HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: byer@adobe.com (Scott Byer)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: X is a hack?
Date: 28 Aug 92 00:11:19 GMT
Reply-To: byer@adobe.com (Scott Byer)
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated

Richard Krehbiel writes

> Why is printer support necessarily a GUI feature?  The
> Mac system, Windows, etc. are more than just GUIs.
> Printer support is simply not within the domain of X.
> I take it you're saying it should be.

Without support from the windowing system, printer support
is as it is under DOS; every application must write *it's
own* printer driver for *each* of the printers it wants
to support.  Augh.  It's up to whoever provides the
imaging model (in this case it's X, not the GUIs) to
provide reasonable printer support.

Every other windowing system + GUI provides some sort of
bottleneck where the windowing system takes care of the
basic protocols of talking to a printer with global
printer drivers.

'Printing support under X is like a black hole.'
'But black holes exist!'

Scott Byer                                   NeXTMail: byer@adobe.com
Adobe Systems Incorporated               These are *my* opinions, and  
1585 Charleston Road, P.O. Box 7900        do not necessarily reflect
Mountain View, CA 94039-7900             the opinions of my employer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
From: thg@cam-orl.co.uk (Tim Glauert)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: X is a hack?
Date: 27 Aug 92 10:09:13 GMT
Organization: Olivetti Research Ltd, Cambridge, England.

In article <1992Aug26.195452.941@hellgate.utah.edu>, brian%jaguar.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:
|> In article <1992Aug26.171756.17033@msi.com> bill@msi.com writes:
|> >1) Why is X a hack?
|> It's a glue-on on top of Unix (i.e. it's not well integrated).  I purports
|> to be a GUI, but has a fair number of standard features missing.

Let's get this straight, shall we? X is a "Window System", not a GUI, and it
provides all the standard features of a window system. A key design feature of
X was "Mechanism, not policy" whereas the key feature of a GUI is that it
provides consitency by enforcing a given user-interface policy.

If you want to talk about GUIs, discuss Motif or OpenLook or Andrew or
something else. But don't accuse X of not having features it was never
intended to have.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: X is a hack?
From: mendels1@husc4.harvard.edu (Andrew Mendelsohn)
Date: 27 Aug 92 13:47:56 EDT
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

Desqview/X is a good impementation of X for the PC; locally, it has 
printer support and font management technology.   Its fairly efficient 
as it runs about as fast as Windows on my system.  It requires 4 MB 
RAM.  
ps- you can even run it in an OS/2 DOS 5.0 VDM.
andy mendelsohn
From: buhr@umanitoba.ca (Kevin Andrew Buhr)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Misinformation about os2-dos HW access
Date: 30 Aug 92 01:22:09 GMT
Article-I.D.: ccu.BUHR.92Aug29192209
Organization: University of Manitoba, Canada

In article <1992Aug27.152101.2685@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>
mlevis@ringer.cs.utsa.edu (Mike Levis) writes:

   Does this mean that Alpha & NT for Alpha must be tested
   separately from a PC & NT for PC?

   How much variation in the hardware is allowed after the test
   is completed and the security is verified?  For example, if a
   PS/2 Model 95 & NT is tested and approved, does this mean that
   an untested PS/2 Model 90 & NT is also approved, or does the
   certification require *exact* hardware matching.

I have no specific information either way, but from what I've heard,
the answer to your two questions is "YES".  When they say C2
certification is awarded to a hardware-software combination, they
presumably mean it.

However, no one here is suggesting that Microsoft would have to get NT
certified with five hundred clones and pseudocompatibles before it
could legitimately boast a C2 "rating".

If Microsoft had NT certified on a single hardware platform, it would
go a long way to lending credibility to their claim that NT and C2
have any kind of relationship.  Analogies are dangerous, but it seems
to me MS is spouting a "zero out of five dentists recommend us, but
we're still a toothpaste" claim.

Kevin Buhr <buhr@ccu.UManitoba.CA>
From: "bill dehaan" <bill.dehaan@canrem.com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: what crash...
Date: 1 Sep 92 19:54:59 EST
Reply-To: "bill dehaan" <bill.dehaan@canrem.com>
Distribution: comp
Organization: Canada Remote Systems

In message <0#bnnzj.jeffc#netcom.com>, jeffc@netcom.com (Jeff Cohen)
writes:

JD>>>Sure. If you don't want to run any PM or Windows apps. Which we do.

JC>>By changing the RUNWORKPLACE to CMD.EXE you can still use PM apps
JC>>since the PMSHELL is still running.  A different line in the config sys
JC>>is used to disable the PMSHELL.  I know this since I have tried
JC>>both changes, and was still able to run PULSE.EXE after having changed
JC>>RUNWORKPLACE to CMD.EXE.  I am not sure of windows apps, but would
JC>>assume that since PMSHELL is running that dos & windows support is
JC>>possible.
JC>>

JC>It is.  Dos/Windows/PM applications can all be launched from a command
JC>line session with the START command.  Mr. Dehaan does not have his
JC>facts straight.

That's "de Haan" to you. :-)

And  actually,  without  bothering  to  post  five pages of explanations
(which I've already emailed to three different people pointing this  out
to me), the real problem has more to do with SOM than with the actual PM
shell, although both are  required. Unfortunately, NDA prevents  me from
going into the _real_ problems, so I'll just have to leave it at that.

----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
Deus Ex Machina                   | Internet:   bill.dehaan@rose.com
Software Consulting and Gator Pit | Eradicate Hunger - Eat the homeless
----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
---
  SLMR 2.1a  Joe's Crematorium: You kill'em we grill'em!
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario/Detroit, MI
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
Organization: European Academic Research Network (EARN)
Date: Wednesday, 26 Aug 1992 08:46:55 GMT
From: Turgut Kalfaoglu <TURGUT@FRMOP11.BITNET>
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT goes "late Beta" in 8 weeks! (was Re: Windows NT 'Alpha')
 <1992Aug21.181514.4337@njitgw.njit.edu> <1992Aug24.200938.14130@microsoft.com>

Phil: If Microsoft is not responsible for dropping OS/2, and is
not responsible for my personal loss of $1000 for purchasing two
of their dud compilers (I thought they would continue supporting
OS/2 when I bought them). If they are not resposible for creating
bad publicity, putting pressure on magazines, and creating biased
"benchmarks", then who is?

-turgut
From: slug@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Glen Anthony Graham)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Problems with crashes, tweaks, etc. (was: Re: Win-OS/2 performance tweaks)
Date: 2 Sep 92 22:42:56 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

>but could not find it.)  If anyone knows what the keys are, please
>post.

Left-control, Left-shift, and F1 all at the same time.  Press and hold them
down when the WPS colored screen first appears.  It is in the Readme file in
the rood directory of your machine.
 
Glen Graham
From: ak@ananke.stgt.sub.org (Andreas Kaiser)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: OS/2 vs NT features list, Revision 1.3 
Distribution: world
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 92 02:17:13 GMT
Organization: ananke


In article <1992Sep1.222800.17703@hellgate.utah.edu> brian%jaguar.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu writes:

  > #       Asynchronous I/O
  >                 OS/2 1.X had this feature but for unexplained
  >                 reasons dropped it in 2.0.  While you can do it
  >                 with threads, you can also multi-task in DOS...

Note that OS/2 1.x async i/o obviously was no more than threaded
wrappers around the corresponding sync i/o. You can easily see that
when you look at the output of PSTAT while running programs using the
async i/o calls.

:::::::::::::::::::: subnet:  ak@ananke.stgt.sub.org
:: Andreas Kaiser :: fidonet: 2:241/7220.9
::::::::::::::::::::
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: f67700241@violet.ccit.arizona.edu (Greg Franklin)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Os/2ers whine again
Date: 29 Aug 92 13:21:21 GMT
 <1992Aug26.091123.1@violet.ccit.arizona.edu> <1992Aug29.010839.12600@umr.edu>
Distribution: world,local
Organization: University of Arizona
Nntp-Posting-User: f67700241

In article <1992Aug29.010839.12600@umr.edu>, ckincy@mcs213c.cs.umr.edu (Charles Kincy) writes:
>In article <1992Aug26.091123.1@violet.ccit.arizona.edu> f67700241@violet.ccit.arizona.edu (Greg Franklin) writes:
>>Well, you are.  You gambled $1000 on the (remote) possibility of a 
>>successful OS/2 1.x.  The rest of us hoarded it until MS Windows came 
>>along.  Don't blame MS for the choices of a free market.
> 
> Oh, this is the dumbest thing I have ever heard in my *life*!  Why
> did you not believe MS about OS/2 in 1987, but believe them in 1990
> when Windows 3.0 came out?  Sounds like someone is being inconsistent,
> if you ask me....

Hmph.  I didn't touch Windows till *this month*, and I swore never to 
get Win 3.0, it was just too buggy.  I think I let enough time go by before
committing to an operating environment, didn't you?  I was losing patience
single-tasking on my dumb old DOS PC....

The delays in getting OS/2 applications and CSDs out made it pretty 
obvious to me which product was being better supported in the marketplace.
It's not a question of belief....

>>> If they are not resposible for creating
>>> bad publicity, putting pressure on magazines, and creating biased
>>> "benchmarks", then who is?
>>
>>You can't blame MS for that.  Blame the software developers who
>>supposedly believed the "bad publicity," trashed such an
>>*obvious* winner in OS/2, and developed software for such an *obvious*
>>dog as Windows 3.1/NT.  (note sarcasm)
> 
>No, blame MS for being wishy-washy in their direction, for saying
>one thing and doing another.
> "OS/2 may well be the most important operating system ever"
> --Bill Gates

Note the "may" -- he was hedging his bets just like I was.  All good
developers do that, to a point.  They just want your money, after all.
"OS/2 may well be the most important operating system ever" ..... that
reeks of hype to me.  I'm under no illusions that Windows is the most
important GUI ever....

Anyway, I haven't seen NT, so I have no idea what to think on it.  It
has disadvantages with respect to OS/2, in that it doesn't exist and
is likely to be heavier in system reqs.  Score 1 for OS/2.

It's up to the OS/2 developers to start developing applications,
drivers, etc. and quit whining about MS's two-timing them.  This is the
future.  *Make me* want to put OS/2 on my system by writing better
apps to run under it....
-- 
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.os2.advocacy
From: grumpy@jpradley.jpr.com (Jeff Markel)
Subject: Re: Will OS/2 2.0 support Windows 386Enh development?
Reply-To: grumpy@jpradley.UUCP (Jeff Markel)
Organization: Unix in NYC
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 15:08:02 GMT
Keywords: windows 386enh sdk

In article <1992Aug20.190257.13127@njitgw.njit.edu> dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:
>In article <1992Aug19.121120.25468@jpradley.jpr.com> grumpy@jpradley.UUCP (Jeff Markel) writes:
>>The problem with running apps in 386 Enhanced mode is that 386/486 CPUs
>>are not self-virtualizing.  A [34]86 can pretend to be a 286 or 8086, but
>>can't create a virtual 386.  This, in my opinion, is one of the current
>>generation's great shortcomings.  If the P5 can virtualize the entire
>>(or at least most) of the [34]86 architecture, then you could have a
>>true VM OS - imagine running Solaris, NT, DOS, DVX and OS/2 all as 
>>apps under OS/2 - it boggles the mind.
>
>Perhaps Intel should work with IBM's mainframe division.  The s/370
>machines could virtualize themselves.  I've seen the VM operating
>system running in a VM-hosted virtual machine.  I've also seen the MVS
>operating system running in a VM-hosted virtual machine.  This is
>particularly useful for debugging new versions of the operating system
>- you just run it in a virtual machine under the older (and stable)
>version until it stabilizes.
>
>If IBM can make a 370 that can produce virtual 370's, Intel should be
>able to make a 486 that can produce virtual 486's.  They just haven't
>done it yet.
>-- 
>   |)  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.

That's exactly what I was aiming for, and also where I'm coming from.  In
a past life I was a VM/[XA,ESA] system developer for IBM.

                        Jeff Markel

Jeffrey Markel | uucp:     jpradley!argos!markel   | Argos Computer Systems Inc
KD2HN          | internet: grumpy@jpradley.jpr.com | 110 W. 32nd Street 
(212)594-5400  | amprnet:  kd2hn@kd2hn.ampr.org    | New York, NY 10001
===============================================================================
	The New World Order is ... "Shoot to kill!"
===============================================================================
From: db3l@ans.net (David Bolen)
Subject: Re: OS/2 vs NT features list, Revision 1.2
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 12:39:24 GMT
	<1992Sep1.000214.29640@hellgate.utah.edu> <7bjns_q.msmith@netcom.com>
	<1992Sep1.013507.9674@hellgate.utah.edu>
Organization: Advanced Network & Services, Inc. - Elmsford, NY

In article <1992Sep1.013507.9674@hellgate.utah.edu> brian%jaguar.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:

>One question I have is there any reason why I should not ALWAYS give
>a program a 256K (or other large) stack?  ICC defaults to a small one,
>so I assume there must be a reason... however I haven't figured out one.
>I realize that there would be extra overhead in page table entries, but
>that is fairly small.... Does anyone know for certain?

Yes - I believe the stack for thread 1 of a process under OS/2 is allocated
statically by the program loader, so whatever stack size you specify in the
EXE will actually be committed in memory.

The C/2 library handles the guard page and stack growth for any other threads
you allocate (ala beginthread) from within the application, so there's really
no reason not to give those threads a 256K stack except if you are creating so
many that you'll run up against the 512MB process space.  (even uncomitted
memory objects still reserve space within process memory)

>My point here is that if you can give programs an attrociously large stack
>willout incurring much of a penalty... then OS/2 from a practical stand point
>has something almost as good as dynamically extensible stacks.
>But if you can do this.. why doesn't IBM just make them extensible anyway?

Not sure...

--
-- David
--
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------\
 \              David Bolen             \  Internet: db3l@ans.net      /
  |   Advanced Network & Services, Inc.   \   Phone: (914) 789-5327   |
 / 100 Clearbrook Road, Elmsford, NY 10523  \   Fax: (914) 789-5310    \
\-----------------------------------------------------------------------/
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: brian%jaguar.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill)
Subject: Re: OS/2 vs NT features list, Revision 1.2
Date: 1 Sep 92 01:47:44 MDT
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept

In article <1992Sep1.071831.12626@cs.brown.edu> wcn@cs.brown.edu (Wen-Chun Ni) writes:
>In article <1992Sep1.000214.29640@hellgate.utah.edu> brian%jaguar.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:
> < arguments about stack allocation deleted>
...
>Brian, I understand your disappointment againt OS/2 2.0's support
>for your software development. But the on-the-fly arguments
>on the net without solid evidence is basically irresponsible.
>You may want to emphasize the superiority of NT and I acknowledge
>that, but please behave like a software developer with all
>proofs before you advocate.

I think you misunderstand what has happened here... I did run the program
I sent out and it does indeed do as I say.. I USED ICC (part of
WorkSet/2), you used emx... this is VERY INTERESTING... maybe OS/2
really does have dynamic stack expansion... and the C Set/2 compiler defeats
it.  Seriously... can someone at IBM clear this up for us?
I won't mind being wrong at all... in fact I'd be quite happy... these
stack limits have been driving me nuts.
(And they say reading the advocacy group isn't useful! Hmmph!)

>Wen-Chun Ni


Brian
-- 
C. Brian Sturgill                       *** OS/2 2.0 is for YOU! ***
University of Utah                  Microsoft needs some competition, but
Center for Software Science        -I- want to be one of the many using NT.
brian@cs.utah.edu; CIS: 70363,1373           :-) :-) :-)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: andy@research.canon.oz.au (Andy Newman)
Subject: Re: X is a hack?
Organization: Canon Information Systems Research Australia
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 08:28:22 GMT

ekl@fics.uucp writes:
>X is meant to provide a networkable, device-independent way of interacting
                                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Hah!
>with a display and associated input devices. Printing is not in the scope
>of X, since X is only the display part of a gui.

If they were trying for device independence they stuffed up bad. Its
up to X clients to ensure they work on the disparate displays. Sure
the X protocol narrows down the number of variables but its still
large.

-- 
Andy Newman (andy@research.canon.oz.au)		"int - God's own type"
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: eletanjm@nuscc.nus.sg (TAN JIN MENG)
Subject: Re: X is a hack? (was Re: NT goes "late Beta" in 8 weeks!)
Organization: National University of Singapore
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 02:31:56 GMT

sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples) writes:
: In article <1992Aug26.195452.941@hellgate.utah.edu> brian%jaguar.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:
: >>1) Why is X a hack?
: 
: About X -- one thing that distinguishes it from both NT and OS/2 is
: its ability to run distributed, across a network (to have remote X
: displays).  OS/2 is adding this feature, incidently, in two ways.
: First, in the near future, OS/2 will have both X client and server
: (only server is available now).  Second, Distributed Presentation
: Manager has been demonstrated.

This is the second time I've seen Distributed Presentation Manager
mentioned - Can someone (Mr. Sipples?) give the low down?


jin meng
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: REXX is... (was: Re: OS/2 vs NT features list, Revision 1.3)
Date: 4 Sep 92 15:47:39 GMT
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago

In article <92247.174007ANDY@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> ANDY@MAINE.MAINE.EDU (Andrew T. Robinson) writes:
>REXX is *not* just a batch extender.  You can write batch files with
>REXX, but REXX is a fully featured (albeit interpretive) programming
>language in its own right, with structured control constructs, procedures
>and functions, scope control, etc.

Actually, REXX under OS/2 has quietly gone to a mostly compiled
language.  Upon first invocation a REXX program will compile, and the
compiled code will be stored in the extended attributes.  Subsequent
invocations are much faster.

Would someone care to clean up the details on this?

-- 
Timothy F. Sipples      | The OS/2 FREQ. ASKED QUESTIONS LIST is avail. from
sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu | 128.123.35.151, anonymous ftp, in /pub/os2/all/faq.
Dept. of Econ., Univ.   | Or from LISTSERV@BLEKUL11.BITNET (send "HELP").
of Chicago, 60637       | Family Values Means a Job
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: ckincy@mcs213c.cs.umr.edu (Charles Kincy)
Subject: Re: NT vs OS/2 features (was Re: Misinformation about os2-dos HW access)
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 18:24:21 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri - Rolla

In article <1992Sep2.130450.12392@njitgw.njit.edu> dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:
>>>I'd like to see a easy-to-write printer driver.  Also, I've heard
>>>trouble with installing printer drivers under NT.
>>
>>      Come now - it's not even in beta yet...
>
>It seems to me that printer drivers for bit-image printers (like dot-
>matrix and non-PostScript lasers) should be easy to write.  Take
>generic code and fill in the strings to go to graphics mode, exit
>grpahics, etc.  It should be doable with a script file, much like Word
>fod DOS's MAKEPRD.EXE program made Word printer drivers from a script.

*Laughlin voice on*

WRONGGGGGGG!!!  

*Laughlin voice off*

Printer drivers must be able to handle most, if not all, of the Gpi-
calls in the Windows API.  This is why they're such a pain in the arse
to write.  If the printer that you are driving does not easily do
these functions, then you must generate the bitmap yourself and down-
load it.  No fun.
 
Au contraire, PostScript drivers are extremely easy to write, becuase
there is nothing in the Gpi- area that can't be done with a few PS
commands.

cpk
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: tdukes@eng.auburn.edu (Todd J Dukes)
Subject: Re: X is a hack? (was Re: NT goes "late Beta" in 8 weeks!)
Organization: Auburn University Engineering
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 05:08:35 GMT

>>I don't know about the OLE, except that my hunch is that you did not
>>install Word and/or Draw under Win-OS/2 (and migrated from a Windows
>>3.1 installation).  Win-OS/2 needs to find the OLE DLLs -- these DLLs
>>come with OLE aware applications.  Installing such an application will
>>install the DLLs.  However, Windows 3.1 includes them now in the base
>>package.
>
>Sorry, this one I did know about... The latest Windows Draw seems to need
>some feature(s) that is(are) only in 3.1.
>

If you are refering to Draw that comes with Word for Windows 2.0, it
works fine under OS/2. I have used it to write my thesis and linked
several drawings with no problems.

Todd

Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.advocacy:4751 comp.os.os2.networking:1167 comp.os.os2.programmer:4576
From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.networking,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: OS/2 Frequently Asked Questions List Rel. 2.0e
Date: 29 Aug 92 19:30:17 GMT
Article-I.D.: midway.1992Aug29.193017.19637
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago

The OS/2 Frequently Asked Questions List, Release 2.0e, has been
posted to comp.os.os2.misc, comp.os.os2.apps, and news.answers, and is
now available via anonymous ftp from ftp-os2.nmsu.edu.

This release of the list contains only minor changes.

-- 
Timothy F. Sipples      | The OS/2 FREQ. ASKED QUESTIONS LIST is avail. from
sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu | 128.123.35.151, anonymous ftp, in /pub/os2/all/faq.
Dept. of Econ., Univ.   | Or from LISTSERV@BLEKUL11.BITNET (send "HELP").
Chicago, 60637          | Hey GOP: The Economy, Stupid!
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy