waashk/20ng huggingface dataset:
Mark Woodruff <CDA90038@UCF1VM.BITNET> writes:  >I've been running Dos 6 for about a month.  I was generally impressed with >the improvements:  the multiple boot configurations were great, the >new commands were nice, and DoubleSpace worked fine (twice as slow for >large data transfers, twice as fast for small with SmartDrv).  >Until now.  >This morning at 4 am while I was working on my research paper, I had to >reboot a hung Dos program (that did no disk i/o) from within Windows 3.1. >When my machine finished rebooting, I found my windows directory and about two >thirds of my other directories were irreversibly corrupted.  >I cannot afford problems like this.  I'm returning to Dos 5.  >mark  >P.S.  I've also noticed bad sector errors from DoubleSpace where none should >      exist.  InfoWorld (April 26, 1993 issue) has two articles about problems with DOS 6.  A 'Second Look' article calls it a 'loaded gun' and that people should exercise extreme caution if they decide to use it.  The point out that DoubleSpace and MemMaker are both problem areas that will cause a number of folks problems.  MS's response was to the effect that there had been no problems reported that they could duplicate (probably are not trying too hard).
In article <1993Apr22.085129.554@condor.navsses.navy.mil>, zimm@condor.navsses.navy.mil writes: >Greetings! >    >I've had a bunch of problems with the 24x.  Opening a DOS window on the >desktop can occasionally result in the windows "blowing up" into a set of >horizontal lines, hashing the entire desktop.  Nothing can recover this  >except to completely exit from Windows.  The other irritating problem is >that windows that scroll often overwrite lines rather than actually  I posted a similar query and got these replies which I am testing (so far so good)..  * turn hardware scrolling off before going into windows (24xmode scrolloff)  * in the pif file for dos window, set "emulate text mode"  * get the latest drivers from the DiamoND BBS (or cica): dates are 1-20-9.
In article s90@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu, vromanel@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Vincent A Romanelli) writes: >I recently purchased a Diamond Stealth 24 ISA graphics accelerator card (based >upon a positive review by Steve Gibson of Infoworld).  Although it's fast, I >find its windows drivers extremely buggy despite implementing all of the  >Diamond technical support suggestions.  Does anyone else have any experience >with this card? > >Any feedback appreciated.
>Can someone point me in the direction of this file.   Thanks. > > Should come with visual basic. New version is vbrun200.dll. Thx Dave L
I get the picture, I just find it humorous that Running Windows 3.1 apps ( 3.0 for 2.0 )  is what makes os/2 more credible...
I'd like to get a system running OS/2 2.0 GA talking to a network of PCs running Windows for Workgroups.  Acting as a server would be wonderful, but client access would be enough.  Can I run WFW 's NET utilities in a DOS box?  Or is there a way to actually get OS/2 to talk to WFW?  Will OS/2 LanMan clients talk to WFW?  Dazed and confused,
Hello Netters  	I recenlty aquired enough money to purchase a laser printer. The other day, I bought the COMPUTER SHOPPER mag.  I was looking through printer review section and noticed the WINPRINTER800.  The machine is  incredibly low priced for all the features it has   			800 dpi! 			8Meg RAM 			Postscript compatable 			envelope printing  My question is does anyone have one of these or know why the price is so cheap?  I would appricaiate it if someone would pass on their knowledge on this subject.  Thanks alot!  					Dave ------------------------------ Donuts are a girls best friend
In article <1t9ada$og0@fitz.TC.Cornell.EDU> stlombo@eos.acm.rpi.edu (Steve J. Lombardi) writes: >By night I'm an Amiga user. By day I work with windows. I'd be much more  >comfortable in windows if I had Two things. > >1. A good Personal information manager. You know- a calendar, address book, >reminder list etc... rolled into one clean interface.  I prefer InfoSelect myself, but it is a strange kind of PIM.   >2. A good file manager. Microsofts is very poor by my standards. How >about one that has a left and right window and allows file operations  >between them. being able to launch programs from the same interface >would be nice. as well as text reading and graphics viewing. Those >who are familiar with Directory Opus on the Amiga know what I'm >looking for.   Well, a few things might help you like the 3.1 File Manager better.  1) To get more than one window simply double click on a drive icon.    That it only gives you one window to work with is a fallacy. You    can drag files between windows, to any icon on the tree on the left    side of the window, and to any drive icon. This beats your "left    and right window" as you can have as many open as you wish instead     of just two.  2) You can launch any app from within File Manager by double clicking    on the executable's icon.  3) You can launch any application and open a document file by double    clicking on the document file's icon, provided you have    associations set correctly. This is easily done with the menus. The    "browse" capability adds a lot of functionality to 3.1. So if you    name all your text files with .txt and point all GIF, TIFF, etc.    files towards Paintshop or WinGIF, this takes care of your    requirement for "text reading and graphics viewing".  I know someone who prefers using File Manager as his shell. Setting up all the associations you need is the way to do it.  If Directory Opus is half as good as File Manager then it must be pretty good indeed! File Manager just needs you to understand how some things are done.           --
Mike Dahmus (mike@schleppo.bocaraton.ibm.com) wrote: : Yes, a lot of what OS/2 2.0 has in common with OS/2 1.x was written by you : guys. However, many of the things that made OS/2 2.0 so much more successful : (Win-OS/2, Workplace Shell) than previous versions were IBM work.  Win-OS/2 is IBM work? You make me laugh... Re-writing couple of thousands lines of code to make Windows compatible with your DPMI implementation does not make the rest of Windows IBM work...
