HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hmkirchh@cip.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Hans-Joachim Kirchhoff)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: Re: 2.1b won't run winos/2 (os2gdi.exe not found?) help!
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 17:23:47 GMT
Organization: CSD., University of Erlangen
NNTP-Posting-Host: faui00a.informatik.uni-erlangen.de
Keywords: OS/2 2.1 beta winos/2

smithgr@rintintin.Colorado.EDU (Gregory P. Smith) writes:

>I just installed OS/2 2.1b over my 2.0 GA installation and can't get it to
>run winos/2.  I did use selective install to reinstall dos/winos/2 files, but
>now it starts to load and flashes (very quickly) before exiting "os2gdi.exe"
>not found" or something like that.  I checked the drive and it's right, there
>isn't an os2gdi file..  How can I get it to work?  I'm using a 486/33 16megs,
>50meg HPFS partition for boot, SpeedSTAR 24x SVGA (running in 640x480x256 mode
>[not fun to get a decent svgadata.pmi file for it...]).  Any help would be
>appreciated.

>Greg
Thats easy. Simply rename your GDI.EXE in OS2/MDOS/WINOS2 to OS2GDI.EXE.
Just out of curiosity: do you have a real windoze (ms) installed as well??

-Hajo
---
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hans-Jochen Kirchhoff | hmkirchh@cip.informatik.uni-erlangen.de
> No signature today  | CompuServe 100024,712
From: mcrocker@titan.ucs.umass.edu (MATTHEW S CROCKER)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: Re: AmiPro for OS/2 yet?   Soon?
Date: 22 Jan 1993 09:19:13 -0500
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
NNTP-Posting-Host: titan.ucs.umass.edu

In article <1jntg4INN30l@swimming.cis.ohio-state.edu> grichard@cis.ohio-state.edu (Golden Richard) writes:
>
>Any word yet on AmiPro for OS/2?  It's the last reason I have to need
>WINOS2 and I'm just itchin' to reclaim that 7 meg!  :)
>
>--Golden
>
>-- 
>Golden Richard III             OSU Dept. of Computer and Information Science
>grichard@cis.ohio-state.edu                                   (614) 292-0056


From a fairly reliable source at lotus:

 They are working on it.  Hopefully to be release 2Q93.  I don't think
  its in beta yet though, but he wouldn't say if it was or not.


Thats also the only reason I have windows still on my HD...
  For Ami Pro, 123w and Freelance. 

   When I ran Ami Pro under Win-OS2 it didn't behave too well so I
   kept in a stacked drive just for windows....
     (Besides my wife *likes* windows)  When will she see the light :)

-Matt
-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
- Matthew Crocker
s1949782@titan.ucc.umass.edu <-  Til 1/1/93
mcrocker@titan.ucc.umass.edu <-  Til I Graduate  LOOOOOOOONNG TIME
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: pidgeon@acca.nmsu.edu (Pidgeon)
Subject: Lahey FORTRAN: How to get it to run...
Keywords: DOS app, FORTRAN, Lahey
Organization: Alternative Collegiate Computing Association
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 16:15:57 GMT

Has anyone been successfull at getting Lahey FORTRAN to work under OS/2?
I have not been.

Any experiences would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

-Stephen Berrick
From: bbs.bromgrev@gilligan.tsoft.net (Carl Merritt)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: Need sales numbers on OS2v2's PDK CD-ROM...
Date: 25 Jan 93 19:11:11 GMT
Organization: The TSoft BBS and Public Access Unix, +1 415 969 8238

I'm looking for sales/distribution/release/etc. figures for the OS2v2 
Professional developers kit.  Any information would be greatly 
appriciated, and including you're sources would be even better.  Tkx.

Carl
bbs.bromgrev@tsoft.net

--
Carl Merritt (bbs.bromgrev@gilligan.tsoft.net)
From: kitchin@lf.hp.com (Bruce Kitchin)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: Re: Updates break apps, why?
Date: 22 Jan 1993 21:59:23 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard Santa Clara Site
NNTP-Posting-Host: eden.avo.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.2 PL7]

: On <Jan 19 22:40>, Bruce Kitchin of 1:112/28 wrote to All:
: 
:  BK> explained that the delay was so that it would be certified for 
:  BK> OS/2 2.1. I certainly feel better after talking to him.
: 
: 
: What is it that the updates, SP, 2.1, are 'breaking'?
: Are we expected to upgrade all our disk utils everytime an OS update is made too?: 

First of all, neither the person I was talking to nor I said anything about
breaking.  The word we used was certifying.  This means that rather than
ASSUMING that since it worked on 2.0 it will work on 2.1, they will actually
do some testing to prove that it does.  If there are problems, I would
expect Proportional Software to inform IBM of the problems they found
so that it could be fixed before 2.1 is released.

Actually, in a separate note I have mentioned that for me, EZTAPE for PM
(3.1) is apparently broken on the beta.  I've contacted Irwin/Maynard
and after some difficulty in getting someone willing to talk about
beta code was able to report my difficulties with the hopes that they
will check it out to be sure EZTAPE continues to run fine on the
released code.

Overall, I've been very pleased that with the exception of EZTAPE, everything
I use still works just fine under the beta.

Bruce


Xref: sparky comp.os.os2:545 comp.os.os2.networking:2846
From: os2ace@ariel.ucs.unimelb.EDU.AU (Khuanchai Chooboonraj)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2,comp.os.os2.networking
Subject: Re: OS/2 2.1 BETA DISK 19
Date: 22 Jan 1993 23:31:15 +1100
Organization: University of Melbourne
NNTP-Posting-Host: ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au

luse@ll.mit.edu (Paul Luse) writes:


>I've seen this question before on the forum, but haven't seen any replies
>to it. Does anyone know where the hell disk 19 for 2.1 beta is? I ftp'd
>the rest of the disks from software.watson.ibm.com but there was no disk 19?

>Can someone help me with this irritating mystery?

Try ftp "ftp-os2.nmsu.edu". I saw disk 19 few days ago and it should still be
there.

cheers,
kc
os2ace@ariel.its.unimelb.edu.au

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.programmer
From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Subject: Re: Ghostscript as OS/2-Printer ????
Followup-To: comp.os.os2.apps
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 17:36:31 GMT

In article <19930122.081937.754@almaden.ibm.com> pmuellr@vnet.ibm.com (Pat Mueller) writes:
>>is there anobody, who has integrated Ghostscript as PS-Printer for OS/2.
>>I think of something like: Conifgure PS-Printer with no LPTn, but ouput to
>>a file; test every n seconds if there is something in the file, if yes,
>>start Ghostscript.
>You could probably do this with a monitor, like the way the OS/2
>EWS program TXT2PS does and the tcp/ip program lprmon does.  I haven't
>played with monitors (which only have a 16 bit interface in 2.0)
>so I don't know the difficulty level.

A well known personality (:-)) on the OS/2 newsgroups is working on
such a program.  Give him a little time.

-- 
Timothy F. Sipples      | Read the OS/2 FAQ List 2.0i, available from
sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu | 128.123.35.151, anonymous ftp, in /pub/os2/all/info
Dept. of Econ., Univ.   | /faq, or from LISTSERV@BLEKUL11.BITNET (send "HELP")
of Chicago, 60637       | [Read the List, THEN post to ONE OS/2 newsgroup.]
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: ah017@yfn.ysu.edu (John B. Lee)
Subject: Repartion HD?
Reply-To: ah017@yfn.ysu.edu (John B. Lee)
Organization: St. Elizabeth Hospital, Youngstown, OH
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 02:13:02 GMT


Would I need to repartion my hard drive if I wanted to use OS/2
with the FAT file system?  Could I just install it over DOS and
still keep DOS and Windows?

