HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: larrys@watson.ibm.com (Larry Salomon, Jr.)
Subject: Re: Can't open c drive and can't start programs on c
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 21:43:58 GMT
Distribution: usa
News-Software: NewsKit 1.2 - LaMail
Reply-To: larrys@watson.ibm.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM Research

In <1992Apr16.173207.13093@midway.uchicago.edu>, soh3@quads.uchicago.edu (min-woong sohn) writes:
>
>Hi, I am trying to install os/2 2.0 GA version (I got it for free
>at Comdex) on my Compaq 20 Mhz with 5 meg memory and 300 meg disk
>space.  I cannot open c drive and cannot run dos programs off of
>c drive.  I have tried to install it correctly three times already
>without much luck.  I get the message that Access is denied whenever
>I try to launch dos program on c.  D drive is fine.  Any help will
>be appreciated.

Did you format the C drive as HPFS?  If so, you need to reinstall and format as FAT.

Cheers,
Larry Salomon, Jr. (aka 'Q')            LARRYS@YKTVMV.BITNET
OS/2 Applications and Tools             larrys@watson.ibm.com
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center         larrys@ibmman.watson.ibm.com
Yorktown Heights, NY                    larrys@ibmman2.watson.ibm.com

Disclaimer:  The statements and/or opinions stated above are strictly my
own and do not reflect the views of my employer.  Additionally, I have a
reputation for being obnoxious, so don't take any personal attacks too
seriously.
Organization: Penn State ACA (American Churl Association)
X-Subliminal-Message: OS/2 2.0 is here.  Call 1-800-3IBMOS2 to order.
X-Curtains-For-Windows: OS/2 2.0 upgrade from Windows: $49
X-PEPSI-Slogan: My butt -- Gotta bite it!
X-Emasculated-Operating-System: UNIX
Date: Friday, 10 Apr 1992 00:07:56 EDT
From: Spiro the Spiny Goldfish <MXD118@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: All GUIs are not alike
 <1992Apr9.224352.367@news.nd.edu> <g44tjka@rpi.edu>

In article <g44tjka@rpi.edu>, johnsd2@rs6215.ecs.rpi.edu (Daniel Norman Johnson)
says:
>
>In article <1992Apr9.224352.367@news.nd.edu>, rcook@grumpy.helios.nd.edu      t
>(rober
>cook) writes:
>|> [deletia- is OS/2 more likte Windows or MacOS?]
>|>
>|> The WorkPlace Shell is a better GUI than both the Mac and Windows.
>
>Is the WorkPlace Shell a GUI or a file manager?

Both.  It replaces the old Program and File Managers.

>My impression was that the basic GUI- file manager aside- was
>very much like Windows.

That was the old GUI from OS/2 1.3.

>|> It is a lot like the Macintosh, but there are no menu bars on the desktop,
>|> whenever you press the right mouse button, a menu appears under it.
>
>Does it have Menu Bars in the windows? I thot it did... Of course this
>does not exclude popup menus, but if you are talking about a general
>GUI you kinda have to include the way Apps work too.

Apps that used to have menu bars still will have menu bars.  Most of the
windows that come up in the shell (as in folders,  etc.) don't have menu
bars though - they just have a long system menu that you can get at by
either clicking in the upper left corner (where there's a little mini-
icon) or by clicking with the {middle? right?} button anywhere in the
folder)

>I saw a beta of OS/2 2.0 and it did not look like this. I did have the
>printer business, but the directory structure was represented as a tree
>rather than as nested 'folders' (or other objects- MacOS also has
>suitcases, and OS/2 can name these things whatever it likes).

Only the more recent betas had the Workplace Shell integrated with the
operating system.  Up through the 6.149 release,  the old 1.3 GUI was
used.

>|>  WPS will launch the application it is associated with and
>|> print it, but unlike the Mac you will not notice that the program had
>|> to be loaded in order to accomplish this seemingly trivial task.  It is
>|> a truly object oriented shell.
>
>"object oriented" is a little bit meaningless. You may mean no more
>than icon-based (which it is, at least), but it may ALSO mean a lot more.
>It could be partitioned into object so that you can slip your own code inside
>the Workplace shell with whatever results you like, and things like that.

Well - it is object-oriented using the object model called "SOM".  When
Workplace Shell development tools become available,  the object-oriented
nature of the desktop will become more apparent.

---
Michael E. Dahmus -- mxd118@psuvm.psu.edu, dahmus@cs.psu.edu, or GWPX90D *P*
UNIX:  The perfect operating system for people who don't have to pay for
       their computers.        <* OS/2 2.0 is here! *>
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: ccorzine@jarthur.claremont.edu (Chris Corzine)
Subject: Re: Is OS2/2.0-DOS faster than plain Dos??
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 18:41:10 GMT

In article <1992Apr14.183059.26265@towers.rn.com> davidh@towers.rn.com (David Holland) writes:
>rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) writes:
>
>>ry01@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (ROBERT YUNG) writes:
>>>Is DOS in OS2 2.0 faster than plain Dos on the SAME machine? Or is it so
>>>arkward and slow that I would have to dual-bbot all the time?
>
>Well, just an example, a very old copy of norton utilities SI reports
>approx 51.2 on a 486/33 as its computing index, however under
>OS/2 2.0 in a Dos window I managed only 18.x.
>

I did the same thing in a full-screen DOS session on my 386/33.  The index
went from 35.0 (DOS) to 34.5 (OS/2).  In an when I changed to a Window,
it went down to 28.1.  These were with the SI from Norton 6.01.  I think
my figures are more accurate, as I've found DOS stuff to run very close
speed-wise under either enivronment. (Oops,  I mean a single-tasking non
re-entrant program loader vs. a real OS :)

>I'd say the disk I/O is probably improved considerably (with HPFS that is)
>however computing thru-put is (obviously) lower.
>

I haven't done any disk-intensive DOS stuff, so I can't comment on this.

Chris Corzine
ccorzine@jarthur.claremont.edu
From: mlevis@ringer.cs.utsa.edu (Mike Levis)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Bug in GA or is my copy corrupted?
Date: 12 Apr 92 02:36:49 GMT
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio

In article <rdippold.703038085@cancun>
    rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) writes:
>jokim@jarthur.claremont.edu (John H. Kim) writes:
>>Take a folder (directory), any folder in one of your drive partitions.
>>Drag it over to another drive partition and drop it.  Does WPS try to
>>COPY it or MOVE it to the other drive object?
>
>>On my copy, WPS tries to MOVE the folder.  I've been told that it's
>>supposed to COPY the folder since it's between drives.  But I've gotten
>>MOVE the last three times I've reinstalled.
>
>It MOVEs for me.  I actually prefer it that way.
>-- 
>Lawrence Radiation Laboratory keeps all its data in an old gray trunk.


I don't have OS/2 2.0 yet, but I read the WPS.DOC file in WPSGUIDE.ZOO.
I states that dragging with the mouse MOVEs the object.  If you want
to COPY, then press Control while dragging.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Levis	Reader of the OS/2 Frequently Asked Questions List

DOS is the disease, and OS/2 is the cure.

Kill Windows, but DOS survives.  Kill DOS, and Windows dies, too.
From: groenweg@phil.ruu.nl (Cornelis Groenewegen)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: GA cant read 360KB floppy
Date: 13 Apr 92 18:11:04 GMT
Organization: Department of Philosophy, University of Utrecht, The Netherlands

siggi@fml.tuwien.ac.at (Siegfried Hanisch) writes:

>I use a DPT PM2001/95 SCSI-host adapter which has an onboard floppy controller.
>My A: is a 3.5" 1.44MB drive, and the B: is an old 360KB 5.25" drive (I
>need it to copy files from my old pc to the new one). DOS can read the B: drive
>without any problems, but OS/2 2.0 GA can't (6.177 beta could). Is this a
>known problem? I guess GA does double-stepping when it recognizes a 360KB disk,
>and can't find tracks >1.
>I get a "Sector not found" message.

>thanx in advance
>Siegfried Hanisch

Well i have the same problem!!!!
                     -----------

thanx in advance also,
Gerard. (e-mail groenweg@phil.ruu.nl).

>--
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Selling skin                                ! Siegfried Hanisch
>Selling god                                 ! -------------------------------
>The numbers are the same                    ! siggi@ruble.fml.tuwien.ac.at
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: tanith@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Michael D Kretzer)
Subject: Re: HPFS and Memory
Originator: tanith@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Reply-To: tanith@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 14:22:36 GMT

From article <26908@wraxall.inmos.co.uk>, by des@frogland.inmos.co.uk (David Shepherd):
> In article <1992Apr10.160426.2863@news.cs.brandeis.edu>, rothman@binah.cc.brandeis.edu writes:
> i have rescanned the installation guide and i still can't find any
> warning that i should not install hpfs on a machine with 4-6 Mb 
> memory. i have 5 Mb so i chose hpfs (well it does say high performance)
> - yes i do notice significant disk swapping ... i'm going to 
> re-install with FAT and see if it makes it better.

This information is in the README file (yes, I know, how can that help you
BEFORE you have installed OS/2?).  It also mentions that the installation
program won't install HPFS in the first place unless you happen to be
installing from a previous version of OS/2 and your drive is formatted
for HPFS if you have 6MB of memory or less.
From: ry01@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (ROBERT YUNG)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Some questions about OS/2......
Date: 15 Apr 92 02:38:00 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

I have some questions before I try it out. Thank you for your time.

1) Does it have a disk cache? I currently use Super-pckwik. Can I use that? If
not, will there be an update?

2) Can I have a CLI box on screen so I can do simple stuff like "copy *.xyz"
without having to click like crazy?

3) Does DOS boxes support ANSI?

4) Is there a screen blanker? Will the one with Super-Pckwik work?

5) How do I unfrag HSFS drives?

6) Can I resize windows without resizing the application? ie: I want to only
see a portion of a program, so I shrink the window until the unwanted areas
are covered up.

7) Do Dos boxes support UMB?

8) If a DOS/WINDOW program crashes, how do I quit it?

9) Can I enlarge an application on screen? Like a magnifying glass. Great for
Ultima Underworld if possible! Just have the playing field on screen.

10) Is there an icon editor?

11) What's the average size of the swap file? Or what's the swap-file size
ratio with memory amount?

12) What's MS's C-2 protection? How's it better?

13) Can I redirect the deleted-file directory to any drive I want? How about a
Ram drive? Is that bad? Also, can I undelete????

14) Mouse support in Dos windows?

15) Can I run different resolution programs in different windows? If yes, then
if I had OS2 in 1024X758, I can run any program as long as their resolution is
equal or less. Right?

16) Multi/Ulti-media support?

17) Dos games work? [TOP PRIORITY :-) ]

18) Street Fighter II applet??? :-) :-) :-)

19) Cool hologram like Dos 5's? BTW, how's the box?

20) Manuals????? REAL ONES I MEAN. Not online ones. I hate reading manuals
from the screen!

21) Any plans for icon name wrapping like in 3.1??? I guess they should since
3.1 compatibility is coming.

22) Will the $50 upgrade from Windows offer end? Is yes, when? And hhow much
would it be then???

23) Can I diskcopy in ONE pass now????

24) Is it too buggy to get know???

25) Is there an easy and quick way to switch between full screen DOS or
Windows? [For those with small screens :-( ]

26) How's IBM's big-fix policy? Free maintainence disks?

THANKS YOU for your time! Your answers will *REALLY* help me! God bless.
-- 
 (%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%)
  |  Off-campus address...                                          |
  |     first alley down this street, left refrigerator box. :-)    |
  |                                                                 |
   \_(Robert) Bobby Yung_______RY01@Lehigh.Edu________X-0471_______/
Organization: European Academic Research Network
Date: Saturday, 11 Apr 1992 15:36:35 GMT
From: Turgut Kalfaoglu <TURGUT@FRMOP11.BITNET>
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: i don't like it!!
Distribution: comp

It takes only ONE COMMAND to change the way your OS/2 looks. Your options
are OS/2 1.3 look, and Windows 3.0 look. See the manuals that come with
GA.  -turgut
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: jpa8r@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Joseph P. Allen)
Subject: Painless transition (DOS --> OS/2) ???
Organization: University of Virginia
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 16:35:06 GMT

I am trying to find out just how much difficulty will be 
involved in making the switch from Dos 5.0 to OS/2.	

My two questions involve DOS session compatibility with	
network and backup software.  (I realize that OS/2	 
versions of both exist, but it would be far easier	
for me to simply use what I have in a DOS box.):	

1. The network to which I am connected uses Novell	
Netware.  Specifically, I execute the following	programs	
in Dos:
hcdnet.sys (from config.sys); emsnet5, pdipx, and 3c501.	

I also use NCSA Telnet and FTP.  	

Can I simply continue to use all of these from at least	
one Dos session in OS/2?  	
Getting our computer support staff to order OS/2 replacements
may take a while, I use these features everyday, and would	
like to have full use of them in OS/2.	

2.  Similarly, I currently use Fastback Version 3.1.  Can
I continue to use this in a DOS session (at least to back up	
non-HPFS files, or HPFS files conforming to the 8.3 convention)?
If not, is OS/2 Backup any faster or more efficient than DOS?	

I like what I've read in this group about OS/2 very much, but	
I also want to get a sense of whether the conversion will	
involve simply installing OS/2, or also having to immediately
find and install other software as well.

Thank you,
Joe Allen
Department of Psychology
University of Virginia
Internet: Allen@virginia.edu
From: lairdkb@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Kyler Laird)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: ATI Ultra users: I'd like your config.sys.
Date: 10 Apr 92 02:42:01 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center

I just gave up on installing an ATI Graphics Ultra (1MB/512K) in
a Zenith 386DX-25, 8MB RAM, OS/2 1.3EE.

I'd like to take a look at how others have done it.  Also, how do
I setup OS/2 up for plain 8514/A use?  (to use the ATI emulation)

The ATI board is driving a Samsung Sync 4 17" monitor that emulated
the NEC 4D without any problems.  I'd like to do 1024x768x256.

THANKS!

--kyler
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Subject: Re: Memory requirements for OS/2 v2.0
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 02:45:43 GMT

In article <1992Apr15.202023.29085@jts.com> kent@jts.com (Kent Ng (Co-op) ) writes:
>I have a 386DX-20MHz with 4MB RAM (640k + 3MB extended RAM).
>The 384k (between 640k and 1024k) can ONLY be use for ram shadow
>and NOTHING ELSE! :-(
>Is this enough for OS/2 v2.0 or do I need more?

OS/2 2.0 will probably load and run (using the FAT file system -- DO
NOT USE HPFS ON A 4 MB MACHINE).  However, IBM's recommended minimum
memory is 256K above what you cite.  I suggest adding at least the
smallest increment of additional memory supported by your system.
-- 
Timothy F. Sipples       Keeper of the OS/2 Frequently Asked Questions
sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu  List, available via anonymous ftp from
Dept. of Economics       128.123.35.151, directory pub/os2/faq, or via
Univ. of Chicago  60637  netmail from LISTSERV@BLEKUL11.BITNET.
From: wjames@cse.ucsc.edu (John Amenta)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: y
Date: 11 Apr 92 21:28:21 GMT
Article-I.D.: darkstar.32696
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz (CE/CIS Boards)
Originator: wjames@spica


lest
From: "chuck filson" <chuck.filson@canrem.com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: mouse problem under o
Date: 13 Apr 92 13:11:12 EST
Reply-To: "chuck filson" <chuck.filson@canrem.com>
Distribution: comp
Organization: Canada Remote Systems

To: chenjs@acf3.NYU.EDU
  
CS>I was one of those who were fortunate enough to get a free copy of
CS>OS/2 2.0 at the Comdex.  I was trying to install it on my computer
CS>(Compaq Deskpro 20 MHz with 5 meg memory and 300 meg disk).  I could
CS>install it without much problem, but once I reboot the system
CS>I found that my mouse (Logitech serial mouse) is not responding.
CS>Is there a soul who had a similar problem?  How can get it work again?
CS>I am just starting with OS/2, so if this question offended anybody
CS>please pardon me.

  I had the same problem but did find a solution.

  Install OS2 and use the PCMouse drivers.

  The Logittech serial mouse will be PCMouse compatible only when
first pwered up. This means that you can turn the machine on and
boot OS2 and the mouse will work.

  If you use the dual boot feature, you must turn the machine off
when booting from DOS to OS2. If you use a warm boot or the reset 
button, the mouse will not reset itself and will not work.

Chuck
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario/Detroit, MI
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: tomh@wes.on.ca (Tom Haapanen)
Subject: VGA in a window (was: Trident... The saga continues...)
Organization: Waterloo Engineering Software
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 16:40:29 GMT

prs@turing.acs.virginia.edu (Phillip R. Scarr) writes:
> I think the problem is one of modes and not drivers.  He is asking why
> he can't run his standard vga apps in a window on an svga desktop.  I
> don't think OS/2 supports the kind of mode translation required to adapt
> a game which is 640x480 to a desktop which is 800x600.  If it did, then
> I would REALLY be blown away...

Really?  OS/2 doesn't support this?  Even Windows 3.1 does it!  (For example,
I can run with the *included* generic 800x600x16 SVGA driver, and run Cshow
in a window at 640x480x16.)  Not that this is really important IMHO, but I
would surely have thought that OS/2 could do this.

[ \tom haapanen    "i don't even know what street canada is on" -- al capone ]
[ tomh@wes.on.ca                   "trust the programmer" -- ansi c standard ]
[ waterloo engineering software      "to thine own self be true" -- polonius ]
From: relic@athena.mit.edu (Aram J Agajanian)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: 486 vs 386 (was: OS/2, Unix, DOS 3.3, DOS 5.0, DR DOS 6.0 all at once?)
Date: 11 Apr 92 10:17:29 GMT
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

>I've got a 386 with a 200 meg IDE drive, and a 486 with a 200 meg IDE
>drive.  Currently, I'm set up for everything except OS/2, and I'm
>trying to figure out how to add OS/2.  Here's the current setup:

.
.
.

>The plan:
>
>	Put OS/2 on the 386.  I've moved almost all of my DOS work to
>	the 486, so I can get rid of two of the DOS partitions on the
>	386.  I only need a large enough DOS partition there to do
>	the stuff that I have to share between DOS and Unix.


One point which I think should be made is that the 486 contains microcode
is more optimized for 32-bit computing.  So if you were to run on the 486,
even at equal clock speeds, you would notice a serious performance 
improvement (although I personally can't give you any numbers).  DOS, a 
16-bit OS, won't notice the same gains going from 386 to 486.
From: gt0040a@prism.gatech.EDU (Thomas Michael Sorensen)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: PC Week Summary: 4/6/92
Date: 10 Apr 92 21:39:47 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In <1992Apr8.202548.17453@cbnews.cb.att.com> jap@cbnews.cb.att.com (james.a.parker) writes:

>In article <53960@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt0040a@prism.gatech.EDU (Thomas Michael Sorensen) writes:
>>They have 300 operators right now, are taking approx. 2400 orders a day. They
>>would have more operators but they're at capacity right now! (As per the OS/2
>>people in the IBM tower here in Atlanta, where the ordering info is being
>>done).

>Sanity check -- this implies that the operators are taking 8 calls per day,
>or one per hour.  Perhaps that should be 24,000?

Since I know flames are incoming (one person here already told me he did so),
I'll apologize for the above info- its wrong. I think they do have 300 operators
but are taking something like 1200 calls per hour... that's only 4/operator/hour
but is fairly reasonable- it could easily take 15 mins. to do one customer
after all questions are answered, etc.
           
The figures might still be off, but are far more realistic <g>.
      Tom Sorensen

-- 
Tom Sorensen              gt0040a@prism.gatech.edu
Georgia Tech 
And no, I don't like this .signature.
From: bergstro@src.honeywell.com (Pete Bergstrom)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Os/2 Languages
Date: 16 Apr 92 15:14:58 GMT
Article-I.D.: src.1992Apr16.151458.12021
Organization: Honeywell Systems & Research Center


The May issue of Byte has a Microway ad saying they have "NDP Fortran
& C++ for OS/2!" and it is now shipping.

One special offer is that members of OS/2 Expedite can get them for
$295.

Overall, it is very positive about OS/2, including how they consider
it a very strong system for porting large programs.

Check the ad out (I have no affiliation with Microway and don't even
own any of their products!)

Pete
Organization: University Of Toronto Computing Services.
Date: Sunday, 12 Apr 1992 16:16:25 EDT
From: <SANDERS@vm.utcs.utoronto.ca>
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Canadian Retail Stores will have OS/2 in late NEXT WEEK!!!

Philip,

Just received my copy od OS/2 2.0 from the UofT Computer Shop on Friday...No
special deals with IBM!!!

Terry Sanderson
Supervisor, Information Technology Support
University of Toronto Computing Services
sanders@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca
From: grendel@cis.ksu.edu (Stephen Spencer )
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: I WANT MY UPGRADE NOWpwd!
Date: 9 Apr 1992 13:54:01 GMT
Organization: Kansas State University, Department of Computing and Information Sciences
NNTP-Posting-Host: harry.cis.ksu.edu

In article <9204081642.AA14772@ebs330.eb.uah.edu> kchittur@EBS330.EB.UAH.EDU (Krishnan Chittur(CHE)) writes:
>
>Well, I am sure I will get my upgrade (from 1.3) soon ...
>
>but .. but ... Why cannot I take my proof of licence form to a
>local dealer and get the upgrade?  (sigh .. sigh .. sigh ..)
>
(aimed at nobody in particular:)  We need to make a FARQ (for -f-requently
-a-sked -r-etorical -q-uestions)  I might or might not have others who share
my same sentiments, but it would greatly increase the information load of this
particular data stream if certain questions could be kept to email or certain
parties could read the FAQ (ie: will this configuration run.  why doesn't ibm
do this?  why can't I get a copy of OS/2 at egghead, etc...)

It is understandable that this newsgroup is used alot, but when 10-20/100
messages posted every few days are repeats of previously asked questions 
(and mostly previously answered) it is difficult to weed through.

I believe the moderator of this newsgroup has a faq at his site (the address
is in his .sig file) so I beg you (for everyone's sake) please read it so the
information can flow (if it exists) or at least can be found.

-Steve

P.S.
Krishnan,
I didn't reply to your message in specific for any other reason that it was the
one I was on :)


-- 
I hold the world but as the world, Gratiano--a stage, where every man must play
a part, and mine a sad one.
       -Merchant of Venice I.i.77
 grendel@cis.ksu.edu   harry.cis.ksu.edu!dagonet!grendel sdstpk@matt.ksu.ksu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc