HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ehammers@stein.u.washington.edu (Alison Blais)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.apps
Subject: converting .snd files to .wav
Date: 17 Oct 92 03:25:23 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Oct17.032523.19131
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle


Are there any good programs to convert .snd files to .wav?  I tried Sound Tool
2.6 (an excellent program), but it seemed to keep getting the speed wrong.
The files it produced all sounded a little slow.  I'd be happy just using
Sound Tool to listen to the files, but it doesn't come with a driver for my
Sound Source.  I've also tried sox, but it tells me "unknown file type."
Thanks a lot.

Erick.
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.apps
From: thomas@datamark.co.nz (Thomas Beagle)
Subject: Re: W4W 2.0: "File too large to save" (bug?)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 19:47:24 GMT
Organization: Datamark International Ltd.
Keywords: Windows Word File Save Bug

In article <1992Oct8.045846.5736@panix.com> entropy@panix.com (Daniel Gross) writes:
>There I was, happily editing my nearly 4-Meg file -- lots
>of OLE embedding, other than that your pretty standard
>long document with about 25-30 styles (it's a manual).
>
>I *cut the file in half*, try to save, and I get
>"File too large to save. Cut some text and try again."
>So I quit (losing work of course), copy the file,
>and try to trim it to 1/3 its original size.
>"File too large to save." I delete chunks and
>chunks, and it saves only when I get down to
>something < 40K. This ain't right.

Well, I have had this bug but not for a long time. I'm nto sure
whether it stopped with 2.0a or not.

Anyway, to get around it I opened up a new version of Word and cut the
old document into the new one.

On the other hand, you may have just run out of space through very
large temp files being created.
-- 
    Thomas Beagle | thomas@datamark.co.nz  or  thomas@cavebbs.welly.gen.nz
Datamark Intl Ltd | 
 Technical Writer | I don't need a disclaimer, I live in a sane society.
From: sqe@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Sam Espartero)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 22:37:03 GMT
Subject: Re: CD Player for Windows
Organization: the HP Corporate notes server
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.apps

#Alas, I'll continue to use the DOS-based CD Player I got from Creative Labs.
#Why?  First, neither CD Player nor WinCD has a volume control; in an office
#setting, I'd prefer to fine-tune the volume a bit more...

	Creative Labs includes SBMIXER applet where you can control the
volume of Windows based CD Player. I have my own home-brewed CD Player
too, using the MCI API, and SBMIXER works great with it.

#Worse, loading MSCDEX takes up 45K of DOS memory I can't afford to give
#away.  Unfortunately it seems that everything needs MSCDEX, but at least 
#if I use a DOS utility, I can run it inside a DOS box from Windows, saving
#memory for the DOS sessions (525K available in a DOS session after all my
#crap is loaded in).

	I really don't have this problem because through EMM386, you can
configure part of memory as EMS (expanded). Then load MSCDEX with the
/E option to use expanded instead of conventional RAM.

----------
- Sam (speaking for himself) Espartero -
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: danaf@bray1b.its.rpi.edu (Frank R. Dana Jr.)
Subject: Re: Essence of flame
Reply-To: danaf@rpi.edu
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 22:44:10 GMT

In article <1bdmbgINNjt3@pollux.usc.edu>, addison@pollux.usc.edu (Richard Addison) writes:
|> In <1992Oct12.212607.12994@sol.ctr.columbia.edu> jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
|> >Matthew Dillon (dillon@overload.Berkeley.CA.US) wrote:
|> >:     Microcruft WinBlows     (you also need to write a batch file to start
|> >: 			    it up so you can say 'loose' instead of 'win')
|> >: 
|> >: 			    Bryce Nesbitt thought that one up.
|> 
|> >Bryce Nesbitt (or you) should learn how to spell.
|> 
|> Or maybe you, Jerry, could learn broader meanings of words.
|> 
|> Bryce's batch files sets Windows loose on his system, as opposed to keeping
|> it bound within files on his hard disk.
|> 
|> Since "loose" can be a verb,
|> 
|>   Loose windows.
|> 
|> is a complete sentence.  

Perfectly true. Also completely wrong.

As anyone who has ever read a lot of non-professional writing (and, for some
reason, British writing in particular) can tell you, one of the MOST COMMON
word-replacement mistakes in the English language is using "loose" for "lose".
I've even seen it done in some "professional" magazines, .info being the one
that comes to mind.

(Note: I'm not slamming the British in any way. It's just that the lose->loose
mistake seems much more common there than anywhere else....)

|> Richard

-- 
/////////////////////////[[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]]]\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
(718)             (212)                        (516)             (518)
=======Amiuser============Frank R. Dana, Jr.============Doc Ami=======     
--------My opinions rarely reflect those of any sane person,----------
	   living, dead, or undead... that's gonna CHANGE.
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: thayne@unislc.uucp (Thayne Forbes)
Subject: Re: Windows == OS (NOT!)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Organization: HomeVax
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 16:51:51 GMT

Gary Lang (garylang@netcom.com) wrote:
First Phil said:
: "      But it does do something that the Rolls-Royce doesn't, which
: is sell more.
: 
: Yes, sure Phil, but...
: 
: Ice-T outsells any Bach recording. You see?

I hate to defend Ice-T, but here goes.  Ice-T outsells Bach because
his music is more appropriate for today.  If Ice-T's music could have
been offered in the 18th century, he would not outsell even then, because
it is inappropriate for that time.

I love Unix as much as the next guy, maybe more than some of you, but
I do 90% of my work in Winders(tm) because it is more appropriate for
what I am trying to accomplish.  Unix was 'REEL K00L' 10 years ago,
and I still have a soft place in my heart for it, but it is never
going to get to the usability, and standardization level that is
extant in DOS/Winders today.  Does this make any sense?
-- 
           "If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure."
                            -U.S. Vice President J. Danforth Quayl[e]
Thayne Forbes
thayne@unislc.slc.unisys.com
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: jorngh@dhhalden.no (JORN GUNNAR HALONEN)
Subject: Re: Essence of flame
Organization: Ostfold College
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 04:59:49 GMT

>>In <dillon.0p22@overload.Berkeley.CA.US> dillon@overload.Berkeley.CA.US (Matthew Dillon) writes:
>>
>>Don't forget MicroSquish (from Berke Breathed's Outland).
>>
>>  "I'll buy you Norway."
>>  "OK.  But no kissing."

Being from Norway, I'd like to know the story behind this saying ...

Thanks!

*JORN* (email : jorngh@sofus.dhhalden.no)
From: hpw@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Harry P Warren)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why I don't use MACs
Date: 15 Oct 92 13:35:27 GMT
Reply-To: hpw@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Harry P Warren)
Organization: Columbia University



Frank Calloway writes
> I'd have to agree with this.  While I don't doubt that Macs are fine
> machines and have some advantages over the IBM compatible I've used
> over the years, they're simply too expensive.  Computer users in the
> IBM-compatible world have benefitted from all the competition for the
> buyer's dollar.

It doesn't look like the poor price/performance of Macintosh relative
to pc clones is going to get any better in 1993. I can't see how Apple
is going to counter the introduction of the "586," Windows NT, and, to
a lesser degree, NeXTStep 486 in 1993. Right now, IMHO, the Macintosh
operating system has significant advantages over Windows 3.1 and OS/2
2.0 because of its superior "look and feel" and "ease of use" (I have
actually used all of them!). However, Apple's overpriced, underpowered
hardware really dilutes any advantages the operating system might
have. With the power pc and "pink" not expected until 1994, Microsoft
and Intel might have a whole year with better products and no real
competition. Just one more opinion . . . 

I have some rather simplistic questions about NT. How well can
different platforms running NT be integrated? If you had a mix of
workstations and pc clones all running a port of NT would you be able
to do distributed processing (run some programs locally, some on
another machine)? Will it be possible to use files on a different
platform locally across the network? (I am a graduate student in a
department with a lot of macs that are not well integrated with the
workstations. It would be nice to be able to use files that were on
another machine without having to physically download them).

harry warren
hpw@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: garylang@netcom.com (Gary Lang)
Subject: Re: Windows == OS (NOT!)
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 09:52:18 GMT


"     This is speculation on my part, but I believe the answer to your
question is "Sell more than a handful of copies."

                                -Phil"

Sure. If it does this it will be because of Microsoft's awesome
marketing prowess. But n.b. Phil, Sun is a $4 billion dollar company,
IBM makes about $3 billion a year from UNIX, then there's HP, etc.
etc. A handfull? Sounds like a Fistful of Dollars to me.

Note I said marketing prowess here. "All" Microsoft seems to be able
to do is look around and coopt great ideas by putting lots of money
behind development and marketing of copycat products. I say "all"
because it's actually a lot of work and because MS sometimes goes one
better than the original. Most times not, however. MS's products are
really solid - lately even well-designed. They are also incredibly
boring. When was the last time we were treated to an innovation from
Redmond? Probably the BASIC interpreters - especially Visual.

But don't sweat it. Your stock goes up 100% every 2 years so who cares
how boring your products are right?

By the way, couldn't the "designers" of the latest Microsoft Mail have
at least rearranged the order of the NeXTMail buttons in MSMail?

A challenge for NT lovers - name one thing that NT does and does
better than NeXTSTEP does now besides run Windows programs.

All that said, I really admire MS. But let's call a spade a spade -
you don't innovate. Not at all. Not in the least.
From: jld@datascope.com (Jay L. Davis)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows == OS (NOT!)
Date: 9 Oct 92 18:17:54 GMT
Organization: Datascope Corp.

In article <1992Oct02.202247.21711@wes.on.ca> tomh@wes.on.ca (Tom Haapanen) writes:
>Surprise!  Microsoft started development of Windows waaaay back in 1981,
>and announced it in October (?) of 1983, before the Macintosh was announced
>(but the Lisa was already on the market).  Windows 1.0 shipped in early
>1985, WELL BEFORE Macintosh became a commercial success.  Sure, Windows 3.0
>wasn't out until 1990, but Microsoft had been spending time and money on
>development and marketing of Windows for years by then...
>

Actually, the Mac was available in October of 83. I'm sure, since that
was my first year in college and the school was offering a special price
on them (on of my friends bought one).

--Jay Davis
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: fischer@iesd.auc.dk (Lars Peter Fischer)
Subject: Re: Essence of flame
Organization: Mathematics and Computer Science, Aalborg University
	<Bvpq0D.EL9@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> <Bvps6t.HGz@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>
	<1992Oct7.113251.19592@newshost.unh.edu>
Date: 8 Oct 92 05:20:53


>>>>> "Paul" == Paul S Secinaro (pss1@kepler.unh.edu)

Paul> Anyone here any good ones for Atari products?  How about NeXT, Sun, etc?

Back when there was all the fuss about the up an coming NeXT machine
and the release was being postponed again and again, I saw a T-shirt
with "NeVR" printed on it.

/Lars
--
Lars Fischer, fischer@iesd.auc.dk | It takes an uncommon mind to think of
CS Dept., Aalborg Univ., DENMARK. | these things.  -- Calvin
From: hawkes@hillrun.corp.sgi.com (John Hawkes)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Silicon Graphics Magnum 4000 NT
Date: 13 Oct 92 19:06:56 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics

In article <1992Oct8.212836.8455@cuug.ab.ca>, edwardsk@cuug.ab.ca (Kenneth
Edwards 268-6500) writes:
|> I have seen ads for Silicon Graphics Magnum 4000 boxes that are 
|> twice as fast as a 486/50.  This 64 bit hummer is not going to 
|> blow down a DEC ALPHA but is supposed to be price competive with
|> 486.
|> 
|> And it runs Windows NT.  Anybody out there seen this box?
|> 
|> I always thought SGI was good ( Indigo etc ), does this
|> box keep the tradition.  Strange though, I haven't seen any reviews
|> in the mags. 

This is the MIPS Magnum 4000 system, with integrated SCSI, Ethernet,
audio, and local-bus 1280x1024x256 video, plus EISA slots.  It is the
reference platform for Windows NT on the MIPS R4000 microprocessor,
and the current Windows NT CDROM shrinkwrap supports it (and the Intel
80386/486). 

The current incarnation of this box uses an R4000 with a 100MHz clock
(50MHz external).  You're comparing the performance of a shipping 100MHz
MIPS system to a 150MHz DEC Alpha machine which has very restricted
availability and which has not yet been openly demonstrated running NT.
If you want to compare apples to apples, then keep in mind that several
semiconductor companies are sourcing 134MHz (internal) R4000 parts now,
and 150 MHz (internal) parts are expected soon.  Compare today's R4000
products against today's Alpha and P5 products.  In this world of rapid
technology improvements, it's silly to compare a real system against a
spec sheet promising tomorrow's systems.
-- 
John Hawkes		hawkes@sgi.com
Xref: sparky comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:2465 comp.sys.mac.advocacy:1572 comp.sys.amiga.advocacy:26580 comp.sys.next.advocacy:2657
From: dillon@overload.Berkeley.CA.US (Matthew Dillon)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy
Subject: Re:  Essence of flame
Distribution: world
Date: 13 Oct 92 14:44:03 PST
Organization: Not an Organization

In article <1bdmbgINNjt3@pollux.usc.edu> addison@pollux.usc.edu (Richard Addison) writes:
>In <1992Oct12.212607.12994@sol.ctr.columbia.edu> jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
>>Matthew Dillon (dillon@overload.Berkeley.CA.US) wrote:
>>...
>>Bryce Nesbitt (or you) should learn how to spell.

    Actually, I did mean 'lose', but 'loose' works too :-)  Still, just
    because I don't use a spelling checker on my freetalk doesn't make the
    article any better or worse then one in which one does.

    Frankly, I think I am having much more fun playing with the English
    language in my cute remarks then you are with your cute remarks...

					    -Matt

--

    Matthew Dillon		dillon@Overload.Berkeley.CA.US
    1005 Apollo Way		uunet.uu.net!overload!dillon
    Incline Village, NV. 89451	ham: KC6LVW (no mail drop)
    USA 			Sandel-Avery Engineering (702)831-8000

Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: alwin@neuron.et.tudelft.nl (Alwin Hoogerdijk)
Subject: PC-users vs. Mac-users
Organization: Delft University of Technology, Dept. of Electrical Engineering
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 09:39:08 GMT

Hi,

Reading the discussion about Mac users and PC users, I thought I'd post my
views upon this matter.
First, I have nothing against Mac's; it's a nice machine. But I definitely see
a big difference between Mac users and PC users. As I see it, Mac users are
really USERS and nothing more than that. They just use it for word-processing, 
data-base programs or some CAD applications. On the other hand, among PC-users
there are far more people that really 'know' their machine and understand how
it works. I know a lot of people who write programs for the PC, DOS-program and
Windows-program, but I don't know any Mac-user who writes programs for the Mac.
Most have never heard of C or Pascal.
Because I like to try to get the most out of my system (a 486-PC) using clever
utilities and efficient programming techniques and as I like to mess around 
with fast graphics and sound, I would never buy a Mac.

Sorry to offend any Mac-users who do know their system, but this is how I see
things happen in my neighborhood.

Bye,

Alwin
  
-- 
|        Alwin Hoogerdijk         |    Email : alwin@dutisi.twi.tudelft.nl    |
| Delft University of Technology  |                                           |
From: ch491@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Pj Pisczak)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Windows? or OS/2-2.0
Date: 16 Oct 1992 15:43:49 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc4.ins.cwru.edu


As a new reader of this forum the first thing I did was put on my
flame proof bathrobe to sit down to my friendly 386.  I toss this
question out: I need to link (2) 486 and (1) 386 Everexs', (1)
IBM Model 80, (1) Compaq Deskpro 286, (1) CompuAdd 286, and (1)
486 clone.(also 1 add'l Standard 286).  Because of the Model 80 we
have been updated regularly to the point of OS2-2.0, but for now
it is sitting on the shelf.  We run Windows 3.1 on all our 
machines with the exception of the 286s'.  The question:  Do we re-
ly on Workgroup, the future but unseen NT, or OS2.0 to do the
linking.  *Hot Topic* - I realize that.  What I am looking for is
an education.  Being a Mech E you have to talk veeerry slowly to
me, but I am a willing student.  What thing I am trying to avoid
is the use of a file server `ala Novelle.  Please E-Mail me your
response as I have a delicate ego; otherwise post for the good of
the Net.  Keep the Faith, PJ
-- 
Sealy R & D - A laid back job with its ups & downs, but we always
manage to spring back.  All opinions are regretfully my very own.
17500 Engle Lake Drive			     Phone (216)-891-8200
Middleburg Hts., Ohio 44130-8399               Fax (216)-891-9116
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: PC-users vs. Mac-users
From: <V80UGEKO@HASARA11.BITNET>
Date: Tuesday, 13 Oct 1992 12:00:45 CET
Organization: SARA - Stichting Academisch Rekencentrum Amsterdam

I think ignorance can be a good thing. When radio's appeared in the world, you
had to know of different frequency-bands, sometimes had to exchange parts of it
 to switch to another band, and the tuning was something of an art of magic
with two knobs being dependent of each other. The indicator was never exactly
on the scale according to the position it should be. For the modern receivers
you key in the frequency and there you are. According to me, this is an
approval of the user interface. And yes, the early users did know a lot more
of their machine.
I think ignorance can also be a stupid thing. Inside the Mac are a health of
routines for graphics & sound, making programs independent of underlying
devices. The device independency is one fine thing Windows has given to
PC-users as wel as programmers. Ignorant users just bought the machine that
everybody bought, while programmers should have refused to work on 8086 or
80286 machines. Now PC's have 386 cpu's, and Windows brings some of the
things of the Mac to the PC-world,  its just stupid ignorance to bash on
the machine that pioneered 1) A HUMAN interface 2) Device independency
3) Programmer tools .
                    Gert Kok
Faculty of Human Movement Sciences
Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
From: James_Zuchelli@qm.claris.com (James Zuchelli)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: PC-users vs. Mac-users
Date: 12 Oct 92 20:40:09 GMT
Organization: Claris Corp

In article <1992Oct12.093908.1038@donau.et.tudelft.nl>, alwin@neuron.et.tudelft.nl (Alwin Hoogerdijk) writes:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Reading the discussion about Mac users and PC users, I thought I'd post my
> views upon this matter.
> First, I have nothing against Mac's; it's a nice machine. But I definitely see
> a big difference between Mac users and PC users. As I see it, Mac users are
> really USERS and nothing more than that. They just use it for word-processing, 
> data-base programs or some CAD applications. On the other hand, among PC-users
> there are far more people that really 'know' their machine and understand how
> it works. I know a lot of people who write programs for the PC, DOS-program and
> Windows-program, but I don't know any Mac-user who writes programs for the Mac.
> Most have never heard of C or Pascal.
> Because I like to try to get the most out of my system (a 486-PC) using clever
> utilities and efficient programming techniques and as I like to mess around 
> with fast graphics and sound, I would never buy a Mac.
> 
> Sorry to offend any Mac-users who do know their system, but this is how I see
> things happen in my neighborhood.
> 
> Bye,
> 
> Alwin


If automobiles were as difficult to use as PC's we'd still be riding horses.
I know very little about my car, I can change a tire, i know if the engine
overheats I can turn on the cooler to drain off some heat.  I know to get the
oil changed and put air in the tires.  But that's about it.

If I had to know what my mechanic knows to own a car it make car ownership
much more difficult.  Then someone would bring out a Macintosh car and all
you'd have to know is what I know and they'd sell millions.

Well, I guess my argument is that computers should be easy to use, just like
cars are easy to use, and all the other tools of life.

As for programming, many of the mac users I know are into it, some use C,
some Pascal, some BASIC, a lot use HyperCard ( I like it because its easy
and powerful.)

One day, PC's will be like Mac's are now, the interface will be perfected and 
smoother and all those pc techies will be replaced by PC users.  
After all, the purpose of the computer is to have something we can use to get
a job done.  Technical mastery is left to those who desire it.

James Zuchelli


-------------------------
The above is my personal opinion and not that of Claris Corp. or my employer.
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: strobl@gmd.de (Wolfgang Strobl)
Subject: Re: PC-users vs. Mac-users
Organization: GMD, Sankt Augustin, Germany
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 22:44:14 GMT

In <15302@claris.com> James_Zuchelli@qm.claris.com (James Zuchelli) writes:

[...]

>If automobiles were as difficult to use as PC's we'd still be riding horses.

If people were as knowlegeable about automobiles as they are about
PC's, they probably would ride bicycles, instead of using cars.

>I know very little about my car, I can change a tire, i know if the engine
>overheats I can turn on the cooler to drain off some heat.  I know to get the
>oil changed and put air in the tires.  But that's about it.

Yes, that's the problem.

I know very little about my bicycle. I can repair a tube and can change
a chain. I know how to use my bicycle pump and know which spare parts
to take with me. That's about it, and that's about all what's
necessary to beat almost every car owner with respect to how fast
I get from A to B within the city I'm living in. But it needs a
little bit of training, though.

Sorry, couldn't resist. 

Wolfgang Strobl
#include <std.disclaimer.hpp>
Xref: sparky comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:2377 comp.sys.mac.advocacy:1301 comp.sys.amiga.advocacy:26148 comp.sys.next.advocacy:2579