Last night I tried to reinstall the utilities from the Windows 3.1 Resource Kit disk. The setup program appeared to run perfectly normally, but when it had finished, there was no Program Group created. Now, I know I've done this before successfully, and creating a group myself didn't exactly tax me, but I'm curious as to what might be going on. I can only assume that something left over from the last time I had it installed is getting in  the way, but I can't figure out what. Any clues, anyone?  --
In article <sundaram.737186206@msuinfo> sundaram@egr.msu.edu (Divya Sundaram) writes: >jenk@microsoft.com (Jen Kilmer) writes: > >[much BS deleted for brevity] > >>Again, my point was that not all microsofties are here to "sell"  >>readers on our products (which would conflict with the "no-ads"  >>philosophy of usenet).  Nor do we necessarily have access to info >>that others have. > >It certainly smacks of that! Remember the "POLL" that you quoted  >saying that you had seen a 95% of users being satisfied with DOS 6.0?   It was 93%-94%, and actually another msdos team member posted it. Note that people not on the msdos team would not necessarily know about that, or...  >Care to recall how unbiased the sample set was?   When I heard those numbers I wondered how they got them (having worked in product support and knowing that the typical support caller has very little positive to say about the product, I figured it wasn't from there...) so I wandered over to the marketing folks and asked. And I was told it was from a survey of registered users.  And I  posted that on the net when people asked where the 93% figure came  from.  >That post sure looked like FUD....and coming from a microsoftie  >.... well, it sure seemed like something was not on level.  Hmm. I figured, if Chuck posted the numbers, why not include where they came from? (I also find it interesting that postitive info is  "fear, uncertainty & doubt".)  >Advocacy is GOOD - but spreading FUD to advocate your favorite OS is very  >unethical - especially when you have a vested interest in the success  >of that OS.  ????  I think you've got me confused with someone else. I don't  pretend that MSDOS provides what all people need, or that other OSes (including unix & OS/2) don't provide useful and/or necessary features.  I also don't push people to use MSDOS; I even posted in comp.os.msdos.misc that I suggest _waiting_ before installing a  new os, esp if you have trouble (support is always overloaded  during release, unless the sales are a total bomb).  >>I also get tired of people assuming that microsofties are, like, >>members of the BORG. > >That is because their actions seem to invite this opinion - never seen more  >defensive people in my life.   I ain't saying some of us don't get defensive sometimes. Do you *really* think msdos gets any more respect within microsoft than outside it?  I just mean we all aren't cut out of the same dough with the same cookie cutter. We don't all think alike.  Yeah, ChuckSt and I have some "inside" info on MSDOS - doesn't mean that everyone else does :)    >Seriously speaking, it is a shame that MS techie employees get the heat for >MS's actions - most of which are perpetrated by the Management and marketing. >I am sure that they ARE very talented etc ... I have not doubts about their  >abilities, just about the ethics of their marketing practices.  -jen  --
I am looking for a Windows Utility that would give me a listing of files in a directory, but also display a description of the file.  This utility would allow me to enter and edit file descriptions of, hopefully, any  length (maybe a small window with a scroll bar?).  I would then be able to browse my directories and be able to see what is in a file without having to open or execute it.  Any such beast out there?  If not, anyone want to write one?
Does anybody have any idea where I could find a program that can convert a .GIF image into a .BMP image suitable for a Windows  wallpaper (i.e. 256 colors).  Hopefully there's something out there I can get from an ftp site somewhere...  Thanks in advance...
In article <MEKENKAMP.6.737653432@STPC.WI.LeidenUniv.NL> MEKENKAMP@STPC.WI.LeidenUniv.NL (Leo Mekenkamp) writes: >Brian Grier (bjgrier@bnr.ca) wrote: > >> So to most of the computer users in the world MS product symbolize >> quality. MS has made their life easier, and more productive and to them >> that is quality. They do not care about what innovative things MS has >> done, other than to make their life with a computer one heck of a lot >> easier. You may know better than most computer users in this world >> but that will not change their perception. > >Excuse me? Are you one of those people who *enjoy* working w/win? Come talk  >to a house-mate of mine and tell him how productive his life is when he  >encountered yet another sudden appearence of the DOS-prompt while cutting  >and pasting in win! Or an empty win screen without any tasks running (i.e. >^ESC brings up an empty list, progman has done it again.) > >Leo > >----------------------- "There's Klingons on the starboard bow, ---------- >Leo Mekenkamp            scrape 'em off Jim!"        ___ >Klikspaanweg 53/6                       ___....-----'---`-----....___ >2324 LZ  Leiden                  ========================================= >The Netherlands                          ___`---..._______...---'___ >071-323476                              (___)      _|_|_|_      (___) >                                          \\____.-'_.---._`-.____// >Mekenkamp@STPC.WI.LeidenUniv.NL            `~~~~`.__`---'__.'~~~~' >Leo@STHP.WI.LeidenUniv.NL                           ~~~~~   Been messin roun progman.ini have ye?  I'm gessing you've been "tuning" the system, that's the only way I can remember getting a blank screen from CTRL-ESC.... when one of the PROGMAN.INI parameters was twinked to 0 or 3, can't remember.  I've never seen Win 3 do something like that on  her own, Captain.
PC-Xview from NCD, HCL-eXceed from Hummingbird Software!
S. Alavi (ssa@unity.ncsu.edu) wrote: :  : 	I have an 8514/A card, and I am using windows in 1024x768 mode  : 	(normal 8514/A font, not small).  In the 386 enhanced mode : 	the DOS window font is too small for my 14" monitor. Is there a  : 	way to spacify the font size for the DOS window? You'll have to  : 	excuse me if there is a trivial answer, since I am fairly new to : 	MS Windows world. :  : 	Thanks. :  : 	(Please include this message for reference) : 	======  S. Alavi    [ssa@unity.ncsu.edu]  (919)467-7909 (H)  ======== : 						  (919)515-8063 (W)
In article <5031@cvbnetPrime.COM> tbelmont@feds55.prime.com (Tom Belmonte x4858) writes:  |I am considering buying Borland's Paradox for Windows since I  |would like to use a database with Windows (I don't have/use  |one yet) for both work/home use.  I would like to advantage  |of Borland's "$129.95 until April 30" offer if this package  |is everything that Borland claims it to be.  So, I was  |wondering ... has anybody used this and/or have any opinions?
In article <1rrhe0INN2p7@ceres.kingston.ac.uk> ee_d316@ceres.kingston.ac.uk (Steve Warner) writes: > >Hi >  I am thinking of upgrading to the Beta Version of Windows NT on a 486SX 25Mhz >213Mb Hard disc. Can someone please give me there opion on such a setup for >running NT and is the Operating System likely to be better than Windows or  >Unix's. > > >Steve >ee_d316@uk.ac.king.ceres > I've been using Windows NT (tm) since the October release, and I have to  say that the March release is really a big improvement.  Windows NT (tm) is becomming usable.  There are a few things to consider before you make the leap though. First (for me at least) is that you cannot get a full-speed DOS box. What I mean is, I cannot (for instance) run Falcon 3.0 or any other resourse intensive program in a DOS box.  It absolutley crawls.   And my machine is a 486/33 with a 330MB HD and 16MB RAM.  If anyone knows how to get a fast DOS box (or full-screen for that matter),  please let me know.  The second thing is there are still not many drivers around for stuff. For instance, my PAS-16 has been demoted to running as a Sound Blaster (which is natively supported -- nice), because MediaVision hasn't  produced drivers yet.  Your disk should be large enough to keep an 80MB DOS partition, and give the rest over to Windows NT (tm).  The only thing is, whenever you wanted to run Windows programs, you'd have to reboot and log into Windows NT (tm), instead of just typing WIN.  Windows NT (tm) does seem to be much more stable than normal Windows though.  It'd be a good choice if you have the resources.  You should really have *at LEAST* 8MB RAM though.  One last thing, modems work well enough, but I have yet to get my FAX card to work, and I've never heard of anyone else who did either.  It's only better than UNIX because it runs killer software out of the box, whereas with UNIX there isn't the same availablity.  I guess it comes down to -- Windows NT (tm) is not yet for the faint of heart, it's still a beta.  But it's a very GOOD beta.  --
In article <C5rx8B.Kzp@ecf.toronto.edu> leebr@ecf.toronto.edu (LEE BRIAN) writes: >In article <1qu8ud$2hd@sunb.ocs.mq.edu.au> eugene@mpce.mq.edu.au writes: >>In article <C5o1yq.M34@csie.nctu.edu.tw> ghhwang@csie.nctu.edu.tw (ghhwang) writes: >>> >>>Dear friend, >>>  The RISC means "reduced instruction set computer". The RISC usually has  >>>small instruction set so as to reduce the circuit complex and can increase  >>>the clock rate to have a high performance. You can read some books about >>>computer architecture for more information about RISC. >> >>hmm... not that I am an authority on RISC ;-) but I clearly remember >>reading that the instruction set on RISC CPUs is rather large. >>The difference is in addressing modes - RISC instruction sets are not >>as orthogonal is CISC. >> >>--  > >Theoretically supposed to be reduced.... not any longer.  That's why everyone >is arguing about RISC v.s. CISC.  Personally, I think CISC will win out. >Just take a look at the Pentium!  (Not that I like Intel architectures either, >but that's another story...) > >bye! >
Hi ! I am trying to develop a utility to view WORD for window file. But to do that I need to know the format of the DOC ( word for window file format ) files.Can anybody  tell me what is the format of DOC file or direct me where can I get it. Or is it proprietory format ? Your help is greatly appriciated.
In article <1rfdkqINN8s2@zephyr.grace.cri.nz>, maystonr@grace.cri.nz (Richard Mayston) writes: > Path: kth.se!sunic!pipex!uunet!noc.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!waikato.ac.nz!comp.vuw.ac.nz!zephyr.grace.cri.nz!zephyr.grace.cri.nz!usenet > Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc > Subject: Re: Need longer filenames > Message-ID: <1rfdkqINN8s2@zephyr.grace.cri.nz> > From: maystonr@grace.cri.nz (Richard Mayston) > Date: Mon, 26 Apr 93 03:24:42 GMT-1:00 > Sender: maystonr@grace.cri.nz > References: <1993Apr19.211044.28763@guinness.idbsu.edu> <765461d518325t9@infoserv.com> > Distribution: world > Organization: Industrial Research Ltd., New Zealand. > NNTP-Posting-Host: rmayston.grace.cri.nz > Lines: 10 >  >  >  > In article <765461d518325t9@infoserv.com> hfeldman@infoserv.com (Howard MITCHell Feldman) writes: > >In <1993Apr19.211044.28763@guinness.idbsu.edu>, lhighley@gozer.idbsu.edu (Larry Paul Highley)  wrote: > >>  > >>  > >> Is there a utility out there that will let me use filenames longer than > >> the standard 8.3 format.   > > > Yep, it's called OS2! >  Yep, you can use any type of UNIX, or maybe VMS, or buy a MAC or something...   If you want longer filenames for your documents, I heard of a wordprocessor for windows which let you assign long names to files. Those long filenames could only be seen from that programs open/save dialogs though... Maybe someone knows more about this wordprocessor than I do?
Sorry about confusing subject/summary/keywords!!!  I am a postgrad researcher in ESL/applied linguistics at Edith Cowan University in Perth Western Australia...  I DESPERATELY need help!!! I need to record the results of word processing sessions in windows - so that I can sit down and replay the results of my research subjects' wordprocessing behaviours - naturally, I can do this with the Windows macrorecorder - and 2 or 3 other apps in windows - BUT I CANNOT PAUSE/RESUME!!!! - i.e. all I can do is to ctrl/break to get out - this is useless for a researcher who needs to be able to pause the wordprocessing session he is replaying to make notes/annotations - and then RESUME from where he left off...  I am just about to commence my research for my Masters thesis and would be EXTREMELY grateful for any assistance - if anyone can help could they mail me at:  johnoliver@odin.DIALix.oz.au  Many thanks in advance...
Is anyone maintaining a list of favorite shareware and public domain Windows  software?  I have several such lists for MSDOS, but they are really light on Windows stuff.
In article dil.admin@mhs.unc.edu (Dave Laudicina) writes: >Ignore the attacks and look at the sales numbers and the MS >stock price if you need some  >gratification. Just keep doing the great job you have done in the past. >Thx Dave L
Anybody seen mouse cursor distortion running the Diamond 1024x768x256 driver? Sorry, don't know the version of the driver (no indication in the menus) but it's a recently delivered Gateway system.  Am going to try the latest drivers from Diamond BBS but wondered if anyone else had seen this.  post or email
I just removed an IDE drive and reformated two SCSI disk to use as boot disk  in a system that did run Windows fine in 386 Enhanced Mode. Its a DX50 with 8  meg RAM, and an Adaptec 1542b with bios enabled. System runs fine and runs  Windows in standard mode fine, but it returns to the DOS prompt when trying  to run 386 mode. I've tried EMMExclude and SysROMBreakPoint. What gives??????  Thanks in advance, Hal
I am interested to know if there is know procedure/document to configure an IBM Musci Feature (IMF) card to work as the sound device with MS-Windows 3.1.  I believe the IMF uses the same FM synth chip as the Soun Blaster, but didn't know what driver to use or how to configure the MIDI-mapper.  Any help, past success, suggestions?  Thanks,  Don.
(NDW) >I would like to know how to STOP or uninstall this program!!  If an Uninstall icon doesn't exist in the Norton Desktop Apps group:
I am working with Visual Basic v2.0 for windows. Specifically, I am working on an application that generates formatted reports. Since, some of these reports can be rather large, my first question is:  1.  Is there a way to increase the size of a list box or text box in Visual Basic/windows beyond the 64k limit?  As I have not (as yet - being optimistic :-) come across a way to get around the above problem, I am working on the following approach:  I am trying to create my own defined template in MS-Word, using the WordBasic Macros so that I can open up Word from Visual Basic(VB) and load this template of mine, which will work in the following way:  It will first open MyOwn.INI file (created in VB - at the time when the user selected the kind of report he weanted) and read the section from the .INI file and jump to the appropriate code in template - which will then open and read a file pertaining to the section it read from the .INI file.  1.  When using the GetProfileString function in WordBasic, is there a way to specify/change the default .INI file (which is win.ini) to MyOwn.INI file?  2. When using the file Input$ function in WordBasic - is there a way to read more than the 32k at one time?  --- Any help will be appreciated.
(1) Is it possible to change the icons in the program groups?  I'd like     to give them some individuality.  (2) Can you set up a short-cut key to return to the Program Manager?      I know <CTL><ESC>, <ESC> will do it, but I'd rather set it up so I      can avoid the task list and get back to the P/M with <ALT><F1>.  Any and all help is welcomed.
I was just wondering if anyone new how I could get the BETA version of Windows NT, and be part of the BETA program.    Thanks  gel@binkley.cs.mcgill.ca
In article <1rl9b6$h3c@sol.deakin.OZ.AU> russ@deakin.OZ.AU (Russ Sharp) writes:  >We are using pkzip V2.04 and I am interested to hear from >people who have used one of the many Windows programs that >call these. >Which ones are available and does any one stand out amongst >the rest? >Is there a full windows version that does not call the DOS  >PKZIP/PKUNZIP commands?  Do you mean a prog. that doesn't jump to the DOS display and then back or  create a temp. DOS window?  If yes then I might recommend WinZip from ftp.cica.indiana.edu.  I'm afraid  I don't have the file name or version but you should be able to find it.  It's fully compatible with ver. 2.04g and very functional.  Later,  Phil Trodwell
Hello Brad!  Monday April 26 1993 17:24, Brad Smalling wrote to (crosspost 1) All:   BS> For a VGA card these are the correct files but you can't just copy them  BS> back and expect it to work.  You have to create a new WIN.COM file.  Try  BS> the command (you will have to worry about what directories each file is in  BS> since I don't know your setup):   BS> COPY /B WIN.CNF+VGALOGO.LGO+VGALOGO.RLE WIN.COM   BS> (I grabbed this from _Supercharging Windows_ by Judd Robbins--great book)  BS> This is also how you can put your own logo into the Windows startup  BS> screen. An RLE file is just a specially compressed BMP file.  Brad,     What is the procedure used to 'specially' compress the BMP file?  I would love to use some of my BMP files I have created as a logo screen.  Thanks  Chris