John Lee

-- 
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: prs9k@brain.med.virginia.edu (Phil Scarr)
Subject: Re: AmiPro for OS/2 (was Re: Impressions of OS/2 2.1 Beta)
Organization: Neuroclinical Trials Center, University of Virginia
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 15:31:35 GMT

In article <1993Jan22.233940.1843@midway.uchicago.edu> sip1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>
>>P.S.: Where is Stacker OS/2 now?  Talk about vaporware....
>
>I'm hearing first quarter on it as well, but why don't you ask Stac
>Electronics?

I don't think so.  I'm on the beta test list and I haven't even received
a copy of the BETA yet.  I wouldn't expect it to see the light of day
until June or July.

>
>-- 
>Timothy F. Sipples      | Read the OS/2 FAQ List 2.0i, available from
>sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu | 128.123.35.151, anonymous ftp, in /pub/os2/all/info
>Dept. of Econ., Univ.   | /faq, or from LISTSERV@BLEKUL11.BITNET (send "HELP")
>of Chicago, 60637       | [Read the List, THEN post to ONE OS/2 newsgroup.]

	-Phil
-- 
PHIL SCARR        \      We are Microsoft...     /          (o) 804.243.0229
 University of    /     OS/2 is irrelevant.      \          (f) 804.243.0290
 Virginia,        \     UNIX is irrelevant.      /        prs9k@Virginia.EDU
 Neurosurgery     /     Openness is futile.      \     prs9k@Virginia.BITNET
 HP-UX is my life!\ Prepare to be assimilated... /   ...uunet!virginia!prs9k
Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.advocacy:12921 comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:4058
From: ckincy@cs.umr.edu (Charles Kincy)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Don't eat from the hand that slaps you, take 2.
Date: 27 Jan 93 18:05:16 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri - Rolla, Rolla, MO

In article <AANbTPhOC5@speed.kiev.ua> smcl@speed.kiev.ua writes:
>Howdy,
>
>Ok. The follow up to a rather rational contribution to this topic
>(generally, defending IBM) states:
>
>> However, Microsoft has done nothing to earn my trust.  I even once had the
>> honor of turning down an interview for a summer job with them- I could not
>> bring myself to work for them.
>
>This is bull hocky.  Microsoft writes some damn good apps, and that is
>all that the market needs to "trust" them.
>
>While everyone screems about the relative success of WinWord and Excel
>under Windows 3.X as "uncompetitive", MacWord and MacExcel have been
>kicking butt in the Mac market for YEARS.  My girlfriend is a Mac
>user and she and all of her friends swear by them. Lotus/Mac and
>Symphony/Mac flopped. Wingz/Mac flopped. Microsoft reigns supreme,
>and they certainly do _NOT_ control the Mac OS.
>
[...]
>For Windows, though, I think that we should face the
>fact that MSoft's _APPLICATION PROWESS_ helps them to sell OS's.
>WinWord and WinExcel kick butt, just like they do on the Mac.
>Similarly, PageMaker kicks butt under Win 3.x, just like _it_ did
>on the Mac.  Most importantly, the Win 3.x (esp. 3.1) AppLet's make
>administering the system pretty nice.

Oh, so if you're an application developer, you're going to trust 
Microsoft to give you OS and development tools support when they're,
ultimately, one of your most aggressive competitors?  Shyeaah.  Not
me!

Does Ford buy air-wrenches and screwdrivers from GM?  I didn't think
so.

Develop applications for Windows using Microsoft C/C++ at your own peril.
You never know when Microsoft will decide to clone your application
and then decide to give you shoddy support.  

Why trust a competitor?  ESPECIALLY when the competitor is Microsoft.

cpk
-- 
"The WHITE ZONE is for loading and unloading only.  If you gotta load or un-
load, go to the WHITE ZONE.  You'll love it.  It's a way of life!" --Zappa

Technology always seems to keep one step ahead of human wisdom.
From: hatton@socrates.ucsf.edu (Tom Hatton)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT to be launched at Comdex/Spring,...
Date: 23 Jan 93 01:28:17 GMT
Organization: UCSF Computer Graphics Lab

pjdm@chmeee.enet.dec.com (Peter Mayne) writes:
>In article <GHENNIGA.93Jan20231606@ampere.ampere>, ghenniga@NMSU.Edu writes:
>>However, just to put in a counterpoint to the
>>$69 point, you can get a version of OS/2 comparable to your $69 dollar
>>version of NT for FREE merely by using the command "ftp ftp-os2.NMSU.Edu"
>>and a few "mget" commands!!

>The $69 includes a C/C++ compiler and the first release version of Windows NT.
>Comparable offer from IBM?

Well, the C compiler in NT is *not* C 7.0, but a 32-bit only version;
plus you don't get the whiz-bang all-new Visual C++ (C 8.0) which MS better
hope is less problematic than C 7.0 (or worse still, C 6.0).

You can get a beta of the IBM C++ compiler for $15. Doesn't get you the
final release, but then neither does NT get you the final C++ compiler, so
there, nyah. :-)

>Complaints about requiring a CD drive may be riposted by complaints about
>requiring the ability to ftp.

Many BBS's have the new 2.1 beta; I haven't heard of one with any
version of NT. 'Free' download from the BBS (most people connect locally).
-- 
Tom Hatton
hatton@cgl.ucsf.edu
(415)-476-8693
From: mounil@mathworks.com (Mounil Patel)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Upset about IBM misinformation.
Date: 27 Jan 93 15:26:30 GMT
Organization: The MathWorks, Inc.
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1

In article <AANbTPhOC5@speed.kiev.ua> Scott McLoughlin,
smcl@speed.kiev.ua writes:
>For Windows, though, I think that we should face the
>fact that MSoft's _APPLICATION PROWESS_ helps them to sell OS's.
>WinWord and WinExcel kick butt, just like they do on the Mac.
>Similarly, PageMaker kicks butt under Win 3.x, just like _it_ did
>on the Mac.  Most importantly, the Win 3.x (esp. 3.1) AppLet's make
>administering the system pretty nice.

I think you've hit the nail on the head here Scott. I don't think that
anyone in their right mind will claim that Windows 3.1 is better than
OS/2. Everyone agrees that OS/2 delivers NT's promises today. But the one
factor that makes OSs "mainstream" is applications that the corporate
world is willing to standardize on.  Microsoft will certainly come out
with NT versions of Excel, Word and Access as soon as NT is out. These
are packages that companies have already standardized on. They aren't
going to want to change. Does anyone really think that MS will make OS/2
versions of these guys? Dream on...
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Distribution: world
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 22:54:16 -0800
From: Dave_Sichak@f514.n202.z1.fidonet.org
Subject: WordPerfect 5.2 for OS/2!
Comment-To: All@f514.n202.z1.fidonet.org
Reply-To: Dave_Sichak@f514.n202.z1.fidonet.org
X-FSC-PATH: 202/514

ComputerWorld's January 25, 1993 issue reported a couple of major
vendors with pending releases of OS/2 2.0 specific applications.  In a
previous post, I reported on Lotus 1-2-3 and Freelance Graphics. 
 
The other major vendor mentioned was ------- WordPerfect.  
 
Announced that it would be available this spring, WordPerfect was
reported to be readying a port of its 16-bit Windows version 5.2 to
OS/2.  The port was to be done using Micrografx's Mirros technology
according to the article.  This technology allows a 16-bit Windows
application to run over the 32-bit OS/2.
 
The article opines that this is a hybrid product -- a temp fix to
satisfy the demand for an uptodate OS/2 version.  The 32-bit version
of WordPerfect for OS/2 Version 6.0 is slated for release this fall
according to the article.  
 
Reaction of various persons interviewed in the article basically said
this was good news and a boost for OS/2.  
 
And did I mention that one quote related that Windows doesn't have
enough memory, multitasking is needed, Nt is vaporware and Microsoft
criticisms of OS/2's memory and disk space are erased by NT's
requirements.????? <G>
 
Cheers.
=8:|)ave

--- Maximus/2 2.01wb
 * Origin: OS/2 Connection @ La Jolla, CA  <619-558-9475> (1:202/514)
From: dab6@po.CWRU.Edu (Douglas A. Bell)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: 1993 will be a good year for OS/2
Date: 27 Jan 1993 02:52:07 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: dab6@po.CWRU.Edu (Douglas A. Bell)
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, dab6@po.CWRU.Edu (Douglas A. Bell) says:


>before they make the jump to the power pc platform in 1991.  Amigas
I meant 1994.
-- 
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: aaa@hpuerca.atl.hp.com (Simon Fowler)
Subject: Re: OS/2 shipments
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 15:59:24 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Atlanta GA

In article <1993Jan25.181336.19118@donau.et.tudelft.nl>, linstee@dutecaj.et.tudelft.nl (Erik van Linstee) writes:
> robert.heuman@rose.com (robert heuman) writes:
> >9. Control over the screen fonts, so that I can select the specific 
> >font I want for EACH purpose in menus, windows, etc., instead of one 
> >for global use. (Sorry, I really believe it is two, but that is 
> >insufficient)
> 
> Yes.

What is wrong with the Schemes app? The only fonts that I cannot change there
are Dialog Font and Help Font (there may be another - I can't remember). I can 
change the Title bar, Icon Text, Menu Text, ...
It would be nice if I could change the menu fonts for the WPS.

simon


Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: jmalloy@itsmail1.hamilton.edu (Joseph T. Malloy)
Subject: Re: Upset about IBM misinformation.
Organization: Hamilton College - Clinton, NY
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 00:27:32 GMT

In article <WOC8R.93Jan25144141@poplar.world> woc8r@poplar.world (William Owen Carlson) writes:
>
>In article <1993Jan25.162456.22556@itsmail1.hamilton.edu> jmalloy@itsmail1.hamilton.edu (Joseph T. Malloy) writes:
>
>
>   This point about FUD, though, is either irrelevant or it cuts both ways.
>   To illustrate the latter point, I might easily argue that IBM's
>   delivery of "OS/2 LA" last year (or, what was it, two minutes before
>   midnight on December 31, 1992? :) was a masterful stroke of FUD since
>                            ^^^^
>
>Naah...  It was way before that!!  =) =) =)
>
>   [soapbox mode off]
>
>   jmalloy@hamilton.edu
>
>-=Bill=-
>  \    /         INTERNET:  woc8r@uvacs.cs.Virginia.EDU
>   \__/          BITNET:    woc8r@VIRGINIA

Picky, picky, picky, just because I was off one measly little year... :)

Would you believe (he said, mustering his best Don Adams/Get Smart!
voice) that was a correction to an even more egregious error?

Oh well.  What's great about the net is the you get to read your own
wonderful blunders as soon as you get to the end of a group, even as
that error weasels its way around the world at the speed of light
(unless, I guess, a Windows user is reading it; then it's the speed of
sound?)...

jmalloy@hamilton.edu
(Windows user, btw; note 'humor' of last 1.1 lines)
From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: PRO/CON on Mirrors (was Re: AmiPro for OS/2)
Date: 24 Jan 93 18:13:34 GMT
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago

In article <18118@umd5.umd.edu> jp776@macbeth.umd.edu (Robert S. Rodgers) writes:
>	If they want a strong response for the market, they can write
>	an OS/2 native versionwithout using a hack like mirrors.  Then
>	they'll see a response.  If AmiPro is a native app, you can 
>	kiss DeScribe goodbye.  

DeScribe does not use Mirrors, it should be noted.  DeScribe is
already on its second iteration of its OS/2 32-bit word processor.
They have a tremendous head start, and probably the strongest page
layout (desktop publishing-like) feature set on the market right now.
Lotus, on the other hand, comes to the table with a lot of marketing
clout and what looks like a darn good product as well.

I don't think DeScribe is going to sit still -- I suspect they'll have
yet another release with some additional enhancements.  (They also
offer free upgrades, by the way.)

-- 
Timothy F. Sipples      | Read the OS/2 FAQ List 2.0i, available from
sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu | 128.123.35.151, anonymous ftp, in /pub/os2/all/info
Dept. of Econ., Univ.   | /faq, or from LISTSERV@BLEKUL11.BITNET (send "HELP")
of Chicago, 60637       | [Read the List, THEN post to ONE OS/2 newsgroup.]
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara)
Subject: Re: Upset about IBM misinformation.
Date: 26 Jan 93 03:05:45 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <1k0ofbINN7fb@cae.cad.gatech.edu> chris@cad.gatech.edu (Chris McClellen) writes:
>In <1993Jan25.091315.5977@fcom.cc.utah.edu> brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:
>
>>This is they typical reaction I get from OS/2 zealots.  I make a thought
>>out article, complete with facts and references showing that IBM 
>>has been doling out misinformation in an organized manner, and what do
>>I get?  Cracks about MS.  The vast bulk of MS-bashing in c.o.o.a has
>>no factual basis.   If if it were true, why does this let IBM off
>>the hook?
>
>[Get out of our newsgroup, you nasty IBM-basher, you.  Why don't
> you go to some Windows group where you belong.]

    Check the newgroups line.


>I don't want to hear the standard NT zealot's reasons for posting
>in c.o.o.a: "We're trtying to stop misinformation about NT.." ==
>well, there's hasn't been to much said about NT lately, and rightly
>so; this is an OS2 newsgroup.

    Actually, you posted this to a Windows newsgroup as well, but
that's besides the point.  I've seen quite a bit of misinformation
about Windows NT being posted to c.o.o.a lately - maybe you
missed it.

			-Phil
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phil Lafornara         				1 Microsoft Way         
philipla@microsoft.com				Redmond, WA 98052-6399 
Note:  Microsoft doesn't even _know_ that these are my opinions. So there.
From: slug@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Wowbagger The Infinitely Prolonged)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Beta-zoid (wuz Re: NT to be launched at Comdex/Spring,...)
Date: 25 Jan 1993 06:26:07 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: magritte.cc.utexas.edu

In article <strobl.727876597@gmd.de> strobl@gmd.de (Wolfgang Strobl) writes:
>
>>Also the NT version REQUIRES a CD-ROM drive.  OS/2 2.1 beta doesn't.  
>
>The current NT prerelease doesn't require a CD-ROM, either. If you
>have ftp access, you'll most probably have temporary access to a
>Unix workstation with a CD drive, too. Mount the CD, ftp the contents
>of the NT installation directory to your PC.  That's it.  Local 
>installation proceeds without access to the CD.

That is a crock!

I have had ftp access for several years now, and have never had, nor do I
now have, access to a workstation with a CD drive.

I would venture to say that this same holds true for most of us students at
many universities.

Plus, the wide public does *not* have ftp access.  However, the OS/2 2.1 beta
*is* available on some BBSes, and people can lend out their disks since there
is *no* charge for the OS/2 beta.

The above method you outlined is *not* an acceptable way to install a software
package that one purchases.  Face it, the NT beta is *not* aimed at Joe Public.

-- 
slug@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu                             *****  Glen A. Graham  *****
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can't make anything foolproof, |   "I have something to say... it is better 
 Because fools are so ingenious!   |    to burn out than to fade away!" - Kurgen
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy