE Dept at UF

Again, NT on CD only is just a reflection of the fact that this is a 
pre-release developer's (only) version of NT. MS is expected to release 
NT on magnetic media when it goes retail. Also, I'm told that they will 
have a install diskette which will allow NT to be installed over a network:
just stick the disk in and let it rip. Not too shabby.

Jon Mellott
High Speed Digital Architecture Laboratory
University of Florida
(jon@alpha.ee.ufl.edu)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft bashing (was: Re: Some more misconceptions...)
From: roca1@cs.aukuni.ac.nz (Robert Weeks        O'Callahan     )
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 23:46:34 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept. University of Auckland

In <85mu02Yr20qE01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> rwb00@loon.as (Robert W Beveridge) writes:

>Again, Microsoft wants to maximize their profits - so of course they want users
>to migrate to NT. They don't support lots of environments - the Amiga, Geoworks, etc.
>They (rightly) have to make a decision about how thin to spread themselves - 
>if OS/2 becomes more successful, their desire to mazimize their profits will
>probably dictate that they support it.

Think about Microsoft and the Mac.  All the difficulties between Microsoft
and Apple have never stopped MS making killer Mac apps...  Sometimes I think
Excel *saved* the Mac from premature extinction.

-- 
===============================================================================
= Robert O'Callahan                                     roca1@cs.aukuni.ac.nz =
= I AM UNABLE TO SEND EMAIL OUTSIDE THIS UNIVERSITY  9032121@mat.aukuni.ac.nz =
= "Shut up or shut down"                            9032121@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz =
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: rick@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu (Richard Warner)
Subject: Re: CD ROMS (was: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2)
Organization: San Jose State University - Math/CS Dept.
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 00:00:35 GMT

discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar) writes:

>In article <1992Aug24.152555.26524@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu> rick@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu (Richard Warner) writes:
>>

>By your logic, nobody should be buying 5.25" floppy drives (or 1.44mb
>floppy drives)--because 2.88mb floppies and 20 megabyte flopticals have
>been announced.

BIG difference, here.  First off, a 1.44 Mb floppy drive is $59.  A CD-ROM
is >>$200.  Secondly, if XA and multipass take off they will SUPPLANT,
not supplement current CD technology.  If they take off, your drive will 
be a paper-weight because no one will be writing CD's that you can read.
Period.

>The consideration, friend, is whether or not the $229 *investment* will
>pay off in two years (should you buy an "older technology" CD-ROM drive).
>Why two years?  Because even if the XA and multipass CD's became available
>*now* it still needs to find its way into the mainstream.  Look how long
>it took 360K floppy disks to die off (if you can consider it dead).

Look at the big picture.  CD drives have <1% market penetration.  If the
new stuff coming out next year, ALL of which depends on XA/multipass
technology, and results in 2-5% market penetration, then NO ONE will be
writing CD's that will work in your drive.  Stop and think - the
360 Kb drive analogy is totally fallacious, because there was 100%
market penetration of 5-1/4" DS/DD drives at the time 5-1/4" DS/HD
drives started making inroads.  A better analogy is the 5-1/4" DS/QD
drives.  They were made totally, absolutely obsolete by the DS/HD drives,
just like XA/multipass could make your CD-ROM obsolete.

Will your CD-ROM pay off?  Your gamble.  I paid my $3000 once to MS for
the Windows 3.0 SDK, complete with promise of an upgrade path to
OS/2 PM.  Once burned, twice shy.

>>The medium is not standardized, yet.  It is getting there.  

>The medium is standardized.  Any CD-ROM published to date can be read by
>any CD-ROM drive on the market.  Just like "SCSI" *was* standardized until
>a modification to the standard was made (SCSI-2).  

Actually, the current ISO standard includes XA and multipass.  If your 
drive does not include these, you have a non-standard drive :->

Xref: sparky comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:2048 comp.os.os2.advocacy:4668
From: discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2 and NT
Date: 28 Aug 92 15:20:30 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego

In article <1992Aug27.171508.8940@microsoft.com> gregde@microsoft.com (Greg Demichillie) writes:

>>>>Has anyone noticed how all the people making excuses for this policy
>>>>are from Microsoft?

>>>Has anyone noticed that Fred seems to be the only one making a lot of
>>>noise about this? 

>>Now THERE is the MS we all know and love!  Fine, they can condemn me
>>for my attitude and they can condemn Microsoft for yours.  It is the
>>Microsoft attitude that is the POINT, after all.  It's what this whole
>>episode has been symptomatic of.

>No, this debate started with the question (and I think it's a fair
>question):  Should MS have distributed the NT-SDK on CD-ROM.  YOU
>are the one who turned into a personal crusade against Microsoft.  YOU
>are the one who characterized our defending the policy as "making excuses."
>

And besides.... *I* am not from Microsoft... and I find CD perfectly
acceptable.
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: program manager lacks!
From: f67700241@violet.ccit.arizona.edu (Greg Franklin)
Date: 29 Aug 92 04:08:42 MST
 <1992Aug28.075007.1@violet.ccit.arizona.edu> <1992Aug29.082048.13330@msc.cornell.edu>
Distribution: world,local
Organization: University of Arizona
Nntp-Posting-User: f67700241

In article <1992Aug29.082048.13330@msc.cornell.edu>, maynard@groo.msc.cornell.edu (Maynard J. Handley) writes:
>>> On the other side of the fence on the Mac, the file *is* the application
>>>or data double-click and run.h
>>
>>Indeed.  Too bad Macs are proprietary and overpriced.
> 
> You mean like how I can ftp to ftp.apple.com to pick up latest version of
> the
> system software, but MS has no comparable site- I have to plunk down my
> $89
> or so for each upgrade.

Eh, what?  Assuming that what you said is the truth, I feel bad for 
the 99% of mac users unlucky enough not to even know what an ftp site is.
They have to pay through the nose for upgrades just like the rest of us.

Besides, MS has a BBS where you can download tips and drivers for the
price of a long-distance phone call.  One of the MS employees could tell
you what their plans are for ftp access (if they have any).

So I don't see any bragging points in what you said above.

> Oh- you mean this is the IBM-PC version of
> proprietary
> which is defined in terms of hardware (which does nothing for you) rather
> than software (which is what mostly defines the machine.)

Dude, hardware paves the way for software.  Thanks to IBM open-system
architecture, the door has been long since open to a free market of price
competition, hardware advances (386 and 486), and a software explosion
that Mac bigots can't even comprehend.

Modern OS software like Windows NT and OS/2 needs the power of modern
hardware to do their job.  The availability of hardware to run these
systems means that more-capable software will be written to take
advantage of it.  The upshot is that you can't pretend hardware does
nothing for you.  At the least it creates software, which IS what
defines how useful the machine is to you.

The best part about the "window wars" on
PC-compatible systems is that neither IBM or MS are sitting on their
asses and assuming (like Apple) that everyone will have to buy what
they're giving them.  They're *COMPETING*.
-- 
Greg "Mockingbird" Franklin      Interviewer: "Sir, how do you spell relief?"
f67700241@ccit.arizona.edu               Dan: "R-O-L-A-I-D-S-E."
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy