
                   comp.os.os2.advocacy             (Usenet)

                 Saturday, 02-Oct-1999 to Friday, 08-Oct-1999

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jscott@csolve.net                                 02-Oct-99 06:22:06
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 05:14:14
Subj: (1/2) Re: I am GLAD IBM wants some money!

From: JohnS <jscott@csolve.net>

Firstly, thank you for correcting my misspelling of hypocrit(e). I
really should
learn to use the spell checker in these posts.

Secondly, you have become annoying in your continued personal attack.
So far, you have called me a hypocrite, a liar ("I would never
accept anything you say on your word alone"), a nut case, brain damaged,
foolish, misguided, dishonest, inept, a zealot, superficial, naive,
unsophisticated, helpless, paranoid, and unenlightened, in this post
alone. 
But I forget. You don't consider this to be name-calling.
>"I have no doubt that you'll regard the above as "name-calling",
> but that is my honest impression of what you write,"
Sure sounds hypocritical to me.

Thirdly, your selective memory belay what I write and your invective
undermines -your- rhetoric.

I do hope you enjoy Tholen's company in my kill file.

Sincerely

JohnS

As promised (and rejected by you)
4070489          WARP 4 SUBSCRIPTION ENG         374.00 (CA)
Not being over hypocritical about it, I'll wait till Christmas. 




> >> >>>JohnS
> >> >>>Emailed IBM (CA) 24 hours ago requesting price and availability.
> 
> >> ><<snip>>
> 
> >> >> And when you actually *do*, *then* you can tell everyone else that an
> >> >> OS/2 user should be glad to pay IBM $200 for Software Choice, and not
> >> >> be hypocritical about it.
> 
> >> >I don't take too kindly to your alluding to my being a hypocrit, Jeff.
> 
> >> Actually, the only assumptions that have been made here are on your
> >> part -- the first one being that my question "So, when did you send
> >> your check in?" was addressed to you. Check the attributions. It
> >> wasn't.
> 
> >Weak apology accepted, Jeff.
> 
> There you go again, reading/seeing things that aren't there. You seem
> to do that a lot.
> 
> Personally, based upon what I've seen from you so far, I would never
> accept anything you say on your word alone. You simply make too many
> mistakes/assumptions, and draw erroneous conclusions from them, for
> example, my Team OS/2 affiliation, as well as the date upon which I
> talked about WDM.
> 
> It's ironic that your whole diatribe here is an attempt to admonish
> someone for *allegedly* making false assumptions about you being a
> hypocrite when you've clearly made numerous, wrong assumptions about
> me (and continue to do so after being admonished for doing so). In
> fact, I think that this fact alone proves that you are definitely
> capable of being a hypocrite. Case closed. You *are* being a
> hypocrite.
> 
> I have no doubt that you'll regard the above as "name-calling", but
> that is my honest impression of what you write, based upon these
> numerous assumptions/mistakes of yours which you consistently make in
> each post.
> 
> A few more appear below, which I'll get to in a moment.
> 
> >Check the paragraph (> >> above). Although
> >possibly not intended for me it certainly appears to be.
> 
> >> Nevertheless, I stand by my statement above. When you or anyone else
> >> actually does pay IBM $200 for Software Choice, then he can suggest to
> >> others that they should be glad to pay that price, and not be
> >> hypocritical about it.
> >
> >Your assumption here.
> 
> There is no assumption about anything here. It's a simple statement
> that stands upon its own as a truism. You appear unable to offer up
> any sort of refutation of that statement (obviously because to do so
> would entail you having to defend hypocrisy), and so have tried to
> excuse your misguided answer to a question I asked of someone else as
> blaming me for making assumptions about you.
> 
> And the worst part of it is that you've demonstrated, in a deliberate
> way, that you're a hypocrite in the course of complaining that I've
> called you a hypocrite.
> 
> You have proved that you *are* a hypocrite.
> 
> >Not my statement. Willing, I would be.
> 
> Whether one is willing to pay for Software Choice is irrelevant. My
> initial question was directed to a couple, specific people who are
> telling others that Software Choice is a good deal and that OS/2 users
> should be "expected" to pay for it, etc, and yet these people have
> themselves not paid for it. Some of them have even expressed the idea
> that it may not be worth $200 when grilled as to why they haven't yet
> paid for it. That's *really* hypocritical.
> 
> >Glad? Wrong
> >word. Suggest that others should be glad to do it? Not me. It is
> >none of my business what others do.
> 
> Then it should be none of your business when I question the sincerity
> of specific people who appear to be guilty of hypocrisy when they say
> that others should be glad to pay, etc, but these people themselves
> haven't paid.
> 
> And yet you demonstrated your own hypocrisy by jumping into this
> thread and responding to a question that was directed to, and about,
> another person. Case closed. You *are* a hypocrite.
> 
> >> >You have no facts on which to base that charge.
> 
> >> My statement stands as a truism regardless of to whom it is directed.
> >> If you disagree, you're free to try to point out some logical/ethical
> >> fallacy, but frankly, you're not going to be able to make a convincing
> >> argument because you'd be arguing *for* hypocrisy.
> 
> >Just 'cause you say it, doesn't make it so.
> 
> Just 'cause you say that it ain't so, doesn't make it not so.
> 
> >YOU certainly appear to be calling me a hypocrit.
> 
> You *are* a hypocrite. You've demonstrated this in your posts here.
> 
> >I provide you a definition of hypocrit
> 
> Then you should be aware of your own hypocrisy. (Also, you should be
> aware that it is spelled "hypocrite" if you actually looked it up in
> the dictionary. You've misspelled it several times now).
> 
> >which you
> >conveniently delete, and now your "statement stands as a truism". I
> >don't
> >think so.
> 
> To quote one of your fellow OS/2 nutcases: "What you think is
> irrelevant. What you can prove is relevant".
> 
> I've demonstrated your own hypocrisy in your posts here.
> 
> >> >I care less for bright , bitter people who have
> >> >been hurt by some accident of history and are unable to rise above it.
> >> >I base that statement on your excellent OS/2 programming examples of 5
> >> >years ago and obvious change in attitude between 1995 and 1997.
> >>
> >> Speaking of having no facts upon which to base charges, you yourself
> >> are guilty of that.
> >>
> >> Your first statement is, of course, mindless,
> >> 50-cent-paperback-pop-psychology conjecture that has no basis in any
> >> sort of "facts" whatsoever. You clearly don't even know to what you're
> >> allegedly referring, even while making an obviously bogus, nebulous
> >> allegation devoid of anything specific evidence.
> 
> >Hit a nerve here, did I.
> 
> Perhaps in your own head, yes. Brain damage may explain why you've
> made such embarrassingly foolish, easily disproven
> assumptions/mistakes in your misguided attempt to admonish someone
> for *allegedly* inferring that you're a hypocrite. In doing so, you've
> actually made a number of statements that point out that you *are* a
> hypocrite.
> 
> You're foolish indeed.
> 
> >Certainly it is conjecture.
> 
> Of course. What else would one expect from a hypocrite who makes a lot
> of noise about others making assumptions?
> 
> >I don't know
> >you from adam but.
> >Bright- (reasonably good command of the language, excellent well
> >thought out, concisely written tutorials on MIDI , Soundcards etc.
> >Bitter- continuous rants against all and sundry people in a news-group
> >dedicated to an operating system that you do not use and havn't used for
> >years.
> >And you can't even take a compliment at face value.  Pity.
> 
> I don't need "compliments" from hypocrites. Nobody does.
> 
> The fact that you excuse your negative, totally unfounded and
> obviously uninformed depictions of me as "compliments" underscores
> what a dishonest hypocrite you can be when it behooves you to be so.
> 
> >> As to your second, equally misguided and uninformed statement -- I
> >> have had no "change in attitude" regarding OS/2 and IBM. From when I
> >> first started running OS/2, I found some things lacking, and I felt
> >> that IBM was not very committed to doing what I would have liked to
> >> have seen done with the product. Obviously, you're quite ignorant of
> >> the numerous things I've said over the years.
> 
> >If you were ALWAYS so negative about Amiga and OS/2(IBM) you would have
> >never started using either of them.
> 
> Nonsense. I didn't just start disliking a product's flaws when I
> stopped using it. In fact, if anything, I found those flaws MORE
> annoying when I actually had to deal with them on a day-to-day basis.
> 
> You're obviously arguing about my views under complete ignorance of
> what I've actually said about, and done with, various products over
> the years.
> 
> But then, after having proven you're a hypocrite, I can understand why
> you're hypocritically doing this.
> 
> >Way back then you had a choice.
> 
> I still do, which is why I moved on when I found something that I
> could make work better for me.
> 
> >And you obviously made at least 3 choices. Conjecture , certainly but
> >directly from your statements. You found "some things lacking" (didn't
> >we all) and couldn't nudge IBM into going towards some direction that
> >you thought would benefit the product. (way out on a limb here but
> >sounds like you might even have been team os/2)
> 
> And like the rest of your *hypocritical* assumptions, it's outright
> false. I never was a "member" of Team OS/2. You'd know that if you
> actually had read anything I've written on the subject, but then,
> you're a hypocrite who makes incorrect assumptions about others even
> when he's complaining that they're allegedly doing the same to him.
> 
> >Yup, guilty as charged. I've not taken the time to read all your old 532
> >citations (97-98). Just enough to get the "tone".
> 
> It's a pity that you didn't read enough to get your facts right before
> you demonstrated your own hypocrisy in this very thread.
> 
> >That is why I said you were consistent.
> 
> I think you've demonstrated that what you think is not only typically
> without basis, it's also incorrect and the words of a hypocrite.
> 
> You've done a fine job of demonstrating your own ineptitude, as well
> as hypocrisy, by foolishly pursuing a misguided rant about things that
> shouldn't be "any of [your] business" (if you weren't such a
> hypocrite).
> 
> >> That never changed. I've always been rather critical of IBM because
> >> they never really did much that I found particularly commendable, and
> >> quite the contrary, did some things that I found to be extremely
> >> short-sighted and foolish. In fact, they did a lot of things that I
> >> had already seen Commodore do, to disasterous ends, with the Amiga. I

> >> suspected, even back then, that OS/2 would be a "transition thing" for
> >> me as I moved from a Motorola based to Intel based platform.
> 
> >Yup. Ya calls 'em as you sees 'em. Other's MMV. I can't comment on
> >Commodore
> >but IBM certainly has acted like an elephant with 7 legs from time to
> >time.
> >They did , afterall , teach MS many of their stock in trade tricks.
> 
> There are a lot of things to be said on that subject.
> 
> But frankly, after getting a good look at the sort of dishonesty,
> hypocrisy, and foolishness you've engaged in here in this thread, I
> have to say that I'm honestly not confident that it would be
> worthwhile to discuss such things with you.
> 
> Anyway, I *have* already discussed such things, and since you allege
> that you've looked at those posts I previously wrote, and have *still*
> made the sort of erroneous deductions from it that you demonstrate
> above, I think that I have good cause to feel that you're not worthy
> of discussing such topics.
> 
> Go talk about IBM and MS and whatever with one of your fellow zealots
> who will simply nod his head like one of those car ornaments while you
> rattle off some superficial, naive diatribe/rhetoric. I don't want to
> hear unsophisticated views about the computer market.
> 
> >> Nevertheless, I did what I always do. I made the situation work as
> >> best as possible for me, and used it until something else came along
> >> which served me better, just like I did with the Amiga and Commodore.
> 
> >Vive the ability to choose.
> 
> >> I actually could make OS/2 work for me today, if I desired. But why
> >> should I do so when I have better alternatives? That has always been
> >> my attitude, even when I moved from the Amiga to OS/2. This hasn't
> >> changed, and it remains my attitude today (which is why it's no
> >> guarantee that I'll be using my current choice forever).
> 
> >That IS the key, isn't it. Choice. Alternatives. What works for me
> >doesn't fit your needs and vice-versa. BUT Jeff, If there is
> >nothing left except your current choice, you will have no choice
> >but to remain with it!
> 
> Spoken like the helpless OS/2 advocate that you are.
> 
> Some people actually aren't afraid to pick up development tools and...
> gasp... write software. Because we do so, we realize that there will
> ALWAYS be choices, contrary to the naive, uninformed views of endusers
> for whom software (such as operating systems) are mysterious magical
> things whose existence cannot be fully understood.
> 
> You will always have software choices. Trust me. I know what I'm
> talking about because I write software. Now, here's a glass of warm
> milk. Go back to bed and stop having your paranoid nightmares.
> 
> >> >I do find it curious that from july 97 on, in over 500 citations
> >> >left in deja, that you never once initiated a discussion in c.o.o.a.
> >> >All were replys to others.
> >>
> >> And yet, Tholen accuses me of starting threads. Ironic, isn't it?
> >>
> >> But then, I do not initiate very many threads in in any newsgroup. I
> >> find that I have plenty to post in merely replying to other messages.
> >> I'm not sure what sort of truly misguided, bogus conjecture you've
> >> drawn from this, but I'm sure that it is indeed as superficial and
> >> unenlightened as the statements you've made so far.
> >
> >There you go again.  The only conclusion that I draw from "reply
> >posting"
> >is that you delight in stirring the pot.
> 
> In that case, I could presume that it was your intent to "stir the
> pot" when you hypocritically jumped in here to respond to something

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Sympatico (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jscott@csolve.net                                 02-Oct-99 06:22:06
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 05:14:14
Subj: (2/2) Re: I am GLAD IBM wants some money!

> that "was none of [your] business", and demonstrated that you are
> indeed guilty of hypocrisy.
> 
> >And the majority of your
> >posts that I've read lead me to believe that "bogus conjecture", 
> >"misguided",
> >"unenlightened" and "superficial" could be equally applied to you.
> 
> But, as I pointed out before, I think you've demonstrated that what
> you think is not only typically without basis, it's also incorrect and
> the words of a hypocrite.
> 
> >> Many people do not initiate usenet threads, and merely reply, or just
> >> read newsgroups. To infer something unflattering about them based upon
> >> this is the sort of arrogant, misguided, naively "dumb" reasoning that
> >> I've come to expect from people who are zealous about OS/2.
> 
> >Or AIX, Linux, Amiga or Windows. Did you check the mirror before writing
> >the above?
> 
> I checked the foolishness and inaccurate statements in your
> hypocritical posts.
> 
> >> >At least you are consistent.
> >>
> >> And yet you foolishly suggested just above that my attitude has
> >> somehow changed.
> 
> >Please see paragraph above re IBM and Amiga.
> 
> Please see response above to the paragraph.
> 
> >> Given your own inconsistency, maybe the problem is that *your*
> >> attitude about others has changed.
> >>
> >> >For the rest of us, you really should take it at face value. Many of
> >> >us do prefer it to the other brands and ARE willing to pay for
> >> >the privilege.
> >>
> >> So then do so. Don't be telling others that you *want* to do so, but
> >> haven't yet done so. Nobody cares about rhetoric. We can get an
> >> abundance of that for free from many sources. What there is a dirth of
> >> from OS/2 zealots (and has always been the case) is real, effective,
> >> notable, sincere actions.
> 
> >You keep reverting to name calling, Jeff. It is something you profess to
> >dislike in others.
> 
> You keep reverting to making false assumptions about me. It is
> something that you profess to dislike in others.
> 
> That behavior also happens to prove that you are a hypocrite, which
> makes your whole diatribe here moot.
> 
> >I am an ADVOCATE who seldom lets ZEAL get in the way of common sense.
> 
> Nor facts get in the way of your assumptions... nor logic/ethics get
> in the way of your own hypocrisy.
> 
> >What there is a dEArth of is OS/2 zealots! I see only 4 or 5 here in
> >COOA.
> >And I tend to KF them as I do their opposite MS/LINUX/BE numbers.
> 
> >> >Bye the way, now, 5 years after the fact, did MS integrate the DD models
> >> >of NT4 and Win95? This is not a trick question, you wrote that they
> >> >would and I was just wondering if it came to pass.
> >>
> >> I did not write about the WDM model 5 years ago. Once again you're
> >> mistaken. (Do you ever get *anything* right, or is your track record
> >> always so abysmally bad?) Nevertheless, it exists today.
> >>
> >Maybe you could enlighten me regarding the date that YOU wrote the
> >following:
> >"Microsoft is going to create a unified driver model between Win95 and
> >WinNT (ie, developers will write one driver which works under both WinNT
> >5.0 and some future version of Win95) which should ensure even better
> >support. Current Win95 and Win 3.1 drivers will NOT work with WinNT
> >though, so make sure that you have WinNT drivers for your sound card.
> >Nevertheless, many cards today are either not supported under NT, or
> >only have partial support if you use a driver not specifically written
> >for that card."
> 
> There you go again. I didn't write the above 5 years ago, contrary to
> your clearly uninformed and erroneous claim that I talked about this 5
> years ago. I had a suspicion that the above was your sole "evidence"
> to support your incorrect claim.
> 
> So, I ask again, do you ever get *anything* right?
> 
> >> And just like *considering* whether or not you want to pay $200 for
> >> IBM's Software Choice, it doesn't actually involve any commitment or
> >> expense to talk about WDM, so I guess that's why you OS/2 Advocates
> >> are willing to talk about it. Otherwise, if you actually had to put up
> >> or shut up, then you'd be pretty much forced to shut up since you sort
> >> of folks don't ever do much putting up of anything.
> >
> >Christ! I ask a simple straightforward question
> 
> Your inference/claim that I discussed a common driver model 5 years
> ago was not a question. It was simply yet another false assumption
> from a hypocrite who also incorrectly complains that others have no
> basis to call him a hypocrite. In fact, there is such a basis, and you
> yourself have provided it in your own posts.
> 
> >prefaced with "this is
> >NOT a trick" to ensure that you understood that I was seeking knowledge
> >and not advantage and you reply with this diatribe!
> 
> My initial question to David, which wasn't supposed to be any of your
> business if you're to be believed (and frankly, I don't believe the
> sincerity of anything you say after witnessing your hypocrisy) was
> also "not a trick". Nevertheless, you have since demonstrated that
> you're not to be taken at your word, because you're a hypocrite who
> doesn't get facts straight, and then makes false assumptions based
> upon that ignorance.
> 
> >> Incidentally, where are *your* "excellent OS/2 programming examples"?
> >> Surely, someone who feels the right to get up on a soapbox and spout
> >> off about the "positive contributions" of others has quite an
> >> impressive contribution of his own? No? I thought not. Typical OS/2
> >> zealot. Worthless to absolutely everyone.
> 
> >As I inferred above, you wouldn't know a compliment if it smothered you!
> 
> That's hardly an answer to the above question, and my rightful note
> that you've demonstrated hypocrisy on this matter as well.
> 
> >The "positive contributions" that I was referring to are the 2 quoted
> >below this text and similar ones that you apparently wrote.
> 
> No, you simply haven't been able to comprehend what I'm referring to,
> even though I emphasized the word "your" above. I'm not asking you
> about what *I* wrote that you find to be a positive contribution. I'm
> asking what *you* have written that you deem to be a positive
> contribution, so that I can guage what sort of right you have to be
> judging what is and isn't a positive contribution.
> 
> >PS I can't/don't programme. Telecommunications is my forte.
> 
> Well, there's the answer. I thought as much.
> 
> (Incidentally, it's inaccurate to say that you "can't" program. Anyone
> can do it. It simply takes the will, which obviously you don't have.
> There's the *real* pity that OS/2 suffered).
> 
> You know, OS/2 zealots never fail to prove exactly the points I raise,
> even while they're ineptly attempting to disprove those points.
> 
> I'll say it again -- maybe if some of you had actually spent more time
> doing productive things than spewing rhetoric, you wouldn't have so
> badly bungled your misguided promotion of a pet product.
> 
> You can dislike me all you want for pointing out such things as
> counterproductive hypocrisy from OS/2 fanatics, but until such day as
> you can actually do something beyond prove my point, you have no one
> to blame but yourselves for your appalling failure as self-professed
> "advocates"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Sympatico (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: nws@rollingthunder.clara.co.uk                    02-Oct-99 09:01:09
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 10:13:22
Subj: Re: No thanks... I don't smoke.  

From: nws@rollingthunder.clara.co.uk (Anthony Ord)

On Fri, 1 Oct 1999 00:28:30 +0100, charles.kooy@tesco.net (Charles Kooy)
wrote:

>Anthony Ord <nws@rollingthunder.clara.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>> >btw, I believe the French call the Brits 'Le Rosbief'. This is because
>> >the English eat little other than roast beef..
>> 
>> They're out of date. Maybe they should try "Le Curry tres chaud" or "Le
Kebab
>> apres dix litres des bierre."
>Funny you should mention that - I've just been down to Brick Lane, aka
>'the home of curry' in London and had something called a 'Phal'

Oh my.

> It was a
>mistake. A really, really big mistake.

You bet your arse it was. Pun not intended.

>I'll pay for it tommorow, and several mornings afterwards, speaking from
>experience ;)

Well at least it's the weekend - less people will be forced to suffer.

>ck

Regards

Anthony
-- 
-----------------------------------------
| And when our worlds                   |
| They fall apart                       |
| When the walls come tumbling in       |
| Though we may deserve it              |
| It will be worth it  - Depeche Mode   |
-----------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: theqcc@hotmail.com                                02-Oct-99 12:20:24
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 10:13:22
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: "Quake Cheaters Clan" <theqcc@hotmail.com>

Esther Schindler <esther@bitranch.com> wrote in message

> Oh dear, I hate to see how you have devolved. First you start out with
> name calling, and now you're so desperate to insult others than you
> must resort to _sexist_ retorts? Do you so lack factual reasons to
> support your point of view?

Facts to support a point of view?
I didn't know the two were exclusive to each other.
Aren't points of view just that? You must try harder to get that walnut of
yours between your ears to work a bit harder.

As far as sexism goes, I don't believe in it. Sexism via a faceless, sexless
text interface is really silly don't you agree, for all you know I may be
female, and you as far as I am concerned may be a rather naive 14 year old
spotty geek.

> The most casual observer can see that _you're_ the one with something
> to prove. You're the one who wandered into our neighborhood to start
> throwing insults, for no apparent reason. As I said repeatedly, you
> can use whatever tool gives you pleasure... as long as you respect
> others enough to let them use what works for them.

Is this not a public forumn? Oh, sorry, I forgot, being the experts that you
are in your own insular world of self flagulation, I could have been lured
here ny your shining light that is wisdom and understanding. Do you
understand the phrase 'taking the piss'? - if so, the last statement was an
example of that.

> You've done your best to sidestep the questions I've asked, such as:
> what does it matter, if someone doesn't agree with your choice of OS?
> Why should you care?

It matters to me whan I see so many OS/2 fanatics cryinng with glee how
wonderful IBM is even when they are being screwed. And then you go onto call
Microsoft - are they not the same monster in different skin?

Esther - read the following s-l-o-w-l-y:

Windows is the most widely used OS, like it or lump it... as guilling as it
is OS/2 is on it's way out.
Linux is on it's way up.
Kennedy was shot.
The moon is not made of cheese.
Esther is not always right.
OS/2 is on its way out.

QCC

> --Esther

QCC


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Customer of Planet Online (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: iallen@fox.nospam.nstn.ca                         02-Oct-99 11:22:17
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 10:13:22
Subj: Re: And we thought it couldn't get any worse?!

From: iallen@fox.nospam.nstn.ca (Iain Allen)

On Fri, 1 Oct 1999 17:46:46, esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler) 
wrote:

> On Wed, 29 Sep 1999 18:03:22, baden@unixg.ubc.ca   (Baden Kudrenecky) 
> wrote:
> 
> |   I was kinda feeling the same way, but when I went to Software
> | Choice to see what a minimal subscription would cost, all I that
> | the site mentioned was to contact an IBM sales representative.
> 
> Indelible Blue does sell Software Choice subscriptions.

Will that advise help anyone not in the USA?...Just a thought...I 
don't know...

--
-----------------------------------------------------------
Iain allen <iallen@fox.nstnDOTca>
-----------------------------------------------------------


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PSINet (CA-TORONTO-FEED) (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: theqcc@hotmail.com                                02-Oct-99 11:55:00
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 10:13:22
Subj: Re: An American Thing?

From: "Quake Cheaters Clan" <theqcc@hotmail.com>

Dear Self-Appointed Internet Guru

Who the hell died and made you god?

On what basis do you assume I do not know what I am talking about?

Pleas enlighten me o wise one.

QCC


<pcguido@attglobal.net> wrote in message news:37f57863_3@news1.prserv.net...
> Dear QCC,
>
> When using the Internet to post on topics about which you know nothing,
> it is traditional to include: "I am an Idiot" in the subject line.
>
> Just a hint.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Guido
>
>
> In <7stk1s$d5l$1@newsreader2.core.theplanet.net>, "Quake Cheaters Clan"
<theqcc@hotmail.com> writes:
> |This seems very odd to me:
> |
> |IBM makes OS/2
> |IBM mis-manages OS/2
> |IBM abandons OS/2
> |IBM introduces OS/2 'fees' for updates that were FREE
> |
> |and yet you cannot see the problem? Sheesh.
> |
> |Even smaller software producers have free updates via the net on their
> |homepages for registered users to download... but this seems to be beyond
> |big blue. Maybe this is a Yankie mentality?
> |
> |Get kicked by own country (al'a Vietnam) and YET still love the country??
> |
> |QCC
> |
> |
>
>
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Customer of Planet Online (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: theqcc@hotmail.com                                02-Oct-99 11:57:08
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 10:13:22
Subj: Re: Time to move on (to Software Choice

From: "Quake Cheaters Clan" <theqcc@hotmail.com>

It interesting to see the number of little worms that come to the surface
when the rain of truth comes down upon the soil of misguided loyalty.

QCC


<pcguido@attglobal.net> wrote in message news:37f57d47_3@news1.prserv.net...
> In <MPG.125c77ad699c8b57989a3f@news1.mnsinc.com>, David H. McCoy
<forgitaboutit@fake.com> writes:
> |In article <7st5uc$6f0$1@newsreader2.core.theplanet.net>,
theqcc@hotmail.com
> |says...
> ||Taken from the Oxford English Dictionary
> ||
> ||RAPE (v). have sexual intercourse with (esp. a woman) without consent.
> ||RAPE (n). this is an act of crime.
> ||
> ||Tell me where does Microsoft fit? And why use this phrase? Is it
indicative
> ||of your thought processes? To make sexual analogies to everything in
life?
> ||Do you 'ENTER' the house? Do you RAM shut the door? Do you POKE and
FINGER
> ||your food?
> ||
> ||Its a commercial world chump, Microsoft did it right - they are tops,
IBM
> ||did it wrong, they are struggling. Linux is doing it another way
altogether
> ||and getting bigger. Thats life.
> ||
> ||By the way, did I rape you with this reply or is it a case of now you're
> ||buggered?
> ||
> ||QCC
> ||
> ||Kim Cheung <kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com> wrote in message
>
||news:xvzjnvpfcnztbgbtneontrqrygnargpbz.fit3462.pminews@news.deltanet.com..
.
> ||| On Wed, 29 Sep 1999 08:39:05 +0100, Quake Cheaters Clan wrote:
> |||
> ||| >windows (which ain't that bad) is your most likely route.
> ||| >Take it. Enjoy it
> |||
> ||| "In the M$ world, you either get raped, learn to enjoy being raped, or
> ||help
> ||| raping others. Which group do you belong to?"
> |||
> |||
> ||
> ||
> ||
> |
> |
> |This is advocacy in this group. The facts don't support their position so
they
> |throw around useless analogies.
> |
> |David H. McCoy
>
> Uh-Huh, and some of the hangers-on here are such NutCases that, when the
> facts are not enough, they simply assume omnipotent alter egos.
>
> It's f'in' amazing the people you can meet here!
>
> Guido
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Customer of Planet Online (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: theqcc@hotmail.com                                02-Oct-99 12:03:28
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 10:13:22
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: "Quake Cheaters Clan" <theqcc@hotmail.com>

Dear honey buns

No commercially available on the shelf OS/2 magazines.... something I
implied in my original posting my dear. Must the very basic points be spelt
out for your tepid intellect to absorb?

You say you work in the medium of publishing?

I must assume that the readers over there must be easily pleased with drivel
and tripe from rabid weasels?

TTFN dear


QCC




Esther Schindler <esther@bitranch.com> wrote in message
news:LoEFmgJJ9ecw-pn2-5mxWJPC3jzyW@agave.bitranch.com...
> On Sat, 2 Oct 1999 00:36:21, "Quake Cheaters Clan"
> <theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:
> | gee, because it is such a mass marketed and well known computer
magazine, I
> | must have been blibded by its presence on the shelves!...
>
> I never claimed that extended attributes was mass marketed nor well
> known. That's not its goal. (I've written for plenty of the mass
> marketed, well known magazines and I'm employed by the largest
> computer magazine publisher in the U.S. It's not that big a deal.)
>
> However, you said that there were _no_ magazines. It's a very bad move
> to say that there are *none* of something, because I have to do to
> demonstrate your inaccuracy -- and lead others to question your
> validity -- is point out that there is at least _one_ of something.
> Tsk, tsk, Quakeling.
>
> | > On Wed, 29 Sep 1999 17:48:45, "Quake Cheaters Clan"
> | > <theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:
> | >
> | > | No magazines? - don't care, we have online ones that sometimes come
out.
>
>
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Customer of Planet Online (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: News@The-Net-4U.com                               02-Oct-99 11:11:11
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 12:27:03
Subj: Latest attack by Tim Marting 

From: News@The-Net-4U.com (M.P. van Dobben de Bruijn)

> Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:
>
> I don't think he was criticizing Adrian.  I think he was mentioning that
> anyone who has clout in the OS/2 community who speaks to the press
> has to be <very> careful with what they are saying.  Certainly it isn't
> right how he was quoted, nor is it his fault, but if he had phrased
> things differently the quote would not have been published as such.

Quote from Tim's Post we are now talking about:

	BUT, like Adrian, they are more interested in gaining attention
	for their site/piece/article and that seems to come first and
	consequences second.

If one should not read that as criicizing Adrian (be it in or out of the con-
text of the post where he condemns this behavior of the press) my under-
standing of English must be at fault. Remember this is quite a few days af-
ter Tim and Adrian had a conversation and "cleared" things up on Tim's 
first piece about Adrian. Now he criticizes him again, if that is not a clear
attempt to bring down Adrian's and OS/2 Netlabs standing (I suppose he
thinks that WC will then be the benefitting runner-up, ha long shot) what is?

Look at his original post again (the one where he and Adrian had to talk 
about AFTER he did it instead that he called Adrian BEFORE). He is doing
exactly the same in that post only to claim that he did it on purpose to prove
the risks AFTER others had started protesting. In the mean time he had put
the door wide open for reporters to say to Adrian "See, <g> your own TM read
it the same way we did". Effectively killing all possible complaints of Adrian 
in
the process of smearing Adrian and Netlabs. 

For your convenience I will quote the relevant part of the post with which Tim
started that thread on 22 Sep under the title: OS2NetLabs Head: "OS/2 is Dead"

	The most disappointing quote of the entire interview comes
	from the chief banana over at OS/2 NetLabs.  He is quoted
	as saying ""OS/2 is dead. Once again. Definitely this time," said
	Adrian Geschwind, "

	Any comment on this Adrian?

Look at the eye-catching title. Look at the post. It starts of with 2/3 of
the post attacking and referencing Brad Wardell and then at the end
attacking "the chief banana" Those words chosen are prove enough for
me that he was out defaming Adrian and Netlabs.

The "I did it (meaning: leaving out the rest of the words of Adrian - MPvDdB)
on purpose to prove a point (meaning the danger of opening the door to short
quoting - MPvDdB)" was just a convenient way out. After it was pointed out to
him he did not do his homework, did not check the whole story, did not do the
correct attributions. At least he is consistent at that. He is consistent in
other things
too. Anyone who he regards as a threat to the "position" as a "leader of the
OS/2
community" which he thinks is his and his alone will come in his fire-line
some day.
                 
Regards from Leeuwarden
Peter van Dobben de Bruijn
---
usethenet.at.the-net-4u.com (at becomes @)
----

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TeleKabel (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ispy@groovyshow.com                               02-Oct-99 08:47:08
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 14:10:00
Subj: What are you all complaining about?  It makes no sense!

From: "Kelly Robinson" <ispy@groovyshow.com>

Hey, when IBM first decided to port Netscape 4.06 to OS/2, they were intent
on charging $60 (plus a whopping $15 for shipping and handling - that's $3
for shipping, $12 for a small well-deserved profit).

IBM later changed its mind and offered to give it away, provided that you
still order it and pay $15 for shipping and profit.

But, as with everything else regarding OS/2, IBM's done a complete 180
degree turn and offered no explaination.

I feel sorry for you people, having to deal with pompous crusty fossil
dipshits like IBM...

Since John W Thompson has left, has OS/2 gotten any better or had he done
too much damage so OS/2 will never recover?

Just curious.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: http://extra.newsguy.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: theqcc@hotmail.com                                02-Oct-99 14:27:01
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 14:10:00
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: "Quake Cheaters Clan" <theqcc@hotmail.com>

I would think Esther likes bitter chocolate.....


Stan <ihate@spam.com> wrote in message news:37F5FB3B.86936233@spam.com...
>
>
> Esther Schindler wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 30 Sep 1999 11:18:36, Stan <ihate@spam.com> wrote:
> > | > You and I don't have to agree about our choices on cars, chocolate,
or
> > | > best cities to live in. Why should we conform to your idea of which
OS
> > | > is best?
> >
> > | I prefer my chocolate with hazel nuts or macedamias in them....:-}
> >
> > Great! You can send me all the chocolate _without_ hazelnuts or
> > macadamias... and we'll have more peace in the world. :-)
> >
> > --Esther
> Okay,
> Next time when my wife or myself are in your part of the world I'll send
> them to you.  What's your favourite Esther...:-}
>
> stan...


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Customer of Planet Online (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: dljone9@ibm.net                                   02-Oct-99 08:24:10
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 14:10:00
Subj: Re: Things OS/2 users cannot do....

From: Daniel Jones <dljone9@ibm.net>

My, what an angry slant this posting has...!

You know, I support one of the largest WAN's in the entire
free world - and it's OS/2 based. We freely route extremely
large amounts of important financial data with the greatest
of ease. Thousands of OS/2 servers and workstations easily
communicating, 24 hours a day - 7 days a week. ADSM backups,
complete remote control with Netfinity Manager, gigantic DB2
databases churning along, all done with state of the industry
security. Hackers breaking in?? Nope. Viruses polluting our
network?? Nope. Servers requiring daily attention or reboots?
Nope. 100% uptime and maximum productivity? You betcha...

Quake?? New games?? Hmmm...no thanks, I'm busy taking care of
business, making millions for my employer and watching my
personal bank account grow exponentially as a result.

I'd write more, but I'm busy planning my 4th vacation for the
year...but thanks for sharing!

Quake Cheaters Clan wrote:
> 
> Take criticism
> Take reality in large amounts (only then in selected portions)
> Take a break (from abusing all other OS's)
> Take stock (of their true position as a bit player in the OS world)
> Take control (of themselves from frothing when Windows family is promoted)
> Take comment that seems to go against their own propoganda
> Take their systems into the next century
> Take the fact that they are an endangered lot
> Take part in Quake III gameplay (oops, may as well throw in most new games)
> Take as red the nice feeling of being SUPPORTED
> Take a magazine off then shop shelf
> Take a cover CD with good FREE software (PC Plus springs to mind in UK)
> -------(BeOS, Linux, Windows, DOS all get supported) - the latest issue has
> Staroffice 5.1 on the disc with Linux version next month...NO OS/2 will be
> put on, Automenu play studio and a 10,000 software suite from Seagate....
> Info 7 & Analysis)....
> 
> Have you stopped drooling yet chumps? You losers are so out of the loop you
> are like a small community of inbred hill-billies, with you 'pa' being your
> own uncle... its about time that you all spread your wings and left your
> little cramped and dirty OS/2 cage.
> 
> QCC

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: Frank@get-lost.spam                               02-Oct-99 15:46:23
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 14:10:00
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: Frank@get-lost.spam (Frank)

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 14:12:37, rjf@yyycomasia.com (rj friedman) wrote:

> It would be funny, if it weren't so ludicrous, the way so 
> many are fuming and venting, rushing to blame IBM for the 
> Stardock/Warp5 fiasco. Has it not occurred to anyone that 
> the reason Stardock was turned down was because they were 
> not able to come up with a sufficiently convincing business 
> plan that would persuade IBM it was worth their while to 
> entrust OS/2 to Stardock?


Entrust ??

Would one be so peculiar when your child is ill, you're not doing 
anything, or you're not able to do anything, or
you don't give a toss  whether if it gets well or not because you 
already got an older kid who does the job for you, about the hospital 
you'll get treatment or at least help ??

This all sounds very primitive to me and even worse : we, the clients,
will have to take our losses.


The box said:"Requires Windows 95/98, NT or better" .......... So I 
too installed OS/2.


Reply per Email to franklyware@-NOSPAM-beer.com

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: horseman@ibm.net                                  27-Sep-99 08:26:22
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 14:10:00
Subj: OT/TID Re: NS 4.61GA  Was: Why blame IBM?

From: Tony Wright <horseman@ibm.net>

Alan Beagley wrote:

> I suppose that view goes along with your signature line. But in fact in
countries
> with stricter gun-control laws, even the crooks have fewer guns, and far
fewer
> people die in shootings, accidental or otherwise.

I suspect it all too easy to simplify the actual causes by making such
an arguably over generalisation without supporting statistics.As you
appear to perhaps be inferring(later) a comparison between UK and USA
then undoubtedly numerically you are correct....... but proportionately
the difference may be less?
Factoring in population density and other social-economic factors along
with differences in reporting methodologies tween various countries and
one has to ask how valid such initially simple numeric comparisons are?
No doubt the ability of "crooks having guns" could be simplistically
correlated with the proportion of "legal abilities to carry
firearms".......
There again... a simple comparison with perhaps the "ability" of
illegally possessing   narcotics  proportionate to their legal use might
infer that given sufficient "incentive" then this causal relationship
may not be applied generally without considering a lot more factors?

> Perhaps the crazy who killed all those people in the Texas church would have
> murdered someone with a hammer or a knife, but it would have been more
difficult
> to kill so many in such a short time.

So understandably it's far easier(and more cost effective) to legislate
out a perceived "dangerous" weapon or activity that is misused by a
relative few mentally disturbed or pschycotic individuals than to
actually formulate and implement a pro-active process that identifies
those persons susceptable to that behaviourial anomaly?  
(As it ultimately implies that cost and civil liberties outweigh the
requirement to identify & resolve the "disease" and thus  minimising the
individual "symptoms" on an ad hoc basis is more palatable and expedient
in the short term?).
Thus it's interesting(but totally understandable) how "we" (collectively
not royally) tackle those problems that are numerically less dangerous
than say road safety but politically more dangerous....<g>    
Hmmm... fix the problems you can....ignore/leave the rest....

> Alan Beagley
> Brought up in Britain,

But presumably many years ago as: -

> where even the police did not carry guns.

You didn't qualify that with "....normally or typically" ...in order to
exclude ARV's (armed response vehicles)....Major airports 
security.....RUC (Royal Ulster Constabulary).........<g>
There again you did infer the past tense and several decades ago I
personally can remember when the above wasn't necessary at the time  and
I(and many others) could enjoy pistol/rifle shooting (albeit with
firearms cert and regular? inspections) without apparently being
regarded as an extreme threat to public safety.....

No offense but I still can't see a direct relationship with OS/2 (apart
from this tenuous anology).... and thus presumably one could conclude
that as the overly simplistic logic of the analogy is inconclusive at
best or flawed(or incomplete)at worst, then so is one's perception of
the political, business and marketing dynamics when trying to apply the
argument to IBM,OS/2 in context?  .....perhaps.....?

--
Rgds Tony W   Email: horseman@ibm.net

"still fuming like many other UK gun owners - because lack of basic
article in our equivalent of your USA statutes to the right to carry
arms meant that a total ban(on hand guns) in response to public
hysteria(outrage) was relatively easy to implement and subsequently the
responsible majority are now penalised  for the rare (but
undeniable attrocious when it happened) examples of an occasional
pschycopath....
While we watch legalised/accepted genocide on our overcrowded
roads....... and only a matter of time before rifle,clay pigeon
shooting,  archery, pub darts, and drinking real ale is added to the
list of illegal/dangerous/banned activities ".


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Equi-Tek CompCon (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: esther@bitranch.com                               02-Oct-99 15:09:27
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 16:33:09
Subj: Re: And we thought it couldn't get any worse?!

From: esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler)

On Sat, 2 Oct 1999 11:22:35, iallen@fox.nospam.nstn.ca (Iain Allen) 
wrote:
| > Indelible Blue does sell Software Choice subscriptions.
| 
| Will that advise help anyone not in the USA?...Just a thought...I 
| don't know...

I don't really know, Iain, but I _guess_ so. We'd all have to look at 
the terms and conditions of the license agreement, and I haven't done 
so.

In Europe... well, isn't Mensys still around?

--Esther

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: esther@bitranch.com                               02-Oct-99 16:00:16
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 16:33:10
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler)

On Sat, 2 Oct 1999 11:20:48, "Quake Cheaters Clan" 
<theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Facts to support a point of view?
| I didn't know the two were exclusive to each other.
| Aren't points of view just that? You must try harder to get that walnut of
| yours between your ears to work a bit harder.

Points of view are based on data, and that data may or may not be 
accurate, complete, or logically connected. However, any point of view
that is not based on primordial urges (such as a child's "I am hungry"
or a teenage boy's "I am overcome with testosterone") are based on 
_some_ collection of facts, or what the originator believes to be 
facts.

Perhaps this is news to you.

| As far as sexism goes, I don't believe in it. Sexism via a faceless, sexless
| text interface is really silly don't you agree, for all you know I may be
| female, and you as far as I am concerned may be a rather naive 14 year old
| spotty geek.

For someone who doesn't believe in it, you were quick to throw a 
sexist insult.

I care as little for who you "really" are as I do about your choice of
operating system. I note, in passing, that those who hide behind 
anonymous IDs usually have something to hide, or at least they lack 
the courage to associate themselves with their opinions. But it's your
call, and not even worth a shrug.

Similarly, you're free to make any assumptions about me that you like.
It's rather amusing, in this case, because I'm among the more 
"visible" people you could find on an advocacy forum on usenet... I've
been writing about OS/2 (and quite a few other topics) in the computer
industry since 1992, and I have a biweekly column in both a print and 
online Ziff Davis magazine. (With photos, even, so you can count how 
many zits I have.) I've dealt with executives from every major 
company, from dinner with IBM's Steve Mills and Donn Atkins to private
press gatherings with Bill Gates (close enough to lob an olive at his 
head, if I'd have the nerve), so I don't think you could accurately 
accuse me of operating in a vacuum, much less in a haze of adulation 
towards IBM. (That's particularly laughable, given the number of IBM 
execs who'll cross the street to avoid answering my questions.)

If you are, indeed, an ex-OS/2 user, then you're a particularly 
ignorant one.

I'm also an OS/2 user who uses Macintosh, Linux, Windows, and any 
other platform that comes along. I write reviews about products that 
run on all of them, and there are things I like about each OS. OS/2 
remains my personal favorite... but it's okay with me if others have a
different preference. (There are people who actually like white 
chocolate, after all, which is even more astonishing than a true 
affection for Windows.) For instance, I can easily understand the 
attitudes of people who prefer the Mac, as I'm rather fond of the Mac 
myself.

Isn't it interesting whom you can meet online, Quake? You really 
_should_ be more careful about the assumptions you make regarding your
correspondents.

| > You've done your best to sidestep the questions I've asked, such as:
| > what does it matter, if someone doesn't agree with your choice of OS?
| > Why should you care?
| 
| It matters to me whan I see so many OS/2 fanatics cryinng with glee how
| wonderful IBM is even when they are being screwed. And then you go onto call
| Microsoft - are they not the same monster in different skin?

Certainly, there are OS/2 users who do cling to their vision of what 
they want to see (or, sometimes, what they're afraid to see) rather 
than look at what _is_. Hope and fear are human things, and account 
for the reasons that someone might stay with an abusive spouse, get on
a cattle car headed to Treblinka... or, alternatively, face 
unspeakable odds and change the world. This operates with better 
results when their hopes and fears are based on facts and not wishful 
thinking, and when they spot the right source of a problem -- a 
concern I've addressed in this newsgroup myself, more than a few times
-- but saying, "You're all idiots to believe the way you do" is a 
statistically proven way to _not_ change how someone views the world. 
In order to agree with your "...it's dead!" hypothesis, the listener 
has to first agree that he's an idiot, and it's another human 
attribute that we'd each rather be _right_ than anything else, maybe 
even alive.

But again: why should it matter to you? If your view of the universe 
is correct and OS/2 users are following the head lemming to the sea...
what skin is it off your back? Why do you care?

| Windows is the most widely used OS, like it or lump it... as guilling as it
| is OS/2 is on it's way out.

On its way out of what? Favor? IBM's technology-of-the-week list? 
Again, you make a statement that's based on _popularity_ being the 
most important criteria. For some people, it is. If you need to run 
the latest applications, then Windows may be a better choice. If you 
want to run a reliable Web or commerce server, a flavor of Unix is a 
more secure option than Windows and has more tools available than 
OS/2. If you need to massage a million transactions a day, you might 
need an RS/6000 or an AS/400. Pick the right tool for the right job.

For me personally, the "right tool" for the jobs I do most often is, 
and continues to be, OS/2. It's fast, reliable, robust, consistent, 
does not violate the principle of least astonishment (ie my guesses 
are generally correct, what most people call "intuitive"), and it 
treats my data as inviolate. I know and am comfortable with the OS/2 
applications I already have, and for most of them I have not found 
superior choices on other OSs.

If that's a different situation for you... fine. Enjoy your chosen 
OS... but why berate me for using my power of decision to choose 
differently from you?

--Esther

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: esther@bitranch.com                               02-Oct-99 16:02:13
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 16:33:10
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler)

On Sat, 2 Oct 1999 12:31:55, Stan <ihate@spam.com> wrote:

| Next time when my wife or myself are in your part of the world I'll send
| them to you.  What's your favourite Esther...:-}

Dark chocolate, please. The darker the better. :-)

(And I do hope you're in "my part of the world" before long. Alas, 
I'll be missing Warpstock -- I'll be in San Francisco on business that
weekend -- but perhaps you'll be making it to WarpTech, the OS/2 
conference that the Phoenix OS/2 Society is sponsoring at the end of 
May, 2000?)

--Esther

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: pcguido@attglobal.net                             02-Oct-99 18:18:08
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 21:37:17
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: pcguido@attglobal.net

In <MPG.125dbda0e93da926989a4a@news1.mnsinc.com>, David H. McCoy
<forgitaboutit@fake.com> writes:
|In article <7sulpb$734$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, hunters@thunder.indstate.edu
says...
||In article <MPG.125c79cde198cc6d989a41@news1.mnsinc.com>,
||	David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> wrote:
||
||<snip>
||
||| Or why buy a new TnT2 video card when the Gradd drivers only
||| allow 640x480 at 60mhz.
|||
||| This is not a good thing.
||
||Are you kidding?? If only I could run my Matrox Mystique at 60m(!)hz
||refresh!! I'm not shure my monitor goes that high tho... :)
||
||Besides
||http://www.nvidia.com/Marketing/Products/Pages.nsf/pages/os2drivers
|
|Those are the drivers in question.

Uh David (or whoever you are today/now),

Steven was pointing out that _no_ monitor runs at 60 mhz. If you know
so little about computer hardware that you think _any_ monitor could
run at that refresh rate, perhaps you a copy of "Computers for Dummies".

All the best,

Guido

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ispy@groovyshow.com                               02-Oct-99 08:55:13
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 21:37:17
Subj: Re: IBM catalog gives hint to end of fix packs

From: "Kelly Robinson" <ispy@groovyshow.com>

Read on, but if you get bored - that final paragraph is rather meaningful
and covers a lot more than just one little product:

Kim Cheung <kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com> wrote in message
news:xvzjnvpfcnztbgbtneontrqrygnargpbz.fiweea1.pminews@news.deltanet.com...

> Do a simple math: the defect support until Jan 2001.   Software choice is
fee
> support starting 1Q 2000.   The price is xxx dollar for two years.   Now,
> what's 1Q 2000 plus 2 years?

Yeah, but if you subscribe to a magazine and it goes under 6 months later or
the parent company drops it, what's your chance of getting a refund for the
remainder of the time?  Not good.

And don't forget how IBM's screwed the OS/2 community over.  I left them in
complete disgust in February 1997 and haven't regretted it too much.

> Not to say that I know what IBM's going to do after Jan 2001.   I only
know
> that Jan 2001 is the magic date that the prvious funding cycle ends.
That
> was one of the last thing done by Mike Lowrie.

Does IBM know what IBM is going to do after Jan 2001?  They might extend
defect support even further.  Or perhaps they will can it sooner than that?
IBM ain't alone in the realm of "corporations who screw over customers'
lives."

> I do know that the more revenue OS/2 can generate on it's own weight, the
> more likely there will be anouther round of funding.

Logical.  Unfortunately, IBM doesn't believe in logic.  Their own illogic
destroyed OS/2.  Nothing else, Microsoft or K-Mart are completely
irrelevent.  OS/2 was aimed at business and Windows at home.  IBM must
obviously have screwed up big in order for them to start drooling over
Windows NT when it came out of the closet.  Think about it, there were
several more titles written for NT but never ported to OS/2 - big business
style apps.  Mission critical stuff.  IBM had made its choice and killed
OS/2 with no help from anybody.

> Nothing will be free - and it shouldn't be.

Um, if you make a product and I buy it and I discover a defect which can be
reproduced.  Whose fault is it?  I've done your troubleshooting quality
control work for you.  Why should I pay for you to fix your own bungling
mistake?!  With this scenario, support had very well be free.  Sorry.

On the other hand, when your Geo, Renault, GM, or any other crap brand of
car is called in for a recall, YOU can spend the hundreds of $'s needed for
the updated component!
Get it now?



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: http://extra.newsguy.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ispy@groovyshow.com                               02-Oct-99 08:58:14
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 21:37:17
Subj: Re: Looking for WSoD -- IBM anyone home???

From: "Kelly Robinson" <ispy@groovyshow.com>

Don't be surprised.

When I registered OS/2 Warp 4, their modem-based registration option never
worked.  A computer operator told me the line was not available... that
happened for days.  Ditto for sending the info via internet.  Succinctly
put, site not available...  I don't recall if I tried faxing but by then I
decided to snailmail the bloody thing in.

By now, I hope IBM's fixed the problem - after all it's only been 3 years.

But, that's IBM.  Be happy with them, they're all you've got in terms of
OS/2.

I really must apologize for them, they made it big in the computer realm
claiming good customer support.  IMHO, it's about time IBM dies - because of
their crap customer support they've given over the last few years.

David D. Huff Jr. <huffd@nls.net> wrote in message
news:37F5833C.E4F4BAF6@nls.net...
> I've spent a great deal of time registering for the different
> partnerships development and commercial
> and have gone through several different contacts within Lotus and IBM
> just looking to
> purchase Workspace On Demand.
>
> My last hope was IBM Direct PC Solutions. Damn, if they didn't tell me I
> had to update my
> commercial listing on the Web. My company was registered but not the
> profile. Now
> that that was done four days ago I still cannot logon to the Shopping
> Mall.
>
> How the heck can I buy their product?
>
> Post to the group or write me direct. I need to make some forward
> progress soon!
>
> TIA -- Dave Huff
>
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: http://extra.newsguy.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: esther@bitranch.com                               02-Oct-99 15:08:18
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 21:37:17
Subj: Licensing agreements 

From: esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler)

On Sat, 2 Oct 1999 03:26:19, pcguido@attglobal.net wrote:

| Your means around this has been available since WordStar lost thier
| fight to license this way 15 yrs ago. As long as you can prove that
| only _one_ copy is in use at a time, there's not going to be a
| problem.

It sounds as if you're referring to a court case or other legal 
decision. It's not one I've ever heard of... could you clarify, 
please?

By my recollection, Borland took the then-unheard-of action of issuing
a software license that said, "Use it like a book" when they released 
Turbo Pascal. Many vendors followed suit (so to speak... gee, wouldn't
"following suit" be a great title for a legal column?). If there was 
case law related to this issue, I missed it.

Details, kind sir?

--Esther

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: esther@bitranch.com                               02-Oct-99 15:10:16
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 21:37:17
Subj: Re: And we thought it couldn't get any worse?!

From: esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler)

On Sat, 2 Oct 1999 03:01:41, pcguido@attglobal.net wrote:

| Absotively, poso-lute-ly correct, Esther. Finally we agree! :)

              :::shock!:::

<grin>

--Esther

P.S. See... anything's possible! 


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: esther@bitranch.com                               02-Oct-99 15:15:16
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 21:37:17
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler)

On Wed, 29 Sep 1999 18:32:15, Brad BARCLAY <bbarclay@ca.ibm.com> 
wrote:

|         Still, there may be a way around both the price and the limitations
or
| any users group who has incorporated themselves.  I'm not speaking for
| IBM here, but there is *nothing* anywhere that prevents a group of
| people from incorporating themselves as a private enterprise.  A users
| group (not necesarily a formal one - perhaps just a "group of users")
| could get together and, for say $5 each incorporate themselves as a
| private, not-for-profit company, each holding a single share.  The
| "corporation" could then purchase a Software Choice subscription, and
| all of the shareholders could then have the right to download from
| Software Choice as a part of the corporation.

Brad, do you have -- or have available to you -- the full terms and 
conditions associated with the Software Choice Subscription? I'd like 
a lawyer to examine the rules before I made an authoritative statement
about the validity of your suggestion.

(I mention... merely in passing... that the Phoenix OS/2 Society has 
been incorporated as a not-for-profit corporation for over 5 years, 
and has over 500 members. It already offers its members several 
benefits... as vice president of the organization, I'm certainly in 
favor of offering _more_.)

--Esther

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: b.l.nelson@larc.nasa.gov                          02-Oct-99 11:14:15
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 21:37:17
Subj: Win 2000 burns IT managers...ZDNews

From: Bennie Nelson <b.l.nelson@larc.nasa.gov>

The article that is currently at URL

http://www5.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2346321,00.html?chkpt=hpqsnewste
st

is quite interesting.  Some key points are that:

1) Win 2000 is being called vaporware;
2) The final product won't be available this year;
3) The cost for migrating to Active Directory is estimated at $300 per user;
4) Support for many third party devices has been removed; 
5) The delays are wreaking havoc with IT Departments' budgets; 
6) Some IT shops have already spent their Win 2000 budget on NT Service Packs;
and....
7) The best point of all is that, get this (drum roll, please), 
Microsoft has overpromised and is going to underdeliver!  Imagine that.

Regards,
Bennie Nelson

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, USA (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: djohnson@isomedia.com                             02-Oct-99 08:30:27
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 21:37:17
Subj: Re: Looking for WSoD -- IBM anyone home???

From: "David T. Johnson" <djohnson@isomedia.com>

David D. Huff Jr. wrote:
> 
> I've spent a great deal of time registering for the different
> partnerships development and commercial
> and have gone through several different contacts within Lotus and IBM
> just looking to
> purchase Workspace On Demand.

Workspace on Demand is not sold as a shrink-wrapped product but is
available only through the IBM Passport Advantage service directly from
IBM representatives.  This is a typical channel for the large customers
who benefit the most from a product like this.

> 
> My last hope was IBM Direct PC Solutions. Damn, if they didn't tell me I
> had to update my
> commercial listing on the Web. My company was registered but not the
> profile. Now
> that that was done four days ago I still cannot logon to the Shopping
> Mall.
> 
> How the heck can I buy their product?
> 
> Post to the group or write me direct. I need to make some forward
> progress soon!
> 
> TIA -- Dave Huff

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               02-Oct-99 15:44:27
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 21:37:17
Subj: Re: IBM licenses SDD/2!

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Kendall Bennett wrote:
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> Today is the first day of an official agreement between IBM and
> SciTech for licensing SciTech Display Doctor for OS/2. IBM has
> licensed a special edition of our SciTech Display Doctor for OS/2
> product, to be made publicly available via their drivers online
> pages, and in upcoming fixpacks for OS/2 Warp Client, OS/2 Warp
> Server for e-Business and Workspace On Demand. In essence SciTech
> Display Doctor will become the official display driver technology
> included in all OS/2 products for IBM.
> 
> The IBM Special Edition of SciTech Display Doctor contains a subset
> of the features contained in the full product, as outlined below:
> 
>  . Resolutions of 640x480, 800x600, 1024x768, 1280x1024, 1600x1200
>  . Support for all color depths
>  . Refresh rates from 60Hz to 85Hz
>  . DDC Plug and Play monitor detection
>  . Full hardware 2D acceleration
>  . Hardware cursor
> 
> The IBM Special Edition will be made available by IBM after it passes
> IBM's acceptance requirements. More information on this announcement
> will be forthcoming when we do our official press release on the
> matter.

GREAT NEWS!  Couldn't have happened to a better company or product!

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          02-Oct-99 15:52:26
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 21:37:17
Subj: Re: I am GLAD IBM wants some money!

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>pcguido@attglobal.net
>All good points; and, it has been pointed out by one poster that the
>$200 covers a _two_ year subscription. If OS/2 isn't worth $100/yr
>to you, you've probably chosen the wrong OS anyway!

That's amusing coming from a loud-mouthed, utterly worthless
clown/hypocrite who hasn't even paid IBM $200 for the current Software
Choice offering.

Get back to us when you actually do something that isn't just mere hot
air, you completely useless fool

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: djohnson@isomedia.com                             02-Oct-99 08:57:13
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 21:37:17
Subj: Re: Win 2000 burns IT managers...ZDNews

From: "David T. Johnson" <djohnson@isomedia.com>

Bennie Nelson wrote:
> 
> The article that is currently at URL
> 
>
http://www5.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2346321,00.html?chkpt=hpqsnewste
st
> 
> is quite interesting.  Some key points are that:
> 
> 1) Win 2000 is being called vaporware;
> 2) The final product won't be available this year;
> 3) The cost for migrating to Active Directory is estimated at $300 per user;
> 4) Support for many third party devices has been removed;
> 5) The delays are wreaking havoc with IT Departments' budgets;
> 6) Some IT shops have already spent their Win 2000 budget on NT Service
Packs;
> and....
> 7) The best point of all is that, get this (drum roll, please),
> Microsoft has overpromised and is going to underdeliver!  Imagine that.

Excellent summary!  The most amazing thing is that Microsoft intends for
Windows 2000 to completely replace it's current Windows 98 and NT4
products.  When OS/2 v4 was released in September, 1996 it was easily
the best OS ever released for x86 hardware.  But I fully expected (and I
think IBM did too) that Microsoft would copy and imitate its best
features and release a new version of Windows which would surpass it. 
Microsoft has far greater resources to devote to this due to its huge
user base and unlimited budgets.  Now, it has been 3 (THREE!) years and
the best that Micrsoft seems to have come up with is Windows 2000.  Even
its name is weak.  The best thing that I can say about Windows 2000 is
that it is better than NT4.  I am absolutely stunned that Microsoft has
not yet been able blow OS/2 away.  Or Linux or BeOS or Unix either. 
OS/2 is owned by a small group in IBM with a shoestring budget and
handmedown facilities and equipment.  And it is STILL better than
anything that I can buy from Microsoft.  Microsoft has thousands of the
smartest computer science people available in the world working on
this.  What in the world are those Microsoft people DOING over there
anyway?  What does this say about Microsoft's ability to innovate and
advance the state of the art?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: esther@bitranch.com                               02-Oct-99 16:08:24
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 21:37:17
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler)

On Sat, 2 Oct 1999 11:03:57, "Quake Cheaters Clan" 
<theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:
| No commercially available on the shelf OS/2 magazines.... something I
| implied in my original posting my dear. Must the very basic points be spelt
| out for your tepid intellect to absorb?

Ah, now you're backpedaling. You said "no magazines." You didn't say, 
"full color magazines on the shelf at any newstand, with at least a 
60:40 ratio of advertising to editorial content, including advertising
from IBM and 8 other well-known hardware and software vendors, with a 
BPE report indicating that the readership is well-qualified for the 
subscription, and the magazine must also show a significant profit by 
industry standards and..."  well, maybe you get the idea.

You might have *meant* something else, but you didn't say it. I was a 
programmer long before I was a technology writer; I'm used to rigorous
text that means exactly what it says.

| You say you work in the medium of publishing?
|  
| I must assume that the readers over there must be easily pleased with drivel
| and tripe from rabid weasels?

You're resorting to insults again, instead of relying on statements of
fact. Tsk tsk, are you *that* unsure of your opinions? Your insults do
you no honor, and further reduce your credibility.

--Esther

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: KendallB@scitechsoft.com                          02-Oct-99 10:43:15
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 21:37:18
Subj: IBM licenses SDD/2!

From: KendallB@scitechsoft.com (Kendall Bennett)

Hi All,

Today is the first day of an official agreement between IBM and 
SciTech for licensing SciTech Display Doctor for OS/2. IBM has 
licensed a special edition of our SciTech Display Doctor for OS/2 
product, to be made publicly available via their drivers online 
pages, and in upcoming fixpacks for OS/2 Warp Client, OS/2 Warp 
Server for e-Business and Workspace On Demand. In essence SciTech 
Display Doctor will become the official display driver technology 
included in all OS/2 products for IBM.

The IBM Special Edition of SciTech Display Doctor contains a subset 
of the features contained in the full product, as outlined below:

 . Resolutions of 640x480, 800x600, 1024x768, 1280x1024, 1600x1200
 . Support for all color depths
 . Refresh rates from 60Hz to 85Hz
 . DDC Plug and Play monitor detection
 . Full hardware 2D acceleration
 . Hardware cursor

The IBM Special Edition will be made available by IBM after it passes 
IBM's acceptance requirements. More information on this announcement 
will be forthcoming when we do our official press release on the 
matter.

Best Regards,

-- 

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
|      SciTech Software - Building Truly Plug'n'Play Software!         |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Kendall Bennett          | To reply via email, remove nospam from    |
| Director of Engineering  | the reply to email address. Do NOT send   |
| SciTech Software, Inc.   | unsolicited commercial email!             |
| 505 Wall Street          | ftp  : ftp.scitechsoft.com                |
| Chico, CA 95928, USA     | www  : http://www.scitechsoft.com         |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: SciTech Software, Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: esther@bitranch.com                               02-Oct-99 16:10:09
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 22:25:16
Subj: Re: OS2 Newbie

From: esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler)

Welcome to OS/2 land! <warm smile>

--Esther

On Thu, 30 Sep 1999 08:56:22, vaugh82@ibm.net wrote:

| I just bought a new blue spine os2 warp 3 
| Installed it on my homemade computer 486slc 16megs
| with SB16, etc..
| I have worked deeply with Win and NT and Amiga
| And for what I do ...Its Super. I love it.
| 
| I think its the need that counts..for everyone
| IBM needs money for there Network Projects
| and so we are left behind as progress continues
| to zap into the next century.
| But, its up to programmers to help keep OS2 going
| and the cry for new apps.
| I mean 3 Operating Systems in 1
| I find all the software I need.
| New is not always so good (Bells & Whistles)
| Watch for.... Linux for Windows 2000.....
| 
| 
| Another OS2 user on board
| 
| 
| Vishanti


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: esther@bitranch.com                               02-Oct-99 16:11:28
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 22:25:16
Subj: Re: Looking for WSoD -- IBM anyone home???

From: esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler)

David,

Have you tried to purchase it through Indelible Blue? (I don't know 
for a fact that you can do so, but IB at least has earned a reputation
for giving out accurate answers.)

--Esther

On Sat, 2 Oct 1999 04:05:30, "David D. Huff Jr." <huffd@nls.net> 
wrote:

| I've spent a great deal of time registering for the different
| partnerships development and commercial
| and have gone through several different contacts within Lotus and IBM
| just looking to
| purchase Workspace On Demand.
| 
| My last hope was IBM Direct PC Solutions. Damn, if they didn't tell me I
| had to update my
| commercial listing on the Web. My company was registered but not the
| profile. Now
| that that was done four days ago I still cannot logon to the Shopping
| Mall.
| 
| How the heck can I buy their product?
| 
| Post to the group or write me direct. I need to make some forward
| progress soon!
| 
| TIA -- Dave Huff
| 
| 


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: pendrake@erols.com                                02-Oct-99 14:28:22
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 22:25:16
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: TomG <pendrake@erols.com>

Esther Schindler wrote:

> I'm also an OS/2 user who uses Macintosh, Linux, Windows, and any
> other platform that comes along. I write reviews about products that
> run on all of them, and there are things I like about each OS. OS/2
> remains my personal favorite... but it's okay with me if others have a
> different preference. (There are people who actually like white
> chocolate, after all, which is even more astonishing than a true
> affection for Windows.) For instance, I can easily understand the
> attitudes of people who prefer the Mac, as I'm rather fond of the Mac
> myself.

    Ditto!  I have 4 computers on a home network with (let's get this out of
the
way...) Winbloze98 (for games and my wife's AOL account), Linux, BeOS, and
MacOS.
Most importantly, however, I run OS/2 as my primary (i.e. most often and
enjoyably
used) operating system.  Your experience, along with mine and that of many
others,
is that *even* in regular side-by-side comparisons with other operating
systems
OS/2 fares very, very well.  In addition, with the possible exception of Linux
users, I have not found a more welcoming, helpful, and knowledgeable group of
users than OS/2 users.  And with great resources available like WarpUP!,
Hobbes
OS/2 Archive on CD, the *tons* of OS/2 related websites, and the active
developer
community (granted, it would be nice if it were larger) I don't see anything
to
whine about.
    Jerks like Quake certainly have some entertainment value but are otherwise
irrelevant (except perhaps for the FUD they can spread).


<snip>
For me personally, the "right tool" for the jobs I do most often is,
and continues to be, OS/2. It's fast, reliable, robust, consistent,does not
violate the principle of least astonishment (ie my guesses

> are generally correct, what most people call "intuitive"), and it
> treats my data as inviolate. I know and am comfortable with the OS/2
> applications I already have, and for most of them I have not found
> superior choices on other OSs.
>
> If that's a different situation for you... fine. Enjoy your chosen
> OS... but why berate me for using my power of decision to choose
> differently from you?
>
> --Esther

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     02-Oct-99 13:37:05
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 22:25:16
Subj: Re: OS/2 1.x revisited:RAM prices up, Windows2000 down

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Kelly Robinson wrote:

> Thank goodness that operating systems like Linux and BeOS use a lot less RAM
> than Windows NT (or OS/2) and do a lot more?

Yeah -- you go guy -- tell everyone buying $600 PC why they need the extra RAM
for W2K.

I was impressed you didn't use any scatological references.

[WARP 4.0's box lists an Intel 486-66 with 12-16MB or RAM minimum.  I use a
16MB, 486-66 system and a 64MB P166. ]




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: djohnson@isomedia.com                             02-Oct-99 09:40:10
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 22:25:16
Subj: Re: Hyprocrisy at its finest( Re: I am GLAD IBM wants some money!)

From: "David T. Johnson" <djohnson@isomedia.com>

David H. McCoy wrote:
> 
> In article <37F36255.E4389635@isomedia.com>, djohnson@isomedia.com says...
> >
> >
> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >>
> >> In article <37f36003.2286194@news.borg.com>, jglatt@spamgone-borg.com
says...
> >> >>David T. Johnson
> >> >>It sounds like GOOD news that IBM wants to collect $200 subscriptions
> >> >
> >> >So, when did you send your check in?
> >> >
> >>
> >> Now WHY is it that Windows is overpriced at $89 when "computer are
falling in
> >> price", but paying $200 a year for a browser and Java, things other OSses 
get
> >> for free is a good thing.
> >>
> >Hey, I can't help what Microsoft puts in in that blue Windows box.  If
> >it were up to me, I would set the price of Windows at about $1.95.  But
> >that's not including the dozens of hours that you spend with install,
> >setup, reinstall, lockup, data loss, virii, and other problems so maybe
> >Microsoft should pay each user for this.  But I would say that Windows
> >can do somewhat more than MS-DOS so you're definitely getting some
> >features.  Of course, you still need that DOS for recovery disks,
> >diagnostic disks, boot disks for some games, etc.  And your hard disk
> >will still bang away looking for those "file allocation tables" every
> >few seconds.  And there's still something like that "high" memory and
> >"low" memory stuff.
> >
> 
> Sure. But don't forget the dozens of hours spent finding OS/2-supported
> hardware,

Not true.  OS/2 does not support as much hardware as Windows but there
is still quite a bit to choose from.  You do have to be certain that you
are purchasing supported hardware.  Not a hard thing to verify, thanks
to the internet.

 getting, Win-OS/2 stuff to work,

Win-OS2 software installs on OS/2 in the same way as it does on
all-Windows.  But not that many OS/2 users are still installing this
stuff.  My experience is that Windows software tends to be the most
problematic.

 beastly installs, 

Very straightforward install as long as you have supported hardware.  

> WPS lockups, WPS
> corruptions that result in reinstallations, 

Does not happen.  Maybe in the past?...

> all to run a system with precious
> few applications.

What other operating system runs OS/2, java, X-86, EMX, DOS, Win31, and
Win32s 1.25 applications.  And they can all be launched from the desktop
and share data between them.  There are literally millions of
applications in the sum total of these groups.


> Heck, when did your IBM rebate check arrive?

Rebate?  Are you suggesting that IBM pays me?  No, IBM does not pay me. 
I just got tired of seeing the Microsoft propaganda about non-Windows
operating systems being spread through the cyber-world by Microsoft. 
Especially, considering the monopoly-driven dominance of Windows and its
serious shortcomings.  BTW, does Microsoft pay you?  


> 
> But as you say, OS/2 is a better DOS than DOS. 

I didn't say that.  Sounds like something Microsoft says with a sneer.

> Forget the fact that NO DirectX
> games needs boot disks, and that with or without boot disks, OS/2 has
> pratically NO games.

Who wants to run games on their computer, anyway.  Get a SEGA.  

> 
> And soon, add to this, you will pay for Java and Netscape, something
everyone
> else in the world gets for free.
> 
And soon, thanks to Microsoft, you will only get Internet Explorer v6
for free.  Lucky you!  Microsoft wants Java and Netscape to go away on
the Windows platform.  Don't you read the news?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com               02-Oct-99 09:54:21
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 22:25:16
Subj: Re: IBM catalog gives hint to end of fix packs

From: "Kim Cheung" <kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com>

On Sat, 2 Oct 1999 08:55:26 -0500, Kelly Robinson wrote:

>And don't forget how IBM's screwed the OS/2 community over.  I left them in
>complete disgust in February 1997 and haven't regretted it too much.

I agree and appreciate your recentment towards IBM.   It's not IBM thats
keeping OS/2 going - it IS in fact their paying customer.

Remember: you left.   I didn't.   I still have to deal with IBM.   :=)

I don't like paying more than I have to neither.   But for this particular
case, I happen to know that the Jan 2001 cut off is not as what it seems.   
Not sure what these guys have in mind after that yet.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com               02-Oct-99 09:49:13
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 22:25:16
Subj: Re: Win 2000 burns IT managers...ZDNews

From: "Kim Cheung" <kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com>

On Sat, 02 Oct 1999 08:57:26 -0400, David T. Johnson wrote:

>Microsoft has thousands of the
>smartest computer science people available in the world working on
>this.  What in the world are those Microsoft people DOING over there
>anyway?  What does this say about Microsoft's ability to innovate and
>advance the state of the art?

You ever hear the term "Cockroach Hotel"?


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com               02-Oct-99 09:57:19
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 22:25:16
Subj: Re: Things OS/2 users cannot do....

From: "Kim Cheung" <kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com>

On Sat, 02 Oct 1999 08:24:20 -0700, Daniel Jones wrote:

>I'd write more, but I'm busy planning my 4th vacation for the
>year...

That's the kind of thing an NT network administrator dreams about.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: charles.kooy@tesco.net                            02-Oct-99 16:58:02
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 22:25:16
Subj: Re: No thanks... I don't smoke.  

From: charles.kooy@tesco.net (Charles Kooy)

Anthony Ord <nws@rollingthunder.clara.co.uk> wrote:

> On Fri, 1 Oct 1999 00:28:30 +0100, charles.kooy@tesco.net (Charles Kooy)
> wrote:
> 
> >Anthony Ord <nws@rollingthunder.clara.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> >btw, I believe the French call the Brits 'Le Rosbief'. This is because
> >> >the English eat little other than roast beef..
> >> 
> >> They're out of date. Maybe they should try "Le Curry tres chaud" or "Le
> Kebab
> >> apres dix litres des bierre."
> >Funny you should mention that - I've just been down to Brick Lane, aka
> >'the home of curry' in London and had something called a 'Phal'
> 
> Oh my.
> 
> > It was a
> >mistake. A really, really big mistake.
> 
> You bet your arse it was. Pun not intended.
> 
> >I'll pay for it tommorow, and several mornings afterwards, speaking from
> >experience ;)
> 
> Well at least it's the weekend - less people will be forced to suffer.
Groan! I guess that's what they mean by 'the pleasure/pein principle'.
It was worth it, but I think for the next few visits I'll have to got
for Tikka Masala, or just plain Tikka.

If you're ever there try Cafe Bangla. Wonderfully tacky decor, and
fantastic food!

ck

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Tesco ISP (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: kahnt@adan.kingston.net                           02-Oct-99 17:17:03
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 22:25:16
Subj: Re: FP12:  A Piece Of Cake!

From: "Mark L. Kahnt" <kahnt@adan.kingston.net>

Jim Stuyck wrote:
> 
> "Mark L. Kahnt" wrote:
> 
> > Frank McKenney wrote:
> > >
> > > In <37F4306B.4315DA13@adan.kingston.net>, "Mark L. Kahnt"
<kahnt@adan.kingston.net> writes:
> > > >Frank McKenney wrote:
> >
> > [***SNIP!!!***]
> >
> > >
> > > Well, now that you mention it...
> > >
> > > Back in the mid-70s a professor at Princeton developed a method for
> > > reproducing semi-photograph-quality graphic output from a 1403 line
> > > printer (for the younger readers, that's one of those heavy-duty boxes
> > > attached to an IBM mainframe that will, on occasion, suck up and spit
> > > out a full box of 14"-wide paper in seconds (;-)).
> 
> Sounds like someone forgot to punch a hole in his carriage control
> tape, or screwed up gluing it together and it came apart!  ;-)
> (I go waaaay back, too.  Been there, done that.)
> 
> > I remember those - in fact, I've seen a program that could take images
> > in a couple of different formats (seems to me they were pcx and
> > MacPaint), and convert them to text images. And I remember full well the
> > 1403 and related line printers - faster than your average laser printer
> > at pumping out pages of stuff.
> 
> No 1403-N1 could (or can) hold a candle to, say, an IBM 3800 which is
> a laser machine that uses cut paper, unlike the fanfold of the 1403.  And
> the 3800 has been around for a looooong time.
> 
> Where have you been?  ;-)
> 
> Jim Stuyck

Sorry - meant the everyday SOHO laser printers. Mind you, I think the
3800 was after my experiences with the 1403. I do remember a non-IBM
printer called a Photon, which used lenses, daisy wheels and toner to
produce scalable fonts and xerographic printing, and the first
legitimate laser printers I dealt with were the Imagen and the early
Xerox products - both of which tended to run at 4 or so ppm if lucky.

But I've seen what you refer to: laser printers that run at a speed that
to the eye approaches that of a printing press. I have also seen the
invoice for that type of printer - outta my budget! ;)
-- 

============================================================
To respond via e-mail - remove the "go-away-spammers"
portion of the Reply to: value.

Mark L. Kahnt, C.P. Box 1263, Kingston, Ontario   K7L 4Y8
Voix:        (613) 531-8767   Cellulaire: (613) 539-0935
Telecopieur: (613) 531-8684   Email: kahnt@adan.kingston.net

References to "spam" in the above post refer to any of numerous
abuse of the Internet to repeatedly place off-topic messages in
inappropriate or unauthorised locations. The term should in no
way be construed as involving the products of Hormel Foods
Corporation.

Further, the use of the term "spam" should in no way be construed
to imply the support or involvement of Hormel Foods in conjunction
with such Internet abuse. Indeed, Hormel has publicly expressed
its disapproval of such actions.

SPAM  is a registered trademark of Hormel Foods for luncheon meat 
and is a damn fine product at that. The author of this signature
attachment has no legal, commercial or financial involvement with 
Hormel; rather, is active in the fields of copyright, trademark,
and Internet abuse analysis.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: M.L. Kahnt New Markets Consulting (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@emily.oit.umass.edu                      02-Oct-99 15:35:25
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 22:25:16
Subj: Re: What are you all complaining about?  It makes no sense!

From: Jason <malstrom@emily.oit.umass.edu>

Kelly Robinson <ispy@groovyshow.com> wrote:
: Hey, when IBM first decided to port Netscape 4.06 to OS/2, they were intent
: on charging $60 (plus a whopping $15 for shipping and handling - that's $3
: for shipping, $12 for a small well-deserved profit).

This is a constant lie by you David, which you have never been able to 
verify.  Please take your lies and leave this newsgroup.  The only person 
to ever mention it was you, and when ever anyone asked for any evidence, 
you would run and hide.

-Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               02-Oct-99 16:14:18
  To: All                                               02-Oct-99 22:25:16
Subj: Re: Latest attack by Tim Marting 

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Well, I never wanted to be in a position of defending TM.  In general I
try to not see conspiracy under every rock and around every corner. 
Reading his article didn't give me the impression that he was blasting
Adrian, just offering some "paternalistic advice."

I don't think even he believes that if Netlabs went down, he'd be able
to pick up the slack.  I don't think Tim's opinion could really do any
damage to an established pro-OS/2 group anyway.

- Marty

"M.P. van Dobben de Bruijn" wrote:
> 
> > Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> > I don't think he was criticizing Adrian.  I think he was mentioning that
> > anyone who has clout in the OS/2 community who speaks to the press
> > has to be <very> careful with what they are saying.  Certainly it isn't
> > right how he was quoted, nor is it his fault, but if he had phrased
> > things differently the quote would not have been published as such.
> 
> Quote from Tim's Post we are now talking about:
> 
>         BUT, like Adrian, they are more interested in gaining attention
>         for their site/piece/article and that seems to come first and
>         consequences second.
> 
> If one should not read that as criicizing Adrian (be it in or out of the
con-
> text of the post where he condemns this behavior of the press) my under-
> standing of English must be at fault. Remember this is quite a few days af-
> ter Tim and Adrian had a conversation and "cleared" things up on Tim's
> first piece about Adrian. Now he criticizes him again, if that is not a
clear
> attempt to bring down Adrian's and OS/2 Netlabs standing (I suppose he
> thinks that WC will then be the benefitting runner-up, ha long shot) what
is?
> 
> Look at his original post again (the one where he and Adrian had to talk
> about AFTER he did it instead that he called Adrian BEFORE). He is doing
> exactly the same in that post only to claim that he did it on purpose to
prove
> the risks AFTER others had started protesting. In the mean time he had put
> the door wide open for reporters to say to Adrian "See, <g> your own TM read
> it the same way we did". Effectively killing all possible complaints of
Adrian in
> the process of smearing Adrian and Netlabs.
> 
> For your convenience I will quote the relevant part of the post with which
Tim
> started that thread on 22 Sep under the title: OS2NetLabs Head: "OS/2 is
Dead"
> 
>         The most disappointing quote of the entire interview comes
>         from the chief banana over at OS/2 NetLabs.  He is quoted
>         as saying ""OS/2 is dead. Once again. Definitely this time," said
>         Adrian Geschwind, "
> 
>         Any comment on this Adrian?
> 
> Look at the eye-catching title. Look at the post. It starts of with 2/3 of
> the post attacking and referencing Brad Wardell and then at the end
> attacking "the chief banana" Those words chosen are prove enough for
> me that he was out defaming Adrian and Netlabs.
> 
> The "I did it (meaning: leaving out the rest of the words of Adrian -
MPvDdB)
> on purpose to prove a point (meaning the danger of opening the door to short
> quoting - MPvDdB)" was just a convenient way out. After it was pointed out
to
> him he did not do his homework, did not check the whole story, did not do
the
> correct attributions. At least he is consistent at that. He is consistent in 
other things
> too. Anyone who he regards as a threat to the "position" as a "leader of the 
OS/2
> community" which he thinks is his and his alone will come in his fire-line
some day.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: News@The-Net-4U.com                               02-Oct-99 19:29:14
  To: All                                               03-Oct-99 03:16:06
Subj: Re: IBM catalog gives hint to end of fix packs

From: News@The-Net-4U.com (M.P. van Dobben de Bruijn)

> "Kelly Robinson" <ispy@groovyshow.com> wrote:

> And don't forget how IBM's screwed the OS/2 community over. 
> I left them in complete disgust in February 1997 and haven't re-
> gretted it too much.

Nonsense. Of course you regret it very much Your constant (s)trolling 
through to this neighbourhood proves that you cannot let it go. Get help!

Regards from Leeuwarden
Peter van Dobben de Bruijn
---
usethenet.at.the-net-4u.com (at becomes @)
----

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TeleKabel (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: News@The-Net-4U.com                               02-Oct-99 19:29:13
  To: All                                               03-Oct-99 03:16:06
Subj: Re: And we thought it couldn't get any worse?!

From: News@The-Net-4U.com (M.P. van Dobben de Bruijn)

 
> In Europe... well, isn't Mensys still around?
 
Yes they are www.mensys.nl. However this is
essentially paper- / creditcard work. So I guess
one could order it IB from anywhere. By the way
I don't think we are entitled to SW Choice in Euro-
pe at all, if I read the licenses on the site thsi is legal
available in the USA / Canada and a limited set of Aisan
countries etc. Could not find Europe in the list <VBG>.

Regards from Leeuwarden
Peter van Dobben de Bruijn
---
usethenet.at.the-net-4u.com (at becomes @)
----

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TeleKabel (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: philbike@my-deja.com                              02-Oct-99 23:32:03
  To: All                                               03-Oct-99 03:16:06
Subj: pinball.sys BROKEN by SP5??

From: philbike@my-deja.com

So with Service Pack 5 have Microsoft BROKEN the NT 3.51 pinball.sys
device drive used to install HPFS???

Oh SHIT!

Not really shit as of course, I've got everything backed up ;)

I mean oh darn.  If I can't access my large HPFS partitions in NT is
there any way to access NTFS partitions in OS/2?   (though I cringe at
the crappy NTFS performance)


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com               02-Oct-99 13:15:08
  To: All                                               03-Oct-99 03:16:07
Subj: Re: Looking for WSoD -- IBM anyone home???

From: "Kim Cheung" <kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com>

On 2 Oct 1999 16:11:57 GMT, Esther Schindler wrote:

>David,
>
>Have you tried to purchase it through Indelible Blue? (I don't know 
>for a fact that you can do so, but IB at least has earned a reputation
>for giving out accurate answers.)
>

***** Not intended as a commercial message *****
Before you ACTUALLY buy WSOD, I would highly recommend you somehow try it
first.   I hate to see people walk away as a bitter user from this wonderful
technology.   See if the owner of that product will help you when you can't
get it working.  If you're happy with their performance, by all means:
there's wonderful technology underneath.
***** End of not intended as a commercial message *****





--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com               02-Oct-99 13:21:01
  To: All                                               03-Oct-99 03:16:07
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: "Kim Cheung" <kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com>

On 2 Oct 1999 15:15:33 GMT, Esther Schindler wrote:

>On Wed, 29 Sep 1999 18:32:15, Brad BARCLAY <bbarclay@ca.ibm.com> 
>wrote:
>
>|         Still, there may be a way around both the price and the limitations 
or
>| any users group who has incorporated themselves.  I'm not speaking for
>| IBM here, but there is *nothing* anywhere that prevents a group of
>| people from incorporating themselves as a private enterprise.  A users
>| group (not necesarily a formal one - perhaps just a "group of users")
>| could get together and, for say $5 each incorporate themselves as a
>| private, not-for-profit company, each holding a single share.  The
>| "corporation" could then purchase a Software Choice subscription, and
>| all of the shareholders could then have the right to download from
>| Software Choice as a part of the corporation.
>
>Brad, do you have -- or have available to you -- the full terms and 
>conditions associated with the Software Choice Subscription? I'd like 
>a lawyer to examine the rules before I made an authoritative statement
>about the validity of your suggestion.
>
>(I mention... merely in passing... that the Phoenix OS/2 Society has 
>been incorporated as a not-for-profit corporation for over 5 years, 
>and has over 500 members. It already offers its members several 
>benefits... as vice president of the organization, I'm certainly in 
>favor of offering _more_.)
>

I concur with Brad's view.    There is NOTHING to say that a "not-for-profit"
corporation is not an enterprise.    The only issue - minor, so I say - is
the COMMITMENT level.   That's the real issue.    With a low commitment
level, your pricing is not going to be any different from an individual
subscription.   If that were the case, then why take the exposure?   On the
other hand, IBM ALSO did something that's quite stupid: they included WsEB
under the Passport umbrella.    It's obvious that in their view, NOBODY on
the outside world would be dumb enough to buy Aurora.    I can never
understand these people.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com               02-Oct-99 13:25:04
  To: All                                               03-Oct-99 03:16:07
Subj: Re: Time to move on (to Software Choice

From: "Kim Cheung" <kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com>

On Sat, 2 Oct 1999 11:57:16 +0100, Quake Cheaters Clan wrote:

>It interesting to see the number of little worms that come to the surface
>when the rain of truth comes down upon the soil of misguided loyalty.
>
>QCC

Watch out - you will get an Oxford English Dictionary definition of "worm" in
reply.   That's the only level they understand.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     02-Oct-99 13:50:29
  To: All                                               03-Oct-99 03:16:07
Subj: Re: What are you all complaining about?  It makes no sense!

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>

Hey, when MS was first going to ship IE they wanted to charge $500 for it and
$25 for shipping.  I called them up and said, "Hey you guys are gong to make
some Windows luniatics really mad.  Give it away -- add it to the operating
system."  They said "Okay, but that might get us into a lawsuit". I said "So
what?!"  The rest is history.

If you believe me than I'll believe you.

Kelly Robinson wrote:

> Hey, when IBM first decided to port Netscape 4.06 to OS/2, they were intent
> on charging $60 (plus a whopping $15 for shipping and handling - that's $3
> for shipping, $12 for a small well-deserved profit).
>
> IBM later changed its mind and offered to give it away, provided that you
> still order it and pay $15 for shipping and profit.
>
> But, as with everything else regarding OS/2, IBM's done a complete 180
> degree turn and offered no explaination.
>
> I feel sorry for you people, having to deal with pompous crusty fossil
> dipshits like IBM...
>
> Since John W Thompson has left, has OS/2 gotten any better or had he done
> too much damage so OS/2 will never recover?
>
> Just curious.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     02-Oct-99 13:52:23
  To: All                                               03-Oct-99 03:16:07
Subj: Re: An American Thing?

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Kelly Robinson wrote:

> IBM markets a product as 32-bit.

MS markets DOS 7.0 and Windows 4.0 as a 32-bit product called Windows95.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: kahnt@adan.kingston.net                           02-Oct-99 17:17:17
  To: All                                               03-Oct-99 03:16:07
Subj: Re: FP12:  A Piece Of Cake!

From: "Mark L. Kahnt" <kahnt@adan.kingston.net>

Jim Stuyck wrote:
> 
> "Mark L. Kahnt" wrote:
> 
> > Frank McKenney wrote:
> > >
> > > In <37F4306B.4315DA13@adan.kingston.net>, "Mark L. Kahnt"
<kahnt@adan.kingston.net> writes:
> > > >Frank McKenney wrote:
> >
> > [***SNIP!!!***]
> >
> > >
> > > Well, now that you mention it...
> > >
> > > Back in the mid-70s a professor at Princeton developed a method for
> > > reproducing semi-photograph-quality graphic output from a 1403 line
> > > printer (for the younger readers, that's one of those heavy-duty boxes
> > > attached to an IBM mainframe that will, on occasion, suck up and spit
> > > out a full box of 14"-wide paper in seconds (;-)).
> 
> Sounds like someone forgot to punch a hole in his carriage control
> tape, or screwed up gluing it together and it came apart!  ;-)
> (I go waaaay back, too.  Been there, done that.)
> 
> > I remember those - in fact, I've seen a program that could take images
> > in a couple of different formats (seems to me they were pcx and
> > MacPaint), and convert them to text images. And I remember full well the
> > 1403 and related line printers - faster than your average laser printer
> > at pumping out pages of stuff.
> 
> No 1403-N1 could (or can) hold a candle to, say, an IBM 3800 which is
> a laser machine that uses cut paper, unlike the fanfold of the 1403.  And
> the 3800 has been around for a looooong time.
> 
> Where have you been?  ;-)
> 
> Jim Stuyck

Sorry - meant the everyday SOHO laser printers. Mind you, I think the
3800 was after my experiences with the 1403. I do remember a non-IBM
printer called a Photon, which used lenses, daisy wheels and toner to
produce scalable fonts and xerographic printing, and the first
legitimate laser printers I dealt with were the Imagen and the early
Xerox products - both of which tended to run at 4 or so ppm if lucky.

But I've seen what you refer to: laser printers that run at a speed that
to the eye approaches that of a printing press. I have also seen the
invoice for that type of printer - outta my budget! ;)
-- 

============================================================
To respond via e-mail - remove the "go-away-spammers"
portion of the Reply to: value.

Mark L. Kahnt, C.P. Box 1263, Kingston, Ontario   K7L 4Y8
Voix:        (613) 531-8767   Cellulaire: (613) 539-0935
Telecopieur: (613) 531-8684   Email: kahnt@adan.kingston.net

References to "spam" in the above post refer to any of numerous
abuse of the Internet to repeatedly place off-topic messages in
inappropriate or unauthorised locations. The term should in no
way be construed as involving the products of Hormel Foods
Corporation.

Further, the use of the term "spam" should in no way be construed
to imply the support or involvement of Hormel Foods in conjunction
with such Internet abuse. Indeed, Hormel has publicly expressed
its disapproval of such actions.

SPAM  is a registered trademark of Hormel Foods for luncheon meat 
and is a damn fine product at that. The author of this signature
attachment has no legal, commercial or financial involvement with 
Hormel; rather, is active in the fields of copyright, trademark,
and Internet abuse analysis.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: M.L. Kahnt New Markets Consulting (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: News@The-Net-4U.com                               03-Oct-99 03:17:09
  To: All                                               03-Oct-99 03:16:07
Subj: Re: Latest attack by Tim Marting 

From: News@The-Net-4U.com (M.P. van Dobben de Bruijn)

> Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:

> Well, I never wanted to be in a position of defending TM.  In general I
> try to not see conspiracy under every rock and around every corner. 
> Reading his article didn't give me the impression that he was blasting
> Adrian, just offering some "paternalistic advice."

I do not see a conspiracy either, <g> not in normal cirucmstances under
every rock or around every corner. I even do not see a conspiracy by
Tim as he a loner, so rather difficult to conspire I think. Eh ... others will
most probably come up with this multiple personalities to conspire with.

Bu I definitively think he has an agenda and the wording "banana" fitted.
 
> I don't think even he believes that if Netlabs went down, he'd be able
> to pick up the slack.  I don't think Tim's opinion could really do any
> damage to an established pro-OS/2 group anyway.

In many instances Tim's "opinion" is a piece of self-serving bullshit.
However,
even he in some cases is right. If he could only improve the ratio <g>. As 
well as ending his attacking people personally .. Ah well let's leave it at
that.

Sure hope that everybody understands that OS/2 Netlabs is by far, far
more important for the OS/2 user-community and OS/2 than TM and WC.

Regards from Leeuwarden
Peter van Dobben de Bruijn
---
usethenet.at.the-net-4u.com (at becomes @)
----

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TeleKabel (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: christian.g@ibm.net                               02-Oct-99 18:09:09
  To: All                                               03-Oct-99 03:16:07
Subj: Re: IBM Speaks

From: "Christian Gustafson" <christian.g@ibm.net>

Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:37F640CA.67C73AD9@ibm.net...
>
>
> Kelly Robinson wrote:
>
> > Whoa!  IBM is finally barking up a different tree?
> >
> > And when will IBM finally start doing what it has been saying about
> > supporting OS/2?
>
> Sortt of like asking "When will you stop beating your dog?"
>
> > And let's say I become a full-time Linux user, I'd rather not have IBM
> > making a presence and uriniating all over it.
>
> The words a man uses define him.

Hardly -- his actions do.  Talk is cheap.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: forgitaboutit@fake.com                            02-Oct-99 19:52:07
  To: All                                               03-Oct-99 03:16:07
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com>

In article <37F510C5.E0CF59B8@NOSPAMus.ibm.com>, jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com 
says...
>
>"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
>> Well, once again, OS/2 is late to the party.
>
>It's a PORT.  Of an existing product.  When 4.61 for OS/2 was
>shipped, 4.61 was the current version on Windows.  How could
>the OS/2 version be at the 4.7 level when 4.7 hadn't been done
>yet?!?
>
>Sheesh.
>
>Jeffrey S. Kobal
>IBM Corporation
>
>
>

Seems that no problem was made releasing an Unix and Mac version or did this 
not occur to you.

Sheesh.

-- 
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: esther@bitranch.com                               03-Oct-99 00:55:18
  To: All                                               03-Oct-99 05:13:17
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler)

On Sat, 2 Oct 1999 13:21:02, "Kim Cheung" 
<kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com> wrote:
| I concur with Brad's view.    There is NOTHING to say that a
"not-for-profit"
| corporation is not an enterprise.    The only issue - minor, so I say - is
| the COMMITMENT level.   That's the real issue.    With a low commitment
| level, your pricing is not going to be any different from an individual
| subscription.   If that were the case, then why take the exposure? 

But we won't know unless we try, will we?

I have no idea how many members would take advantage of a 
reduced-price subscription to Software Choice. It would, however, be a
heck of a membership incentive!

--Esther

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: baden@unixg.ubc.ca                                03-Oct-99 01:55:28
  To: All                                               03-Oct-99 05:13:17
Subj: Re: My god, somebody woke up!

From: baden@unixg.ubc.ca   (Baden Kudrenecky)

In <7t3cld$1ndb@enews3.newsguy.com>, "Kelly Robinson" <ispy@groovyshow.com>
writes:
>> I don't like what IBM's doing with the SWChoice subscription requirement
>> any more than the next person.  However, doesn't this feel like
>> "consumer harm" to you?
>
>Jesus fucking christ, I've said that for years and I was labeled "Microsoft
>licker" or whatever!!!
>
>It's not just harm IBM has done toward its own userbase, it's also
>exploitation (the only thing of value for 101.2% of OS/2 users is the 32-bit
>IP protocol update - which should be free since OS/2 is marketed as 32-bit,
>yet the IP protocol in warp 4 is 16-bit.  That's exploitation and a
>confirmation to misadvertising.)

   Evidently your knowledge reflects your eloquence, as IBM has
released free 32 bit IP stacks since 8421.  And even though they
stated that FP_40 would be the last public fixpack for 3.0, I
downloaded FP_42 the other day.

baden

baden@unixg.ubc.ca
http://baden.nu/
OS/2, Solaris & Linux

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: @Home Network Canada (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com               02-Oct-99 21:25:09
  To: All                                               03-Oct-99 10:24:09
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: "Kim Cheung" <kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com>

On 3 Oct 1999 00:55:37 GMT, Esther Schindler wrote:

>On Sat, 2 Oct 1999 13:21:02, "Kim Cheung" 
><kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com> wrote:
>| I concur with Brad's view.    There is NOTHING to say that a
"not-for-profit"
>| corporation is not an enterprise.    The only issue - minor, so I say - is
>| the COMMITMENT level.   That's the real issue.    With a low commitment
>| level, your pricing is not going to be any different from an individual
>| subscription.   If that were the case, then why take the exposure? 
>
>But we won't know unless we try, will we?
>

It's certainly worth pursuing.    Be warn that when it come to business,
certain people at IBM is very serious.   The "COMMITMENT level" is something
to think about.   I have access to  plenty copies of Aurora because of this
"COMMITMENT level"   (grin!)

After WarpStock, may be Serenity might be able to do something, I don't know.
  We are a "VAR OEM" - not "OEM".   We don't offer product on an "as is"
format - there must be "value" added on top of IBM software before we can
turn around and sell it.   I don't know that we can "resell" software choice
- or whether we can "assist" POSSI to get it: it all depends on what Austin
have in mind.

>I have no idea how many members would take advantage of a 
>reduced-price subscription to Software Choice. It would, however, be a
>heck of a membership incentive!
>

If we can convince Austin to do it, that would be a great way of solving the
problem.   Of course.......

>--Esther



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     02-Oct-99 22:52:14
  To: All                                               03-Oct-99 10:24:09
Subj: Re: IBM Speaks

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Christian Gustafson wrote:

> Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:37F640CA.67C73AD9@ibm.net...
> >
> >
> > Kelly Robinson wrote:
> >
> > > Whoa!  IBM is finally barking up a different tree?
> > >
> > > And when will IBM finally start doing what it has been saying about
> > > supporting OS/2?
> >
> > Sortt of like asking "When will you stop beating your dog?"
> >
> > > And let's say I become a full-time Linux user, I'd rather not have IBM
> > > making a presence and uriniating all over it.
> >
> > The words a man uses define him.
>
> Hardly -- his actions do.  Talk is cheap.

Use the word "urinating" in a business conversation.  When others object to
the baby talk and ask you to leave, tell them your actions, not your words
matter.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ispy@groovyshow.com                               03-Oct-99 00:24:00
  To: All                                               03-Oct-99 10:24:09
Subj: Re: Win 2000 burns IT managers...ZDNews

From: "Kelly Robinson" <ispy@groovyshow.com>

You'll probably be surprised by what I have to say:

Bennie Nelson <b.l.nelson@larc.nasa.gov> wrote in message
news:37F62156.8B5960A0@larc.nasa.gov...
> The article that is currently at URL
>
>
http://www5.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2346321,00.html?chkpt=hpqsnew
stest
>
> is quite interesting.  Some key points are that:
>
> 1) Win 2000 is being called vaporware;

True.  And when it comes out, "Megabloat" will replace "vapor".
Fortunately, CrapOS X (workstation ed) is still 6 months away, provided it
doesn't get delayed further.  (for some sickening reason, I prefer Win2000
over anything Apple can blow out of its nose.)

> 2) The final product won't be available this year;

Quite.  Every month MS will say "It'll be out next month!"  Sodding
Microsoft, eventually IT managers will stick to what they've got and count
blessings or spend thousands more and migrate to another OS (evn migrating
to Linux is going to be very costly despite the 'freeness' of it all.)

> 3) The cost for migrating to Active Directory is estimated at $300 per
user;

Yeah but if users migrate to a new platform, you still need to pay
*something* (even the bloody CD media) for the new OS and don't forget shiny
new apps.  It's more likely that people will say "Piss on all of you!" and
stick to what they currently have and save even more money.

> 4) Support for many third party devices has been removed;

And I thought that the point of win2000 was to increase support... oh well,
whose business is microsoft trying to give up?  Everybody's, it seems.  Of
course, Win2000 might be trying to look like OS/2 - in which case having as
few compatible devices and as few properly written drivers as possible will
help.  :-)

> 5) The delays are wreaking havoc with IT Departments' budgets;

My god, a business wants to use a new x.00 OS version the day it comes out?
Jeez, are there any better ways to beg for bankruptcy?!?!  Let them go under
if they are going to be this stupid!

> 6) Some IT shops have already spent their Win 2000 budget on NT Service
Packs;
> and....

Huh?  They're free for free download.  Or $10 or whatever for a CD.  If
these shops don't know what "download" means, then they can go under.

> 7) The best point of all is that, get this (drum roll, please),
> Microsoft has overpromised and is going to underdeliver!  Imagine that.

What a first... but it hasn't stopped them before and, if you haven't
noticed, Apple and IBM often do the same thing.  You're just blind to it
because you have a single unified allegience to OS/2.  I can't blame you for
feeling that way nor would I attack you because you feel that way.
Certainly not under these prevailing circumstances.  Linux people are the
same to their platform (only they're more like nazis than anything else),
BeOS to their own, Crapintosh to theirs (these people are almost as bad as
the Linux lot.  Except the linux users have quite a few more brain cells and
don't have a leader who is an outright thief and swindler), and so on.

> Regards,
> Bennie Nelson


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: http://extra.newsguy.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bs976@freenet.toronto.on.ca                       02-Oct-99 19:07:17
  To: All                                               03-Oct-99 19:48:20
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: bs976@freenet.toronto.on.ca

In <7t4or9$m5m$1@newsreader2.core.theplanet.net>, "Quake Cheaters Clan"
<theqcc@hotmail.com> writes:

>I must assume that the readers over there must be easily pleased with drivel
>and tripe from rabid weasels?

No I am not easily pleased.  Keep your drivel and tripe to yourself.  
I love it when people offer the insult themselves; but in your case it
might be an honor to be called a rabid weasel.

-------
"The law may permit what honor does not."
--Deacon
-------

Michael

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: netINS, Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: chris_in_caro@centurytel.net                      03-Oct-99 17:52:13
  To: All                                               03-Oct-99 19:48:20
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: chris smith <chris_in_caro@centurytel.net>

i'll think about that the next time microsloth posts the next "security fix,"
or
leaves everyone's hotmail account open.

of course, nt wasn't good enough to host all of hotmail anyway.

c

Quake Cheaters Clan wrote:

> Annie K. <piquant00@uswestmail.net> wrote in message
>
> >  Don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out.
> >
> > --
> > Anthropomorphic Hamburger
>
> Or that IBM boot kick you in the privates as you bend down to kiss their ass
>
> QCC

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: CENTURYinter.net (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: rsstan@ibm.net                                    03-Oct-99 07:40:22
  To: All                                               03-Oct-99 21:38:24
Subj: Re: pinball.sys BROKEN by SP5??

From: "Bob Stan" <rsstan@ibm.net>

On Sat, 02 Oct 1999 23:32:06 GMT, philbike@my-deja.com wrote:

>So with Service Pack 5 have Microsoft BROKEN the NT 3.51 pinball.sys
>device drive used to install HPFS???
I used NT SP5 and pinball.sys with no problems.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: wsonna@ibm.net                                    03-Oct-99 13:46:12
  To: All                                               03-Oct-99 21:38:24
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: wsonna@ibm.net (William Sonna)

On Sat, 2 Oct 1999 23:52:15, David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> 
wrote:

> In article <37F510C5.E0CF59B8@NOSPAMus.ibm.com>, jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com 
> says...
> >
> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >
> >> Well, once again, OS/2 is late to the party.
> >
> >It's a PORT.  Of an existing product.  When 4.61 for OS/2 was
> >shipped, 4.61 was the current version on Windows.  How could
> >the OS/2 version be at the 4.7 level when 4.7 hadn't been done
> >yet?!?
> >
> >Sheesh.
> >
> >Jeffrey S. Kobal
> >IBM Corporation
> >
> >
> >
> 
> Seems that no problem was made releasing an Unix and Mac version or did this 

> not occur to you.
> 
> Sheesh.
> 
> -- 
> ---------------------------------------
> David H. McCoy
> dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
> ---------------------------------------

David - Instead of trolling this to death, why don't  tell us just 
what, exactly Navigator 4.7 does that makes it such a important 
upgrade and worthy of a discussion in an OS/2 newsgroup?

You seem genuinely excited by this release, and having used the 
program I really can't understand what the fuss is about.  So please 
tell me:    What does 4.7 do that 4.6 doesn't do?  And why does it 
matter?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: centus@coqui.net                                  03-Oct-99 14:35:17
  To: All                                               03-Oct-99 21:38:24
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: centus@coqui.net

On Thu, 30 Sep 1999 01:12:26, David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> 
wrote:

Well, once again, some Winblows fan try to trash our confidence, and 
confort with our OS.  
The above argument is so foolish, I dont even know why I am wasting 
time replying.  

Sir, we *know* that latest releases of applicatios which primary 
target is Winblows platform, take time 
to be available in native OS/2.  We are used to wait and use (in the 
interin) whatever could be used to complete our work. 
Your point about NS 4.7 is useless and FOOLISH!.

We use OS/2 and will continue to do so for a long time (IMO).  and 
besides, Why did'nt you discuss IBM licensing SDD
Device Display drivers which will be available for FREE to OS/2 
users?.

I have an ATI RAGE FURY 128 (AGP) which ATI make's NO OS/2 drivers for
it.  I installed SDD beta7 and it works nicely.
I wonder what other persons with (until now) unsupported video card 
will think when they know of this NEWS.

So, please stop posting your negative FUD about OS/2 and try to make 
OBJETIVE arguments here, or better leave to Winblows groups.

What makes persons like you so bad about OS/2?.  You don't use it, 
goto Winblows groups and get along with them.

Prof. Edfel J. Rivera


> Well, once again, OS/2 is late to the party. Which brave person will be the 
> first to step up and proudly shout how Netscape 4.61 "does everything they 
> need", and how you don't need any "bloated" features?
> 
> Of course, the same thing was said about 4.61, when 4.04 was out.
> And 4.04 when 2.02 was out.
> 
> I imagine, many won't need anything in 4.7 until its available for release, 
> right. Of course, by the time that happens, it will cost you $200.
> 
> But what the heck? In this time of declining hardware prices, why not pay
$200 
> for something that others get for free and isn't guaranteed to actually
ship.
> 
> 
> -- 
> ---------------------------------------
> David H. McCoy
> dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
> ---------------------------------------


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com               03-Oct-99 13:20:28
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:07
Subj: Re: OS/2 Executive leaves for Sun

From: "Kim Cheung" <kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com>

On Fri, 01 Oct 1999 17:52:29 +1200, Craig Benbow wrote:

>You know what it looks like to me?
>Upper management hog tying the lower management on certain product streams
eg.
>OS/2
>

No, we should pull out the champaign on that one - of course, we just signed
on as a Sun developer (grin)!!!

Don't mean that the replacement will fair any better - but there is always
hope.

>Craig



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: dpeterso@halcyon.com                              04-Oct-99 16:10:19
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:07
Subj: Re: Latest attack by Tim Marting 

From: Dennis Peterson <dpeterso@halcyon.com>

"M.P. van Dobben de Bruijn" wrote:
> 

[snip]

> 
> In many instances Tim's "opinion" is a piece of self-serving bullshit.
However,
> even he in some cases is right. If he could only improve the ratio <g>. As
> well as ending his attacking people personally .. Ah well let's leave it at
that.

You've nailed it rather well. Tim's got the passion for OS/2 and that
isn't a bad thing. What he does that works against him is to alienate a
significant part of the group he should consider his peers with his
ranting and raving about Stardock and anyone he perceives as having an
interest outside of OS/2. Hell, even IBM has an interest outside of
OS/2. Tim's best course of action is to accept the reality that there is
a need for ISV's to make money any way they can and to enjoy the fact
that some of them even make OS/2 products. What is totally illogical is
his diatribes against Stardock for making Windows products while at the
same time applauding the folks who make his favorite Java email client
but who also make Windows products in order to keep the doors open (to
name just one such example of many). These inconsistencies will continue
to deny him credibility for as long as they exist. It's too bad because
it will also deny him a lot of enjoyment that comes with pursuing one's
passion.

> 
> Sure hope that everybody understands that OS/2 Netlabs is by far, far
> more important for the OS/2 user-community and OS/2 than TM and WC.
> 
> Regards from Leeuwarden
> Peter van Dobben de Bruijn
> ---
> usethenet.at.the-net-4u.com (at becomes @)
> ----


-- 
dp

                 Support Eddie Kieger III at http://eddiekieger.com
                 Got a home page? Please add a link to Eddie's site!

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: I'm not organized at all (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: gmezero@gz.bomb.com                               03-Oct-99 16:44:15
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:07
Subj: Re: Win 2000 burns IT managers...ZDNews

From: gmezero@gz.bomb.com (Bryan aka R.I.P.)

>> 5) The delays are wreaking havoc with IT Departments' budgets;
>
>My god, a business wants to use a new x.00 OS version the day it comes out?
>Jeez, are there any better ways to beg for bankruptcy?!?!  Let them go under
>if they are going to be this stupid!
>
>> 6) Some IT shops have already spent their Win 2000 budget on NT Service
>Packs;
>> and....
>
>Huh?  They're free for free download.  Or $10 or whatever for a CD.  If
>these shops don't know what "download" means, then they can go under.

No, no... you don't understand. The problem not a puchasing cost for Service
Pack media, but a man-hour/hardware-upgrade/software-rewrite cost to have
someone
install a service pack, fix the machine when/if it fails from the
service-pack, and
then the person may need to upgrade hardware, and or re-write software on that
server to accomodate new features introduced in the Service Pack at the
demands
of management. Don't forget, eventhough MS says SP4 is supposed to be
"The Y2K fix for NT" most people I know are hedging their bets and installing
the
latest Service Packs they can find. Oh, and you ask, why did we bother to
install
that service pack? Well, it's supposed to fix some blah...blah problem that
you've
been experiencing every other day, or give you some new feature that
management
swears you need, or your an MS shop, and you just do it!

And last, don't forget, this isn't just talking about NT Service Packs, to
keep everything
"current",  you also may need to apply SQL Service Packs, Exchange Server
Service
Packs, Visual Studio Service Packs (which frequently break all of your
programs), a
stack of speciallized fixes, all of which may or may not allow you machine to
boot next
regular reboot, or worse, may prevent your software from functioning without
rewrites.

This get's pretty expensive quick when you have a large organization/user
install
base.

MS's elusive promise is that Win2K will clean up all these headaches and bring 
you
to a new base install level... atleast untill they issue the first service
packs <G>.

Cheers,

Bryan aka R.I.P.
gmezero@gz.bomb.com

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Game Zero Magazine (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: gmezero@gz.bomb.com                               03-Oct-99 16:51:12
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:07
Subj: Re: Win 2000 burns IT managers...ZDNews

From: gmezero@gz.bomb.com (Bryan aka R.I.P.)

On Sun, 03 Oct 1999 16:44:30 GMT, gmezero@gz.bomb.com (Bryan aka R.I.P.)
wrote:

>>> 5) The delays are wreaking havoc with IT Departments' budgets;
>>
>>My god, a business wants to use a new x.00 OS version the day it comes out?
>>Jeez, are there any better ways to beg for bankruptcy?!?!  Let them go under
>>if they are going to be this stupid!
>>
>>> 6) Some IT shops have already spent their Win 2000 budget on NT Service
>>Packs;
>>> and....
>>
>>Huh?  They're free for free download.  Or $10 or whatever for a CD.  If
>>these shops don't know what "download" means, then they can go under.
>
>No, no... you don't understand. The problem not a puchasing cost for Service
>Pack media, but a man-hour/hardware-upgrade/software-rewrite cost to have
someone
>install a service pack, fix the machine when/if it fails from the
service-pack, and
>then the person may need to upgrade hardware, and or re-write software on
that
>server to accomodate new features introduced in the Service Pack at the
demands
>of management. Don't forget, eventhough MS says SP4 is supposed to be
>"The Y2K fix for NT" most people I know are hedging their bets and installing 
the
>latest Service Packs they can find. Oh, and you ask, why did we bother to
install
>that service pack? Well, it's supposed to fix some blah...blah problem that
you've
>been experiencing every other day, or give you some new feature that
management
>swears you need, or your an MS shop, and you just do it!
>
>And last, don't forget, this isn't just talking about NT Service Packs, to
keep everything
>"current",  you also may need to apply SQL Service Packs, Exchange Server
Service
>Packs, Visual Studio Service Packs (which frequently break all of your
programs), a
>stack of speciallized fixes, all of which may or may not allow you machine to 
boot next
>regular reboot, or worse, may prevent your software from functioning without
rewrites.
>
>This get's pretty expensive quick when you have a large organization/user
install
>base.
>
>MS's elusive promise is that Win2K will clean up all these headaches and
bring you
>to a new base install level... atleast untill they issue the first service
packs <G>.
>

Oh yeah... and don't forget, in a big company, you request funding for a
SPECIFIC
time period, if you don't spend it, it's gone, and you can't keep requesting
these
funds every Quarter. If MS says it will be out in June, I tell my Accounting
Department
that I need  X Thousand $$$ to purchase software and perform installs. At the
end
of that budget period, the books are closed and I then have to re-request my
funds
for the next period. Pretty soon I don't know when to ask, or for how much to
ask
for, and my accounting department and senior management are getting pissed
because
I keep screwing up the companies books with fund request that don't get spent
which
shortfalls other people who don't get the money because it was allocated to
me.

Get it?

>Cheers,
>
>Bryan aka R.I.P.
>gmezero@gz.bomb.com

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Game Zero Magazine (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     03-Oct-99 10:26:26
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:07
Subj: Re: Win 2000 burns IT managers...ZDNews

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

On 10-3-99, 5:24:00 AM, "Kelly Robinson" <ispy@groovyshow.com> wrote 
regarding Re: Win 2000 burns IT managers...ZDNews:


> You'll probably be surprised by what I have to say:

> Bennie Nelson <b.l.nelson@larc.nasa.gov> wrote in message
> news:37F62156.8B5960A0@larc.nasa.gov...
> > The article that is currently at URL
> >
> >
> 
http://www5.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2346321,00.html?chkpt=hpqsnew
> stest
> >

> > 3) The cost for migrating to Active Directory is estimated at $300 per
> user;

> Yeah but if users migrate to a new platform, you still need to pay
> *something* (even the bloody CD media) for the new OS and don't forget 
shiny
> new apps.  It's more likely that people will say "Piss on all of you!" 
and
> stick to what they currently have and save even more money.

http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2345040,00.html
IT managers have problems with NT and Win9X which motivated them to 
look to W2K.  While W2K might be a more difficult and costly upgrade, 
sticking with the status quo will eventually prove to be unworkable.  

One possible Windows/PC replacement is a information console.  The 
Dreamcast is a proof of concept (se URL).  The actual device that can 
replace a PC is the Playstation II.  

> > 4) Support for many third party devices has been removed;

> And I thought that the point of win2000 was to increase support... 

Device drivers are a point of failure for W2K.  MS is motivated to 
reduce the variety of device drivers for the sake of increasing W2K 
reliability.  



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     03-Oct-99 10:36:12
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:07
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

On 10-3-99, 1:46:24 PM, wsonna@ibm.net (William Sonna) wrote regarding 
Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!:

> > Seems that no problem was made releasing an Unix and Mac version or 
did this
> > not occur to you.
> >
> > Sheesh.
> >
> > --
> > ---------------------------------------
> > David H. McCoy
> > dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
> > ---------------------------------------

> David - Instead of trolling this to death, why don't  tell us just
> what, exactly Navigator 4.7 does that makes it such a important
> upgrade and worthy of a discussion in an OS/2 newsgroup?

> You seem genuinely excited by this release, and having used the
> program I really can't understand what the fuss is about.  So please
> tell me:    What does 4.7 do that 4.6 doesn't do?  And why does it
> matter?

Support for Shopping with one click of the button and the new AOL 
Instant Messenger.  

Considering how AOL would link Navigator to AOL and AOL partners, I 
decided to skip the 4.7 client except for the FreeBSD version being I 
am unhappy with the quality of the 4.6 release and 4.7 might fix some 
annoying bugs.  

4.61 for OS/2 required at least FP5 (Open32 support) which gave me 
some concern about the quality of the port with that API.  I added 
FP11 to OS/2 and N/4.61.  The result is a fast and smooth browser 
environment running on OS/2.  With OS/2 new releases are improvements, 
not just a feature improvements like on windows, but an implementation 
improvement.  Better code quality.  




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     03-Oct-99 18:06:22
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:07
Subj: Re: OS/2 1.x revisited:RAM prices up, Windows2000 down

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

On 10-3-99, 1:44:42 AM, ckh@hknet.com (Oliver Chung) wrote regarding 
Re: OS/2 1.x revisited:RAM prices up, Windows2000 down:


> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

> In article 
<Pine.SGI.3.93.991001125608.10854A-100000@sea.monterey.edu>,
> josco <josco@sea.monterey.edu> wrote

> >As RAM becomes more expensive due to the EarthQuake in Tawian, RAM 
hungry
> >Windows2000 is going to suffer.  Shortages are expected in November 
and
> >Computer hardware company stocks are down due to the RAM shortage 
impact
> >on the sales of PCs.

> Will there be another RAM Doubler placebo software for Win2000? :)

I bet a placebo would sell.  It's hard to tell RAM requirements until 
all debugging code is removed so I'm not sure what the final result 
will be for W2K.  My guess is that a 64MB system is below the minimal 
with 96MB and 128MB more likely to be the *minimal* amout for running 
MS's Office apps.  

IMHO 64MB is minimal for OS/2 WARP 4.0 when running new apps like 
StarOffice/2 on a network.   





--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: pcguido@attglobal.net                             03-Oct-99 18:49:25
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:07
Subj: Re: FP12:  A Piece Of Cake!

From: pcguido@attglobal.net

In <37F67653.9344D6EE@adan.kingston.net>, "Mark L. Kahnt"
<kahnt@adan.kingston.net> writes:
|Jim Stuyck wrote:
||
|| "Mark L. Kahnt" wrote:
||
|| > Frank McKenney wrote:
|| > >
|| > > In <37F4306B.4315DA13@adan.kingston.net>, "Mark L. Kahnt"
<kahnt@adan.kingston.net> writes:
|| > > >Frank McKenney wrote:
|| >
|| > [***SNIP!!!***]
|| >
|| > >
|| > > Well, now that you mention it...
|| > >
|| > > Back in the mid-70s a professor at Princeton developed a method for
|| > > reproducing semi-photograph-quality graphic output from a 1403 line
|| > > printer (for the younger readers, that's one of those heavy-duty boxes
|| > > attached to an IBM mainframe that will, on occasion, suck up and spit
|| > > out a full box of 14"-wide paper in seconds (;-)).

Oh Yeah! Wasn't that a hoot to see & hear? When the little brushes that
read the carriage control tape would get too dirty... whoosh! If you
didn't have a stacker, the paper would stand up off the top of the
printer and go straight across the room.

I was actually lucky enough to see this happen twice. Thanks for the
memory! :)

|| Sounds like someone forgot to punch a hole in his carriage control
|| tape, or screwed up gluing it together and it came apart!  ;-)
|| (I go waaaay back, too.	Been there, done that.)
||
|| > I remember those - in fact, I've seen a program that could take images
|| > in a couple of different formats (seems to me they were pcx and
|| > MacPaint), and convert them to text images. And I remember full well the
|| > 1403 and related line printers - faster than your average laser printer
|| > at pumping out pages of stuff.
||
|| No 1403-N1 could (or can) hold a candle to, say, an IBM 3800 which is
|| a laser machine that uses cut paper, unlike the fanfold of the 1403.  And
|| the 3800 has been around for a looooong time.
||
|| Where have you been?  ;-)
||
|| Jim Stuyck
|
|Sorry - meant the everyday SOHO laser printers. Mind you, I think the
|3800 was after my experiences with the 1403. I do remember a non-IBM
|printer called a Photon, which used lenses, daisy wheels and toner to
|produce scalable fonts and xerographic printing, and the first
|legitimate laser printers I dealt with were the Imagen and the early
|Xerox products - both of which tended to run at 4 or so ppm if lucky.
|
|But I've seen what you refer to: laser printers that run at a speed that
|to the eye approaches that of a printing press. I have also seen the
|invoice for that type of printer - outta my budget! ;)
|--
|
|============================================================
|To respond via e-mail - remove the "go-away-spammers"
|portion of the Reply to: value.
|
|Mark L. Kahnt, C.P. Box 1263, Kingston, Ontario   K7L 4Y8
|Voix:		  (613) 531-8767   Cellulaire: (613) 539-0935
|Telecopieur: (613) 531-8684   Email: kahnt@adan.kingston.net
|
|References to "spam" in the above post refer to any of numerous
|abuse of the Internet to repeatedly place off-topic messages in
|inappropriate or unauthorised locations. The term should in no
|way be construed as involving the products of Hormel Foods
|Corporation.
|
|Further, the use of the term "spam" should in no way be construed
|to imply the support or involvement of Hormel Foods in conjunction
|with such Internet abuse. Indeed, Hormel has publicly expressed
|its disapproval of such actions.
|
|SPAM  is a registered trademark of Hormel Foods for luncheon meat
|and is a damn fine product at that. The author of this signature
|attachment has no legal, commercial or financial involvement with
|Hormel; rather, is active in the fields of copyright, trademark,
|and Internet abuse analysis.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: pcguido@attglobal.net                             03-Oct-99 18:53:12
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:07
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: pcguido@attglobal.net

In <LoEFmgJJ9ecw-pn2-4KdMy2t7EJVZ@agave.bitranch.com>, esther@bitranch.com
(Esther Schindler) writes:
|On Sat, 2 Oct 1999 13:21:02, "Kim Cheung"
|<kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com> wrote:
|| I concur with Brad's view.    There is NOTHING to say that a
"not-for-profit"
|| corporation is not an enterprise.	The only issue - minor, so I say - is
|| the COMMITMENT level.   That's the real issue.    With a low commitment
|| level, your pricing is not going to be any different from an individual
|| subscription.   If that were the case, then why take the exposure?
|
|But we won't know unless we try, will we?
|
|I have no idea how many members would take advantage of a
|reduced-price subscription to Software Choice. It would, however, be a
|heck of a membership incentive!
|
|--Esther

Oh Come-On people!

Is Jeff Glatt right, you would all band together to beat a $100/yr fee?

And IBM is supposed to pay for Netscape & Java support for OS/2 how?

Why not just send a note to Big Lou _begging_ him to _really_ drop OS/2?

Sheesh.

Guido

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: pcguido@attglobal.net                             03-Oct-99 19:05:05
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:07
Subj: Re: Win 2000 burns IT managers...ZDNews

From: pcguido@attglobal.net

In <19991003.10265316@mis.configured.host>, Joseph <josco@ibm.net> writes:
|
|
|||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
|
|On 10-3-99, 5:24:00 AM, "Kelly Robinson" <ispy@groovyshow.com> wrote=20=
|
|regarding Re: Win 2000 burns IT managers...ZDNews:
|
|
|| You'll probably be surprised by what I have to say:
|
|| Bennie Nelson <b.l.nelson@larc.nasa.gov> wrote in message
|| news:37F62156.8B5960A0@larc.nasa.gov...
|| > The article that is currently at URL
|| >
|| >
||=20
|http://www5.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2346321,00.html?chkpt=3Dh=
|pqsnew
|| stest
|| >
|
|| > 3) The cost for migrating to Active Directory is estimated at $300 p=
|er
|| user;
|
|| Yeah but if users migrate to a new platform, you still need to pay
|| *something* (even the bloody CD media) for the new OS and don't forget=
|=20
|shiny
|| new apps.  It's more likely that people will say "Piss on all of you!"=
|=20
|and
|| stick to what they currently have and save even more money.
|
|http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2345040,00.html
|IT managers have problems with NT and Win9X which motivated them to=20
|look to W2K.  While W2K might be a more difficult and costly upgrade,=20=
|
|sticking with the status quo will eventually prove to be unworkable. =20=
|
|
|One possible Windows/PC replacement is a information console.	The=20
|Dreamcast is a proof of concept (se URL).	The actual device that can=20=
|
|replace a PC is the Playstation II. =20
|
|| > 4) Support for many third party devices has been removed;
|
|| And I thought that the point of win2000 was to increase support...=20=
|
|
|Device drivers are a point of failure for W2K.  MS is motivated to=20
|reduce the variety of device drivers for the sake of increasing W2K=20
|reliability. =20

But Joseph, remove support for a SERIAL MOUSE? That's going to
increase their _reliability_ ???

;) Guido

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     03-Oct-99 14:23:14
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:07
Subj: Re: Win 2000 burns IT managers...ZDNews

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

On 10-3-99, 7:05:10 PM, pcguido@attglobal.net wrote regarding Re: Win 
2000 burns IT managers...ZDNews:


> In <19991003.10265316@mis.configured.host>, Joseph <josco@ibm.net> 
writes:
> |

> |http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2345040,00.html

> || > 4) Support for many third party devices has been removed;
> |
> || And I thought that the point of win2000 was to increase 
support...=20=
> |
> |
> |Device drivers are a point of failure for W2K.  MS is motivated to
> |reduce the variety of device drivers for the sake of increasing W2K
> |reliability. 

> But Joseph, remove support for a SERIAL MOUSE? That's going to
> increase their _reliability_ ???

W2K runs device drivers in Ring 0 which means they can affect system 
stability.  In an interview, MS's Allchin said MS was working hard to 
get 3rd parties to clean up W2K device drivers since they were a 
common reason for system hangs/crashes.  I don't know anything 
specific about serial mouse drivers.  

In general, MS's OSs will always have problems since that's how they 
are designed and MS has changed the device driver model for Windows 3 
times in the course of OS/2's life time.

OS/2's device drivers have been designed to reduce their impact on the 
kernel.  I also think IBM's decision to maintain the old device driver 
model is a good decision since it minimizes changes to this critical 
point of failure for PCs.  While people rant about the 16-bit device 
drivers, tests on the Pentium Pro show no impact on CPUs performance 
sensitive to 16 bit code.




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: esther@bitranch.com                               04-Oct-99 01:36:22
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:07
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler)

On Sun, 3 Oct 1999 18:53:24, pcguido@attglobal.net wrote:

| Is Jeff Glatt right, you would all band together to beat a $100/yr fee?
| And IBM is supposed to pay for Netscape & Java support for OS/2 how?

Taking a valid discount for a product one values is part of the 
American way of life. Or do you typically spend more than you need to?

--Esther

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ckh@hknet.com                                     03-Oct-99 09:44:21
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:07
Subj: Re: OS/2 1.x revisited:RAM prices up, Windows2000 down

From: ckh@hknet.com (Oliver Chung)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <Pine.SGI.3.93.991001125608.10854A-100000@sea.monterey.edu>,
josco <josco@sea.monterey.edu> wrote

>As RAM becomes more expensive due to the EarthQuake in Tawian, RAM hungry
>Windows2000 is going to suffer.  Shortages are expected in November and
>Computer hardware compnay stocks are down due to the RAM shortage impact
>on the sales of PCs.

Will there be another RAM Doubler placebo software for Win2000? :)

(To those who don't understand, there was once a RAM doubler software
for Win95 which does NOTHING but change the "free resource" %
displayed, to make the user feels they have doubled their Windows
resources.  Millions of copies were sold.)

______
Oliver Chung
> My opinions are my own <                      >  Happy Warp user <
PGP Key fingerprint: 3E 86 59 AD 08 35 BE 54 DF 63 B9 F8 F7 8B 10 3B

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: cp850

iQCVAwUBN/a1lHNBYa8g7KHRAQHeBQP+OUhoTFUbpw89pYFXwzkItzVEIwnETsCD
5QLsTHb7GHB6SZrY0A4Y78kCREmoebgXm8ZC36deH1Y2ikmUEvzx6RApDlgXBzhE
Fp+f8Og5wzoDzHRm4rR4oVswGWbn/ou5QUPn5D6QFaDDYGMuua0p86VdWfmFOkBU
/ce6RImiZSs=
=nZRM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ckh@hknet.com                                     03-Oct-99 09:48:15
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:07
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: ckh@hknet.com (Oliver Chung)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <37f57553_3@news1.prserv.net>,
pcguido@attglobal.net wrote

>Where is the demonstrable difference between getting all the pieces,
>posted as they are ready, and getting new shrinkwrap every 18-24 months?
>Especially when that new shrinkwrap comes in the form of a forced
>update and the concommitant upgrade of all my apps 'to the best
>benefit' from the 'new' OS!

When you consider using the system, having updates like software choice
is actually better!  I can pick and choose what I need, without adding
in unused stuff.  Also, we get to see the pieces as soon as they are
done, instead of having to wait for some arbitrary 18-24 months cycle.

I have upgraded from OS/2 2.1->3->4, and every time, people recommended
a clean install instead of upgrading the existing system (and I agree).
With the heavy customization in my Warp 4 system, I certainly don't
want to start from a fresh install to get new features.

I agree it makes things harder for a new installation though, but there
are other ways to deal with it, like the WarpUp CD.

______
Oliver Chung
> My opinions are my own <                      >  Happy Warp user <
PGP Key fingerprint: 3E 86 59 AD 08 35 BE 54 DF 63 B9 F8 F7 8B 10 3B

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: cp850

iQCVAwUBN/a3nXNBYa8g7KHRAQFxaAP/d7D4rhWdD478lwKA5evXndchQDFfW6Eo
kvK7OZHIxc7xoWnnjivF48WjPRswlcGato0PUqAQbdRjbQsBSJG2vpg2bYSIbz5u
lfnJFwlJnyMNWX9TR0c8W+EOtfhO+pYYU6/M0llPEZRRYyyi7GxP9wiHrIIrvVvT
ip/sKW4HMd0=
=RcuQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com               03-Oct-99 13:20:27
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:07
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: "Kim Cheung" <kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com>

On 3 Oct 1999 18:53:24 GMT, pcguido@attglobal.net wrote:

>In <LoEFmgJJ9ecw-pn2-4KdMy2t7EJVZ@agave.bitranch.com>, esther@bitranch.com
(Esther Schindler) writes:
>|On Sat, 2 Oct 1999 13:21:02, "Kim Cheung"
>|<kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com> wrote:
>|| I concur with Brad's view.    There is NOTHING to say that a
"not-for-profit"
>|| corporation is not an enterprise.	The only issue - minor, so I say - is
>|| the COMMITMENT level.   That's the real issue.    With a low commitment
>|| level, your pricing is not going to be any different from an individual
>|| subscription.   If that were the case, then why take the exposure?
>|
>|But we won't know unless we try, will we?
>|
>|I have no idea how many members would take advantage of a
>|reduced-price subscription to Software Choice. It would, however, be a
>|heck of a membership incentive!
>|
>|--Esther
>
>Oh Come-On people!
>
>Is Jeff Glatt right, you would all band together to beat a $100/yr fee?
>
>And IBM is supposed to pay for Netscape & Java support for OS/2 how?
>
>Why not just send a note to Big Lou _begging_ him to _really_ drop OS/2?
>
>Sheesh.
>
>Guido
>

I believe you mis-read the message and I am not sure you realize the
difference between
"Passport Advantage" customer and what "qualification" means to IBM.

As a very simple example, WsEB upgrades are NOT included in the non-Passport
Advantage version.    This is very bad for the "non-Passport" customers who
are NOT also a DevCON member because these people will have no way of getting
upgrades.

So, unless IBM changes their mind, the alternative is to band together as one
company and try to qualify for Passport Advantage.

There are many hurdles, however.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               03-Oct-99 17:16:17
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:08
Subj: Re: Win 2000 burns IT managers...ZDNews

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

pcguido@attglobal.net wrote:
> 
> In <19991003.10265316@mis.configured.host>, Joseph <josco@ibm.net> writes:
> |
> |
> |||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> |
> |On 10-3-99, 5:24:00 AM, "Kelly Robinson" <ispy@groovyshow.com> wrote=20=
> |
> |regarding Re: Win 2000 burns IT managers...ZDNews:
> |
> |
> || You'll probably be surprised by what I have to say:
> |
> || Bennie Nelson <b.l.nelson@larc.nasa.gov> wrote in message
> || news:37F62156.8B5960A0@larc.nasa.gov...
> || > The article that is currently at URL
> || >
> || >
> ||=20
> |http://www5.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2346321,00.html?chkpt=3Dh=
> |pqsnew
> || stest
> || >
> |
> || > 3) The cost for migrating to Active Directory is estimated at $300 p=
> |er
> || user;
> |
> || Yeah but if users migrate to a new platform, you still need to pay
> || *something* (even the bloody CD media) for the new OS and don't forget=
> |=20
> |shiny
> || new apps.  It's more likely that people will say "Piss on all of you!"=
> |=20
> |and
> || stick to what they currently have and save even more money.
> |
> |http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2345040,00.html
> |IT managers have problems with NT and Win9X which motivated them to=20
> |look to W2K.  While W2K might be a more difficult and costly upgrade,=20=
> |
> |sticking with the status quo will eventually prove to be unworkable. =20=
> |
> |
> |One possible Windows/PC replacement is a information console.  The=20
> |Dreamcast is a proof of concept (se URL).      The actual device that
can=20=
> |
> |replace a PC is the Playstation II. =20
> |
> || > 4) Support for many third party devices has been removed;
> |
> || And I thought that the point of win2000 was to increase support...=20=
> |
> |
> |Device drivers are a point of failure for W2K.  MS is motivated to=20
> |reduce the variety of device drivers for the sake of increasing W2K=20
> |reliability. =20
> 
> But Joseph, remove support for a SERIAL MOUSE? That's going to
> increase their _reliability_ ???

Sure.  If the user can't interact with the system, there's less of a
chance of screwing it up.  ;-)

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: forgitaboutit@fake.com                            03-Oct-99 17:36:06
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:08
Subj: (1/2) Re: Time to move on

From: David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com>

In article <37F4E744.AF7FE193@stny.rr.com>, mamodeo@stny.rr.com says...
David H. McCoy" wrote:
>> >That or that fact that it was written by a bunch of l33t h4x0rZ.  I'm
>> >not sure which would disturb them most.
>> 
>> Probably the support issue.

>Actually I was thinking of the security issue.

Win9x isn't secure, but companies use it. Why? It is supported. If something 
goes wrong, you can hold someone accountable.

>> >> You are absolutely in the minority for reasons that have nothing to do
with
>> >> this newgroup. This newsgroup is coloring your perceptions, rather
badly, I
>> >> might add.
>> 
>> >I'm in the minority of the computer using public, not the <OS/2> using
>> >crowd.  You were talking about people complaining about OS/2.  What are
>> >these "companies" going to complain about OS/2 for if they don't use
>> >it?  Stick to your own context please.
>> 
>> We are talking about support. Would you like for me to post the context?

>Yes we were (it actually would have been helpful to keep a line or two
>more context in there), but you mentioned all of the people
>complaining.  The only people I hear complaining are SOHO users (or
>former SOHO users) here.  And my personal "gut" feeling FWIW, etc., is
>that of those SOHO users many more are satasfied with their current
>quality of OS than dissatasfied.

This issue came up because you claimed support isn't important. I say it is.
My 
"gut" as well as conversations with people who adminster machines tells me
that 
they wish hold someone accountable.

>> >> >> >> No software ? - dont care, we have loads of shareware and win 3.1
stuff
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Take a look at my hard drives and tell me I have no software.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Sure. Lots of Win3.1 stuff.
>> >>
>> >> >I have 1 Win3.1 program on all my filled 8GB of space.  Try again.
>> >>
>> >> Sure. Hobbes doesn't have 8 gigs of OS/2 programs but you do.
>> 
>> >Did I say they were all OS/2 programs?  I said there was but one program
>> >among them that is a Win3.1 program, demonstrating that I have no
>> >reliance on Win3.1 programs.
>> 
>> You could have said, "I have one Windows program." I merely wanted to
forestall
>> your implication.

>I did:
>>I have 1 Win3.1 program [...]

You didn't say just that.

>The use of the "filled 8GB of space" was to show that I actually use my
>computer and haven't just claimed to not use Win3.1 programs because I
>have not used my computer that much.

No one claimed otherwise. No one claimed that you didn't use your computer. I 
was just calling out your 8gig OS/2 program implication.


>> >> One of your fellows was telling me that one buys for one's operating
>> >> system.
>> >>
>> >> Do you share his beliefs?
>> 
>> >I buy what I need when I need it, not what someone else tells me I need
>> >when it's cool.
>> 
>> Interesting. But that wasn't what I asked. You guys seem woefully out of
touch.
>> Has it occured to you that most people do this?

>I actually wasn't quite sure what you were asking.  Could you restate
>perhaps?
 
Has it occurred to your that most people purchase their computer stuff based
on 
need and not coolness.\>

>> >> >> Or why buy a new TnT2 video card when the Gradd drivers only allow
>> >> >> 640x480 at 60mhz.
>> >> >> This is not a good thing.
>> >>
>> >> >Got a modern Matrox card myself.  Works like a dream.  I could buy a
>> >> >G400 tomorrow and be fully supported with stable and efficient drivers
>> >> >under OS/2.
>> >>
>> >> It ISN'T fully support.  It doesn't support OpenGL under OS/2, for
example.
>> 
>> >But there's no apps that would use it if it did, so why bother?
>> 
>> You brought up the card. The problem, one of many, with OS/2 is that we can 
go
>> out and spend the same amount of money on machines, I'll put Windows
>> (98,NT,2000) on it, and you put OS/2 on yours and your machine, by virtue
of
>> just installing OS/2(if you can install it) is immediately less functional.

>Depends on the functionality you require.  

No, it doesn't. The G400 doesn't have an OS/2 version with no OpenGl or 
Direct3d support. Even if you don't need those features, you pay for them.

>One of the big reasons I
>always hold out on buying a new machine so long is that it will
>invariably come with some BS "technologies" that I don't want.  One such
>example of the recent past is Plug N Pray.  Another such example for me
>currently is ACPI (soft power on/off) and the ATX power supply
>associated with it.  Personally, most of the functionality OS/2 is
>missing is functionality that I never gave a rats ass about to begin
>with.  3D acceleration is another such technology for me.
 
Not a good reason. Every new machine ships with USB, ACPI, and PnP support.
You 
may not use them, in fact, with OS/2, you definitely don't, but they are there 

nonetheless. Whether or not they are "BS" is a matter of opinion. The problem 
if you have no choice because you cannot even take advantage of the stuff, 
"BS" or otherwise.

If you wanted a new video card, the G400 is your best bet, and again, despite 
not needing OpenGl or 3d support, you pay for it. You cannot use it, yet you 
are charged for it. That is my point. By virtue of using OS/2, you strip out 
features that you've paid for, even if you don't need them. 

And if you decide, hey, I do want to use those features, you still can't 
because OS/2 won't let you.

> The aforementioned G400 video card is a perfect example. Surely, you see
that
> this is a bad thing.

>Depends on who considers it.
 
Not at all. No matter who consider it, paying for features you cannot use 
sucks.

>> >> That's my point. And the Matrox is probably the last modern card that
OS/2
>> >> will see.
>> >>
>> >> Not a good thing.
>> 
>> >Not bloody likely.  Scitech is saying otherwise.  After trying their
>> >drivers, I am inclined to believe them.
>> 
>> I think it is incredibly likely. OS/2 support is getting worst, not better.

>Worse in what sense?  The recent Software Choice stuff?

Across the board. Video, soundcards, controllers, scanners, you name it and 
OS/2 is getting worse about supporting it.

>> Here is the supported chipset from Scitech
>> [snip] 
>>
>> The S4 did suprise me, but I don't think I've read of anyone actually using 
it.
>> However, most of these seem pretty old and low end.

>Well, the main issue is that Scitech has reasonable clout and good
>relationships with many video card manufacturers and they have the base
>system in place to expand all of their driver support to OS/2 with a
>minimum of effort.  The will certainly keep improving their support
>level.
 
The main issue is despite Scitech, OS/2 support for new video techologies is 
still severely lacking.  As for "minimum of effort" it seems to me that if it 
were that simple, they would have support for every card Windows supports.

As for improving, that is but a hope.

>> >Which "online sources" have such lag?  Certainly none that I visit.  As
>> >someone who has not been a part of the OS/2 "scene" in some years, do
>> >you really expect to be up on the current news sources and web sites?
>> 
>> You are being presumptous. You have no idea what "scene" I am part of, nor
do
>> you have any idea about my reading habits, now do you?
>> Seems to me that you tossed out Warpcast. OS/2 e-zine is still behind.
EDM/2 is
>> hurting. Warp Pharmacy is 1996.

>EDM/2 has had several updates in the last few weeks.  There's also
>Walter Metcalf's Focus on OS/2 which is updated fairly often.
 
EDM/2? Are you kidding? They went from May until the end of Sept. and all they 

had to show were three articles. If the state of OS/2 programming is such that 

it can only support 3 articles from the premier OS/2 programming site, then 
OS/2 is truly in a world of hurt.


>> Not bad, but still viciously small. Heck, I'm still getting hits on the
>> FORTRESS Ominor site.

>Not on the order of 100/day I'll wager.  ;-P
 
Nope, but I don't update it either. And guess what? All the software reviews 
are current. TWO YEARS LATER.

>> >> How many are using Mame?
>> 
>> >How should I know?
>> 
>> Look, you brought the site up to make a point of some kind about OS/2
gaming.

>Merely that it exists and there are a good number of games that can be
>played in OS/2.

As opposed to a good number of games that people actually *want* to play.

>> Seems to me that how many people are using Mame is important.

>Well, the mere amount of interest that is generated from such a small
>niche was what I was pointing out.
 
You have an amount of hits. It is a bit of a stretch to convert that to 
interest. I was counted as a hit, but I have no interest in playing emulated 
games under OS/2.

>> Again, Buy that logic, nothing has a future. We are all living in the past
or
>> now because everything is ahead of what we may have or acheive. Be that as
it
>> may, I'd rather use something that gives me better access to even today's
>> technologies. Further, if OS/2 has problems with todays stuff, that bolds
ill
>> for tomorrow.

>I prefer having better access to the technologies of today that I find
>useful, such as CPU speed and memory capacity.  I feel that for my
>applications, OS/2 gives me better access to such things.
 
Indeed. I feel, however, that OS/2 doesn't provide better access to the 
technologies of today, be they hardware or software. Simply put, Windows runs 
more applications and supports more current hardware. 


>> >> Sorry, but bug fixes and things like large harddrive support are
important.
>> 
>> >Right.  Glad my system is all taken care of already.
>> 
>> So you have a bug free system. Keep in mind that I read your post about
Fixpack
>> 12. Seems that if since you had problems and depended on IBM to fix them.

>None of those problems were "show-stoppers."  I have not ever not been
>able to do something I needed to because of those problems.
 
But they were issues, and you needed IBM to fix them despite saying you didn't 

need IBM.

>> >> You'll find that out as soon as you replace that "filled 8gig" drive
that
>> >> isn't filled with OS/2 software.
>> 
>> >What will I find?  OS/2 will blow up on me?  Try again.
>> 
>> No. You'll find that without IBM's services, you'll buy a 13 gig drive and
only
>> see 8.

>Shall we go back and talk about problems that were fixed in Win9x and NT
>service packs of the past?  

If you wish, but I never said or implied that there weren't problems.

>Are you reliant on them now?  Sure. 

So are you. You just won't admit it.

>But the problems were fixed and available.  This doesn't indicate future
>reliance.

Of course it does, unless you believe all problems were solved and technology 
won't change to add something OS/2 won't support. And given OS/2's state of 
affairs, it is likely that OS/2 won't support new hardware and software.


>> But then, it seems that many OS/2 people are used to getting less than
>> what they paid for.

>Depends on what you were looking for with each purchase.
 
No, it doesn't. If two people purchase the same videocard for the same price, 
even if one person is expecting less, he is getting less than he paid for.

>> 
>> Care to change your story about "using my system without problems."?

>Absolutely not.  "A few times" and "Weird circumstances" don't
>constitute continous problems that prevent me from functioning.
 
But it does show that you are dependent on IBM, despite your statement to the 
contrary.

>> >[ooooooooohhh... low blow]  ;-)  [j/k]
>> 
>> Not at all. I am using a better OS.

>So you have switched to OS/2?  I finally got through to you!  ;-)
 
Sorry, but that would be going backwards. I wouldn't do that.

>David, let's go to the videotape...
>>> >> OS/2 is on its last legs. Microsoft may be cocky, but they do produce
good
>>> >> software
>>> >
>>> >Your opinion.
>>> 
>>> And mine. And millions of other people.
>>
>>Congratulations!  You're on the bandwagon too!  I guess you're all
>>right.

>Where did I imply that "people use Windows because it is cool", etc.? 
>My point was that people can have the same opinion without necessarily
>being right.

My point is that have you consider that all those people are right adn that
you 
are mistaken?

>> >> You ever stop to consider that IBM is
>> >> pulling away from OS/2 because you are wrong and OS/2 is inferior?
>> 
>> >My personal feeling is that they are pulling away for business reasons
>> >(as businesses tend to do).  They weren't making enough profit to
>> >justify their expenditures on SOHO OS/2.  Inferior or not, if it turned
>> >a profit, they'd be pushing it no doubt.
>> 
>> An inability to make a profit is but one kind of inferiority.

>In this case, it's the only one that matters to a business.
 
Wrong again. Potential profitability also matters.  


>> >> So IBM's "SuperFat" is also a hack because a defrag will hose OS/2's EA
file.
>> >> Be consistent.  That particular ability is in NTFS which isn't affected
by any
>> >> defrag program available to DOS.
>> 
>> >Ditto HPFS, so what's the point?
>> 
>> That NTFS gives you that particular ability, while maintaining its immunity 
to
>> DOS defraggers and OS/2 does not.

>HPFS is quite immune to DOS defraggers.  What did you mean?
 
That NTFS gives you equal immunity and more ability.

>> Really? So you've asked OS/2 users every where and none are dependent on 8
16
>> programs. Furthermore, they all said zero?
>> On what do you base that statement? A distant relative to fact, perhaps?

>Check the newsgroup traffic.  How many people have even so much as
>mention Win16 apps in the last 2 years?  Where are you getting
>information that OS/2 users are reliant on Win16 apps.  Which Win16
>apps?  You made the claim, not me.


Are you kidding? Hardly a day goes by on the comp.os.os2.apps group without 
someone asking about Quicken, Win-OS/2 something, ICQ, or plugins.  

Do you read that group?


>> >If I relied on Win16 proggies, I'd need a whole lot more than long
>> >filenames.  Glad I'm not in that boat.
>> 
>> But others are and your predicament is cold comfort.

>Who?  Which apps?
 
See above.

>> >Why would I want to do such a thing?
>> 
>> Well, believe it or not, but some people like to use long file named
>> directories.

>I do too.  That's why I use HPFS and not FAT.  That's also why I don't
>use old software that can't recognize LFNs.

Good 4 you. However, some have different needs and OS/2 does nothing to
address 
them.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: forgitaboutit@fake.com                            03-Oct-99 17:36:06
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:08
Subj: (2/2) Re: Time to move on

>> That was a big selling point for OS/2 years ago. However, despite
>> this, those Windows programs you claim people don't need cannot be
installed
>> into a long filenamed directory. Also, you cannot open a file with a long
>> filename using a Win16 program under OS/2.

>Ok.  And...?  No one is crying about it that I've heard.

Exactly, because you haven't been listening.

- Marty


-- 
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: News@The-Net-4U.com                               04-Oct-99 01:22:29
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:08
Subj: Re: Latest attack by Tim Marting 

From: News@The-Net-4U.com (M.P. van Dobben de Bruijn)

> Dennis Peterson <dpeterso@halcyon.com> wrote:
 
>> In many instances Tim's "opinion" is a piece of self-serving bullshit.
However,
>> even he in some cases is right. If he could only improve the ratio <g>. As
>> well as ending his attacking people personally .. Ah well let's leave it at 
that.
 
> You've nailed it rather well. Tim's got the passion for OS/2 and that
> isn't a bad thing. What he does that works against him is to alienate a
> significant part of the group he should consider his peers with his
> ranting and raving about Stardock and anyone he perceives as having an
> interest outside of OS/2. Hell, even IBM has an interest outside of
> OS/2. Tim's best course of action is to accept the reality that there is
> a need for ISV's to make money any way they can and to enjoy the fact
> that some of them even make OS/2 products. What is totally illogical is
> his diatribes against Stardock for making Windows products while at the
> same time applauding the folks who make his favorite Java email client
> but who also make Windows products in order to keep the doors open (to
> name just one such example of many). These inconsistencies will continue
> to deny him credibility for as long as they exist. It's too bad because it
will
> also deny him a lot of enjoyment that comes with pursuing one's passion.

Exact. Even though he tried to ruin my name (completely unjustified painting
me as an OS/2 enemy and refusing to take it back repeteadly even adding
more insults) I still cannot do otherwise than feel sorry for him about the
mess
he created for himself. Continuously step by step destroying his own
credibility
by attacking other OS/2-users, what they are even if one sometimes has to si-
destep to make sure the job get's done in a multi-cultural eh hybrid PC-world.

But it is a mess he made himself, so he will need to find ways to clean it up
also.

Regards from Leeuwarden
Peter van Dobben de Bruijn
---
usethenet.at.the-net-4u.com (at becomes @)
----

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TeleKabel (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: dpeterso@halcyon.com                              04-Oct-99 19:11:29
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:08
Subj: Need for NC's is alive

From: Dennis Peterson <dpeterso@halcyon.com>

 at
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/19991003/aponline184851_000.htm

               Amazon planned to announce Monday it will become one of
               the first e-commerce companies to sell its products
through
               new wireless devices. The move is timed to coincide with
this
               week's nationwide release of 3Com Corp.'s new Palm VII, a
               hand-held computer that will provide wireless Internet
access
               to allow users to read e-mail, shop and browse popular
Web
               sites. 

Does anyone not see a need for simple Network Computers here? If kiosk
systems are located in high traffic areas they will also reap the
bennies of this movement. Not everyone is going to go out and buy this
new Palm device but I do believe many would use a kiosk NC if available.
I would.

-- 
dp

                 Support Eddie Kieger III at http://eddiekieger.com
                 Got a home page? Please add a link to Eddie's site!

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: I'm not organized at all (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: morelli@math.utah.edu                             03-Oct-99 21:06:07
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:08
Subj: Re: IBM is NOT quadzillion times larger than MS

From: Robert Morelli <morelli@math.utah.edu>

fmc wrote:
> 
> David Frank wrote:
> 
> > I am amused at continued warp'ees lack of reality expressed by
> > statements   "IBM is quadzillion times larger than Microsoft"
> >
> > Current market caps
> >              billion              comments
> >  MSFT $456        by far the largest company in the world...
> >  INTC  $238       IBM in early 80's owned 20% of Intel
> >  IBM    $217
> >
> > I'm not sure IBM is even in the top ten largest companies,
> > altho they were #1 back in the early 80's when the IBM chairman
> > needed to raise the stock price (his stock options were expiring
worthless)
> > so he sold the 20% stake in Intel and collected several million
> > that year, and the stockholders got screwed..
> >
> > Dave
> 
> It all depends on  how you rate companies.  Microsoft (at $418 Billion)
takes
> first place on the Fortune 500's latest list of companies ranked by market
> value, while IBM comes in at number 11 ( $165 Billion).
> 
> However, in terms of revenue, IBM is number 6 ($81.6 B), while Microsoft is
> number 109 ($14.5 B).  IBM's global rank, at 14,  is almost the same as it's
> U.S rank, while Microsoft's nosedives to 284.  Also:
> 
> IBM's assets total $86.1 B.  MS assets total $22.3 B
> 
> IBM profits were $6.3 B.  MS profits were $4.5 B.
> 
> I'm no expert on investments, so I can't explain why Microsoft's market
value
> is more than 2 and a half times greater than IBM's, while at the same time
IBM
> beats Microsoft on revenue by over 5:1, assets by almost 4:1, and profits by
> 140%, but I suspect that Microsoft stock might be "slightly" overvalued.

These are all good points.  The original poster clearly doesn't understand the
issue.  Of course,  the market capitalization is the money of the
shareholders,
not Microsoft,  and Microsoft is in fact obliged to give a reasonable fraction 
of
its profits to those shareholders.

I would argue the situation is even more complex though.  The biggest 
difference between Microsoft and IBM is diversity.  As one analyst put it, 
IBM
starts with sand and ends with complex computer systems.  I think it is
literally
true (or nearly so) that IBM designs and manufactures almost every piece of 
hardware and software necessary to build an entire end to end computer system.
For this reason,  IBM is considered a blue chip stock,  a broadly powerful 
technology company,  and a very safe long term investment.

Microsoft is a quite different company in that it holds a great deal of power
in an 
important but narrow area:  PC software.  It has tried to diversify,  with
limited 
success.  Apart from some weirdly shaped mice,  keyboards,  and such,  it has
no real presence in hardware.  It tried to establish NT on non-PC hardware 
platforms,  but NT is now essentially dead on every such platform.  It has
attempted 
to move into cable,  news,  
etc. but my impression is that its operations in those areas have been so far
unprofitable and their future is uncertain.  The share price of MS is very
high
because the company has posted tremendous profit margins and growth rates over 

the years.  In this,  it has ridden the growth of the PC and with its
monopolies
has not had to share that market.

Microsoft's narrowness and its failure to demonstrate an ability to adapt,  is 
a 
potential weakness.  For instance,  if the software paradigm shifts away from 
their traditional model,  things could change dramatically for them.  It seems
quite plausible for instance that over the next decade,  Linux will deeply
encroach 
on Windows and Java will deeply encroach on Microsoft's control of languages
and
APIs.  Together,  these two technologies diminish the importance of the idea
of
a delicately controlled proprietary platform,  the rock on which Microsoft is 
founded.

These are some of the important and power issues and this is why most business
people would consider IBM a much more powerful company than Microsoft.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               03-Oct-99 23:01:00
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:08
Subj: (1/2) Re: Time to move on

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> 
> In article <37F4E744.AF7FE193@stny.rr.com>, mamodeo@stny.rr.com says...
> David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >> >That or that fact that it was written by a bunch of l33t h4x0rZ.  I'm
> >> >not sure which would disturb them most.
> >>
> >> Probably the support issue.
> 
> >Actually I was thinking of the security issue.
> 
> Win9x isn't secure, but companies use it. Why? It is supported. If something
> goes wrong, you can hold someone accountable.

And where is Win9x deployed?  As a firewall for the office?  No.  It's
deployed where it is the least risky because it is an inexpensive
solution.  They can afford to have their internal network insecure as
long as they're protected from external sources.  The absolutely cannot
afford to put Win9x as their firewall, in spite of it being a well
supported platform.  I think the same holds true, to a lesser extent,
with Linux.
 
> >> >> You are absolutely in the minority for reasons that have nothing to do 
with
> >> >> this newgroup. This newsgroup is coloring your perceptions, rather
badly, I
> >> >> might add.
> >>
> >> >I'm in the minority of the computer using public, not the <OS/2> using
> >> >crowd.  You were talking about people complaining about OS/2.  What are
> >> >these "companies" going to complain about OS/2 for if they don't use
> >> >it?  Stick to your own context please.
> >>
> >> We are talking about support. Would you like for me to post the context?
> 
> >Yes we were (it actually would have been helpful to keep a line or two
> >more context in there), but you mentioned all of the people
> >complaining.  The only people I hear complaining are SOHO users (or
> >former SOHO users) here.  And my personal "gut" feeling FWIW, etc., is
> >that of those SOHO users many more are satasfied with their current
> >quality of OS than dissatasfied.
> 
> This issue came up because you claimed support isn't important. I say it is. 
My
> "gut" as well as conversations with people who adminster machines tells me
that
> they wish hold someone accountable.

I claimed support wasn't important for <me>.  Are you going to argue
that point?  I don't need to hold anyone accountable for anything
because my system works fine and nothing I do is "mission critical". 
Having said that I also trust that all of my data is safe and in "good
hands" due to past good experience with the product.

> >> >> >> >> No software ? - dont care, we have loads of shareware and win
3.1 stuff
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Take a look at my hard drives and tell me I have no software.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Sure. Lots of Win3.1 stuff.
> >> >>
> >> >> >I have 1 Win3.1 program on all my filled 8GB of space.  Try again.
> >> >>
> >> >> Sure. Hobbes doesn't have 8 gigs of OS/2 programs but you do.
> >>
> >> >Did I say they were all OS/2 programs?  I said there was but one program
> >> >among them that is a Win3.1 program, demonstrating that I have no
> >> >reliance on Win3.1 programs.
> >>
> >> You could have said, "I have one Windows program." I merely wanted to
forestall
> >> your implication.
> 
> >I did:
> >>I have 1 Win3.1 program [...]
> 
> You didn't say just that.
> 
> >The use of the "filled 8GB of space" was to show that I actually use my
> >computer and haven't just claimed to not use Win3.1 programs because I
> >have not used my computer that much.
> 
> No one claimed otherwise. No one claimed that you didn't use your computer.
I
> was just calling out your 8gig OS/2 program implication.

I wanted to cover the possibility in advance, since it may be the next
logical statement to refute mine.

> >> >> One of your fellows was telling me that one buys for one's operating
> >> >> system.
> >> >>
> >> >> Do you share his beliefs?
> >>
> >> >I buy what I need when I need it, not what someone else tells me I need
> >> >when it's cool.
> >>
> >> Interesting. But that wasn't what I asked. You guys seem woefully out of
touch.
> >> Has it occured to you that most people do this?
> 
> >I actually wasn't quite sure what you were asking.  Could you restate
> >perhaps?
> 
> Has it occurred to your that most people purchase their computer stuff based 
on
> need and not coolness.\>

It's occurred to me that it's possible, but my experience actually has
shown otherwise with many people I know.  "Mom, do you really need a
450MHz machine?  Do you know what that means?" "Yes I need it."

> >> >> >> Or why buy a new TnT2 video card when the Gradd drivers only allow
> >> >> >> 640x480 at 60mhz.
> >> >> >> This is not a good thing.
> >> >>
> >> >> >Got a modern Matrox card myself.  Works like a dream.  I could buy a
> >> >> >G400 tomorrow and be fully supported with stable and efficient
drivers
> >> >> >under OS/2.
> >> >>
> >> >> It ISN'T fully support.  It doesn't support OpenGL under OS/2, for
example.
> >>
> >> >But there's no apps that would use it if it did, so why bother?
> >>
> >> You brought up the card. The problem, one of many, with OS/2 is that we
can go
> >> out and spend the same amount of money on machines, I'll put Windows
> >> (98,NT,2000) on it, and you put OS/2 on yours and your machine, by virtue 
of
> >> just installing OS/2(if you can install it) is immediately less
functional.
> 
> >Depends on the functionality you require.
> 
> No, it doesn't. The G400 doesn't have an OS/2 version with no OpenGl or
> Direct3d support. Even if you don't need those features, you pay for them.

Right I pay for lots of things I have no intention of using.  It's part
of life.  Do you use "Enhanced 911 service" that you get charged for on
your phone bill every month?  It's all in the packaging.  To get
something you want, you often have to also get and pay for things you
don't.

> >One of the big reasons I
> >always hold out on buying a new machine so long is that it will
> >invariably come with some BS "technologies" that I don't want.  One such
> >example of the recent past is Plug N Pray.  Another such example for me
> >currently is ACPI (soft power on/off) and the ATX power supply
> >associated with it.  Personally, most of the functionality OS/2 is
> >missing is functionality that I never gave a rats ass about to begin
> >with.  3D acceleration is another such technology for me.
> 
> Not a good reason. Every new machine ships with USB, ACPI, and PnP support.
You
> may not use them, in fact, with OS/2, you definitely don't, but they are
there
> nonetheless. Whether or not they are "BS" is a matter of opinion. The
problem
> if you have no choice because you cannot even take advantage of the stuff,
> "BS" or otherwise.

The real problem is not having a choice as to whether they are there or
not.  If I really wanted to use any of these features, I wouldn't be
trying to shoe-horn OS/2 onto my system.  I would choose the tool that
best suits my needs.

> If you wanted a new video card, the G400 is your best bet, and again,
despite
> not needing OpenGl or 3d support, you pay for it. You cannot use it, yet you
> are charged for it. That is my point. By virtue of using OS/2, you strip out
> features that you've paid for, even if you don't need them.

Again I defer to the above "Enhanced 911 service" argument.

> And if you decide, hey, I do want to use those features, you still can't
> because OS/2 won't let you.

Then I wouldn't be using OS/2.

> > The aforementioned G400 video card is a perfect example. Surely, you see
that
> > this is a bad thing.
> 
> >Depends on who considers it.
> 
> Not at all. No matter who consider it, paying for features you cannot use
> sucks.

Yup, but life sucks like that.

> >> >> That's my point. And the Matrox is probably the last modern card that
OS/2
> >> >> will see.
> >> >>
> >> >> Not a good thing.
> >>
> >> >Not bloody likely.  Scitech is saying otherwise.  After trying their
> >> >drivers, I am inclined to believe them.
> >>
> >> I think it is incredibly likely. OS/2 support is getting worst, not
better.
> 
> >Worse in what sense?  The recent Software Choice stuff?
> 
> Across the board. Video, soundcards, controllers, scanners, you name it and
> OS/2 is getting worse about supporting it.

There is enough support necessary for me to do what I need and want to
do and there's no sign of that deteriorating yet.

> >> Here is the supported chipset from Scitech
> >> [snip]
> >>
> >> The S4 did suprise me, but I don't think I've read of anyone actually
using it.
> >> However, most of these seem pretty old and low end.
> 
> >Well, the main issue is that Scitech has reasonable clout and good
> >relationships with many video card manufacturers and they have the base
> >system in place to expand all of their driver support to OS/2 with a
> >minimum of effort.  The will certainly keep improving their support
> >level.
> 
> The main issue is despite Scitech, OS/2 support for new video techologies is
> still severely lacking.

In terms of 3D gingerbread, sure.

> As for "minimum of effort" it seems to me that if it
> were that simple, they would have support for every card Windows supports.

The simplicity comes in them porting their drivers to OS/2 from other
platforms, not in porting other existing drivers that they didn't
write.  It's in their interests as a company to support as many cards as
possible.  Now it's also easy for them to have these cards supported on
several platforms at the same time, including OS/2.
 
> As for improving, that is but a hope.
> 
> >> >Which "online sources" have such lag?  Certainly none that I visit.  As
> >> >someone who has not been a part of the OS/2 "scene" in some years, do
> >> >you really expect to be up on the current news sources and web sites?
> >>
> >> You are being presumptous. You have no idea what "scene" I am part of,
nor do
> >> you have any idea about my reading habits, now do you?
> >> Seems to me that you tossed out Warpcast. OS/2 e-zine is still behind.
EDM/2 is
> >> hurting. Warp Pharmacy is 1996.
> 
> >EDM/2 has had several updates in the last few weeks.  There's also
> >Walter Metcalf's Focus on OS/2 which is updated fairly often.
> 
> EDM/2? Are you kidding? They went from May until the end of Sept. and all
they
> had to show were three articles. If the state of OS/2 programming is such
that
> it can only support 3 articles from the premier OS/2 programming site, then
> OS/2 is truly in a world of hurt.

Well.. the main problem is that not too many new APIs are coming out for
OS/2.  I think the primary reason for this is that programmers have yet
to exploit the current APIs.  The only new API recently released for
OS/2 has been MGL, and I myself can't even get the damn libraries to
build yet.  ;-)

If I ever gets the time, my GPMIXER/DSOUND style API will be out too,
but that's probably a little ways off.

> >> Not bad, but still viciously small. Heck, I'm still getting hits on the
> >> FORTRESS Ominor site.
> 
> >Not on the order of 100/day I'll wager.  ;-P
> 
> Nope, but I don't update it either. And guess what? All the software reviews
> are current. TWO YEARS LATER.

Right.  The products probably all went belly-up a while ago.  Things
change.  You can't expect all products to be under continual
improvement.  Projects get abandoned and others get picked up and
pursued.

> >> >> How many are using Mame?
> >>
> >> >How should I know?
> >>
> >> Look, you brought the site up to make a point of some kind about OS/2
gaming.
> 
> >Merely that it exists and there are a good number of games that can be
> >played in OS/2.
> 
> As opposed to a good number of games that people actually *want* to play.

Neither of us know what people want to play, but with 1700+ games,
they've got a good variety to choose from.  I'd think many people could
find something that would amuse them in such a list.

> >> Seems to me that how many people are using Mame is important.
> 
> >Well, the mere amount of interest that is generated from such a small
> >niche was what I was pointing out.
> 
> You have an amount of hits. It is a bit of a stretch to convert that to
> interest. I was counted as a hit, but I have no interest in playing emulated
> games under OS/2.

So let's assume that a generous 10% of the people to visit the site have
no interest in it whatsoever and happened upon it by sheer accident. 
The current hit count is approaching 5000, so 4500 hits were from
legitimate interest.

> >> Again, Buy that logic, nothing has a future. We are all living in the
past or
> >> now because everything is ahead of what we may have or acheive. Be that
as it
> >> may, I'd rather use something that gives me better access to even today's
> >> technologies. Further, if OS/2 has problems with todays stuff, that bolds 
ill
> >> for tomorrow.
> 
> >I prefer having better access to the technologies of today that I find
> >useful, such as CPU speed and memory capacity.  I feel that for my
> >applications, OS/2 gives me better access to such things.
> 
> Indeed. I feel, however, that OS/2 doesn't provide better access to the
> technologies of today, be they hardware or software. Simply put, Windows
runs
> more applications and supports more current hardware.

For your use, you're probably right.  For my use, I'm right.

> >> >> Sorry, but bug fixes and things like large harddrive support are
important.
> >>
> >> >Right.  Glad my system is all taken care of already.
> >>
> >> So you have a bug free system. Keep in mind that I read your post about
Fixpack
> >> 12. Seems that if since you had problems and depended on IBM to fix them.
> 
> >None of those problems were "show-stoppers."  I have not ever not been
> >able to do something I needed to because of those problems.
> 
> But they were issues, and you needed IBM to fix them despite saying you
didn't
> need IBM.

If I needed them fixed, I'd need IBM to fix them.  However my system was
fully functional and usable without such fixes.

> >> >> You'll find that out as soon as you replace that "filled 8gig" drive
that
> >> >> isn't filled with OS/2 software.
> >>
> >> >What will I find?  OS/2 will blow up on me?  Try again.
> >>
> >> No. You'll find that without IBM's services, you'll buy a 13 gig drive
and only
> >> see 8.
> 
> >Shall we go back and talk about problems that were fixed in Win9x and NT
> >service packs of the past?
> 
> If you wish, but I never said or implied that there weren't problems.
>
> >Are you reliant on them now?  Sure.
> 
> So are you. You just won't admit it.

Sure.  I'm reliant on the fixes that make my system work today.  I'm not

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               03-Oct-99 23:01:00
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:08
Subj: (2/2) Re: Time to move on

reliant on any further fixes at this time, however.
 
> >But the problems were fixed and available.  This doesn't indicate future
> >reliance.
> 
> Of course it does, unless you believe all problems were solved and
technology
> won't change to add something OS/2 won't support. And given OS/2's state of
> affairs, it is likely that OS/2 won't support new hardware and software.

Of course technologies will change and no-one knows if support will be
added or not.  My point is that my current system can continue to
function indefinitely (yes even beyond 1/1/2000 ;-)) in its current
state without any reliance on IBM.  I am not forced to adopt any new
technologies which could cause that to break down.

> >> But then, it seems that many OS/2 people are used to getting less than
> >> what they paid for.
> 
> >Depends on what you were looking for with each purchase.
> 
> No, it doesn't. If two people purchase the same videocard for the same
price,
> even if one person is expecting less, he is getting less than he paid for.

If he assigns any value to these features, then you are right.  If he
does not then he is indifferent to it and will get the best alternative
that suits his needs, regardless of how it is packaged.

> >> Care to change your story about "using my system without problems."?
> 
> >Absolutely not.  "A few times" and "Weird circumstances" don't
> >constitute continous problems that prevent me from functioning.
> 
> But it does show that you are dependent on IBM, despite your statement to
the
> contrary.

So you've never had to work around a problem in Winxx that wasn't
debilitating?  Do you <rely> on Microsoft to fix these problems or do
you just avoid the known problems and otherwise continue computing as
you normally do?

> >> >[ooooooooohhh... low blow]  ;-)  [j/k]
> >>
> >> Not at all. I am using a better OS.
> 
> >So you have switched to OS/2?  I finally got through to you!  ;-)
> 
> Sorry, but that would be going backwards. I wouldn't do that.

Better look at which way your saddle is facing Mr. DoRight.  ;-)

    o
<\  K- /
  --=--
  |  \ |

> >David, let's go to the videotape...
> >>> >> OS/2 is on its last legs. Microsoft may be cocky, but they do produce 
good
> >>> >> software
> >>> >
> >>> >Your opinion.
> >>>
> >>> And mine. And millions of other people.
> >>
> >>Congratulations!  You're on the bandwagon too!  I guess you're all
> >>right.
> 
> >Where did I imply that "people use Windows because it is cool", etc.?
> >My point was that people can have the same opinion without necessarily
> >being right.
> 
> My point is that have you consider that all those people are right adn that
you
> are mistaken?

Sure I have.  They might be right for themselves, but for me, they're
dead wrong.
 
> >> >> You ever stop to consider that IBM is
> >> >> pulling away from OS/2 because you are wrong and OS/2 is inferior?
> >>
> >> >My personal feeling is that they are pulling away for business reasons
> >> >(as businesses tend to do).  They weren't making enough profit to
> >> >justify their expenditures on SOHO OS/2.  Inferior or not, if it turned
> >> >a profit, they'd be pushing it no doubt.
> >>
> >> An inability to make a profit is but one kind of inferiority.
> 
> >In this case, it's the only one that matters to a business.
> 
> Wrong again. Potential profitability also matters.

"Inability to make a profit" -- is this not also similar to "potential
profitability"?  Let's not play word games.

> >> >> So IBM's "SuperFat" is also a hack because a defrag will hose OS/2's
EA file.
> >> >> Be consistent.  That particular ability is in NTFS which isn't
affected by any
> >> >> defrag program available to DOS.
> >>
> >> >Ditto HPFS, so what's the point?
> >>
> >> That NTFS gives you that particular ability, while maintaining its
immunity to
> >> DOS defraggers and OS/2 does not.
> 
> >HPFS is quite immune to DOS defraggers.  What did you mean?
> 
> That NTFS gives you equal immunity and more ability.

And was designed how many years later?  Don't compare DOS 5.0 to Win95. 
It's just as silly.

> >> Really? So you've asked OS/2 users every where and none are dependent on
8 16
> >> programs. Furthermore, they all said zero?
> >> On what do you base that statement? A distant relative to fact, perhaps?
> 
> >Check the newsgroup traffic.  How many people have even so much as
> >mention Win16 apps in the last 2 years?  Where are you getting
> >information that OS/2 users are reliant on Win16 apps.  Which Win16
> >apps?  You made the claim, not me.
> 
> Are you kidding? Hardly a day goes by on the comp.os.os2.apps group without
> someone asking about Quicken, Win-OS/2 something, ICQ, or plugins.

There's an OS/2 native equivalent of just about everything.  What people
are stuck on is due to their habits and familiarity, not due to
inability of the platform.  No one <has to> rely on WinOS/2 if they
don't want to.  I'm living proof.

> Do you read that group?

Nope.  Too many whiners.  ;-)  [Unlike this group, right?]

> >> >If I relied on Win16 proggies, I'd need a whole lot more than long
> >> >filenames.  Glad I'm not in that boat.
> >>
> >> But others are and your predicament is cold comfort.
> 
> >Who?  Which apps?
> 
> See above.
> 
> >> >Why would I want to do such a thing?
> >>
> >> Well, believe it or not, but some people like to use long file named
> >> directories.
> 
> >I do too.  That's why I use HPFS and not FAT.  That's also why I don't
> >use old software that can't recognize LFNs.
> 
> Good 4 you. However, some have different needs and OS/2 does nothing to
address
> them.

Then I recommend to them that they seek OS/2 native software to meet
their needs or choose another platform.  No one should force something
on themselves if it doesn't fit their needs or function as needed.

> >> That was a big selling point for OS/2 years ago. However, despite
> >> this, those Windows programs you claim people don't need cannot be
installed
> >> into a long filenamed directory. Also, you cannot open a file with a long
> >> filename using a Win16 program under OS/2.
> 
> >Ok.  And...?  No one is crying about it that I've heard.
> 
> Exactly, because you haven't been listening.

See above.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     03-Oct-99 20:22:25
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:08
Subj: Re: Need for NC's is alive

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

On 10-4-99, 11:11:58 PM, Dennis Peterson <dpeterso@halcyon.com> wrote 
regarding Need for NC's is alive:


>  at
> 
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/19991003/aponline184851_0
00.htm

>                Amazon planned to announce Monday it will become one of
>                the first e-commerce companies to sell its products
> through
>                new wireless devices. The move is timed to coincide 
with
> this
>                week's nationwide release of 3Com Corp.'s new Palm VII, 
a
>                hand-held computer that will provide wireless Internet
> access
>                to allow users to read e-mail, shop and browse popular
> Web
>                sites.

> Does anyone not see a need for simple Network Computers here? If kiosk
> systems are located in high traffic areas they will also reap the
> bennies of this movement. Not everyone is going to go out and buy this
> new Palm device but I do believe many would use a kiosk NC if 
available.
> I would.

and I would.  

SEGA is doing something similar for e-commerce (with their Dreamcast 
console) in Japan.  The $200 console comes with a 56kb modem and loads 
the OS off the CD-ROM.  While MS has made WinCE for the DreamCast, it 
is not pre-loaded or a default OS for the console.  The browser is 
based on the IE code base but by a 3rd party and it has crummy 
javascript support.  

Sony is planning on e-commerce and downloading digital entertainment 
with the Playstation II.  The PSX II will also play PSX I games.  N 
Petreley of Inforworld has commented this week that Sony's PSX will be 
positioned as client.

I can't see why the retail community would sit back and let someone 
like MS or IBM control how and where people shop on-line.  Given the 
OS options with Palm, BSD and LINUX, there is the potential for many 
non-PC devices for e-commerce.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     03-Oct-99 20:38:22
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:08
Subj: Re: IBM is NOT quadzillion times larger than MS

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

On 10-4-99, 1:06:14 AM, Robert Morelli <morelli@math.utah.edu> wrote 
regarding Re: IBM is NOT quadzillion times larger than MS:


> fmc wrote:
> >

> > IBM's assets total $86.1 B.  MS assets total $22.3 B

> These are all good points.  

> I would argue the situation is even more complex though.  The biggest
> difference between Microsoft and IBM is diversity.  As one analyst put 
it,  IBM
> starts with sand and ends with complex computer systems.  


> Microsoft is a quite different company in that it holds a great deal 
of power in an
> important but narrow area:  PC software.  It has tried to diversify,  
with limited
> success.  

MS lacks the infrastructural assets of an IBM.  IBM can manufacture 
world class computer chips in fabrication plants.  MS can press 
CD-ROMS.  Software is a difficult thing to value.  MS has the 
potential to lose value if say the gov't forces them to split into 
several units each with the rights to all MS software. 


> Microsoft's narrowness and its failure to demonstrate an ability to 
adapt,  is a
> potential weakness.  For instance,  if the software paradigm shifts 
away from
> their traditional model,  things could change dramatically for them.  
It seems
> quite plausible for instance that over the next decade,  Linux will 
deeply encroach
> on Windows and Java will deeply encroach on Microsoft's control of 
languages and
> APIs.  Together,  these two technologies diminish the importance of 
the idea of
> a delicately controlled proprietary platform,  the rock on which 
Microsoft is
> founded.

COREL is shipping an OS with their apps - a LINUX distribution.  COREL 
is inverting MS's strategy of adding value to their OS - incorporating 
functionality that was once an application or utility.  COREL is 
adding an OS to their applications.  

Java offers a means to build reliable software fast.  As advanced as 
MS tools are for development, their underlying technology is very old 
and thus has become complex.  MFC for example is a large codebase that 
is more difficult to maintain (for MS) as it has evolved over the 
years.  Java is a clean, new start so it has an advantage.  It seems 
to work well on large servers for development.

> These are some of the important and power issues and this is why most 
business
> people would consider IBM a much more powerful company than Microsoft.

IBM has experience.  IBM understands Fortune 1000 businesses and they 
understand technology.  MS understand the markets they now dominate 
but not much else.  If MS cannot simplify the PC client experience 
then the PC will lose it's importance to less complex devices designed 
as task specific devices.  





--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: forgitaboutit@fake.com                            04-Oct-99 00:37:23
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:08
Subj: (1/2) Re: Time to move on

From: David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com>

In article <37F8186D.42A0E5A@stny.rr.com>, mamodeo@stny.rr.com says...
"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> 
> In article <37F4E744.AF7FE193@stny.rr.com>, mamodeo@stny.rr.com says...
> David H. McCoy" wrote:
>> >> >That or that fact that it was written by a bunch of l33t h4x0rZ.  I'm
>> >> >not sure which would disturb them most.
>> >>
>> >> Probably the support issue.
>> 
>> >Actually I was thinking of the security issue.
>> 
>> Win9x isn't secure, but companies use it. Why? It is supported. If
something
>> goes wrong, you can hold someone accountable.

>And where is Win9x deployed?  As a firewall for the office?  No.  It's
>deployed where it is the least risky because it is an inexpensive
>solution.  They can afford to have their internal network insecure as
>long as they're protected from external sources.  The absolutely cannot
>afford to put Win9x as their firewall, in spite of it being a well
>supported platform.  I think the same holds true, to a lesser extent,
>with Linux.
 
The point is that support is important for these companies no matter the 
context. A secure OS with no support is something that corps. still look down 
on.

>> >> >I'm in the minority of the computer using public, not the <OS/2> using
>> >> >crowd.  You were talking about people complaining about OS/2.  What are
>> >> >these "companies" going to complain about OS/2 for if they don't use
>> >> >it?  Stick to your own context please.
>> >>
>> >> We are talking about support. Would you like for me to post the context?
>> 
>> >Yes we were (it actually would have been helpful to keep a line or two
>> >more context in there), but you mentioned all of the people
>> >complaining.  The only people I hear complaining are SOHO users (or
>> >former SOHO users) here.  And my personal "gut" feeling FWIW, etc., is
>> >that of those SOHO users many more are satasfied with their current
>> >quality of OS than dissatasfied.
>> 
>> This issue came up because you claimed support isn't important. I say it
is. My
>> "gut" as well as conversations with people who adminster machines tells me
that
>> they wish hold someone accountable.

>I claimed support wasn't important for <me>.  Are you going to argue
>that point?  I don't need to hold anyone accountable for anything
>because my system works fine and nothing I do is "mission critical". 
>Having said that I also trust that all of my data is safe and in "good
>hands" due to past good experience with the product.

And that is why I said that you are in the minority. Support isn't important
to 
you. Fine. It is important to most,  hence, you are in the minority.


>> >> Interesting. But that wasn't what I asked. You guys seem woefully out of 
touch.
>> >> Has it occured to you that most people do this?
>> 
>> >I actually wasn't quite sure what you were asking.  Could you restate
>> >perhaps?
>> 
>> Has it occurred to your that most people purchase their computer stuff
based on
>> need and not coolness.\>

>It's occurred to me that it's possible, but my experience actually has
>shown otherwise with many people I know.  "Mom, do you really need a
>450MHz machine?  Do you know what that means?" "Yes I need it."

The problem with that particular brand of reasoning, namely, that your mother 
doesn't need a P3-450 for email is basically irrelevent because as the CPU 
speeds go up, they stop making old ones.

But to counterpoint you, my mother-in-law has a 486DX2/66 and, despite P3 
commercials, doesn't feel that she needs a new machine.

>> >Depends on the functionality you require.
>> 
>> No, it doesn't. The G400 doesn't have an OS/2 version with no OpenGl or
>> Direct3d support. Even if you don't need those features, you pay for them.

>Right I pay for lots of things I have no intention of using.  It's part
>of life.  Do you use "Enhanced 911 service" that you get charged for on
>your phone bill every month?  It's all in the packaging.  To get
>something you want, you often have to also get and pay for things you
>don't.

However, I CAN use enhanced 911. OS/2, in our G400 example, doesn't give you 
the option. I can purchase a G400 like you. I can then decide not to use the 
OpenGL support. 

You cannot make such a choice, because your *only* option is that you cannot 
use OpenGL. If I change my mind, under Windows, I can elect to use OpenGL.

If you change your mind, under OS/2, you *still* cannot use OpenGL.

There is a difference between choosing not to use a thing, and being unable to 

use a thing. 

>> >One of the big reasons I
>> >always hold out on buying a new machine so long is that it will
>> >invariably come with some BS "technologies" that I don't want.  One such
>> >example of the recent past is Plug N Pray.  Another such example for me
>> >currently is ACPI (soft power on/off) and the ATX power supply
>> >associated with it.  Personally, most of the functionality OS/2 is
>> >missing is functionality that I never gave a rats ass about to begin
>> >with.  3D acceleration is another such technology for me.
>> 
>> Not a good reason. Every new machine ships with USB, ACPI, and PnP support. 
You
>> may not use them, in fact, with OS/2, you definitely don't, but they are
there
>> nonetheless. Whether or not they are "BS" is a matter of opinion. The
problem
>> if you have no choice because you cannot even take advantage of the stuff,
>> "BS" or otherwise.

>The real problem is not having a choice as to whether they are there or
>not.  If I really wanted to use any of these features, I wouldn't be
>trying to shoe-horn OS/2 onto my system.  I would choose the tool that
>best suits my needs.

That's were we differ. I prefer to use something that increases my options. I 
can then decide, "Hey, let me give that feature a try."

>> If you wanted a new video card, the G400 is your best bet, and again,
despite
>> not needing OpenGl or 3d support, you pay for it. You cannot use it, yet
you
>> are charged for it. That is my point. By virtue of using OS/2, you strip
out
>> features that you've paid for, even if you don't need them.

>Again I defer to the above "Enhanced 911 service" argument.

And look at my retort. 

>> And if you decide, hey, I do want to use those features, you still can't
>> because OS/2 won't let you.

>Then I wouldn't be using OS/2.

Indeed.

>> > The aforementioned G400 video card is a perfect example. Surely, you see
that
>> > this is a bad thing.
>> 
>> >Depends on who considers it.
>> 
>> Not at all. No matter who consider it, paying for features you cannot use
>> sucks.

>Yup, but life sucks like that.

I disagree. I am hard pressed to think of examples of paying for features I 
cannot use as opposed to paying for features I just don't use.

>> >Worse in what sense?  The recent Software Choice stuff?
>> 
>> Across the board. Video, soundcards, controllers, scanners, you name it and
>> OS/2 is getting worse about supporting it.

>There is enough support necessary for me to do what I need and want to
>do and there's no sign of that deteriorating yet.

Again, you are in a minority. 

>> >Well, the main issue is that Scitech has reasonable clout and good
>> >relationships with many video card manufacturers and they have the base
>> >system in place to expand all of their driver support to OS/2 with a
>> >minimum of effort.  The will certainly keep improving their support
>> >level.
>> 
>> The main issue is despite Scitech, OS/2 support for new video techologies
is
>> still severely lacking.

>In terms of 3D gingerbread, sure.

It isn't gingerbread. These are basic features of the card. Basic. And Scitech 

doesn't support them. I find it difficult to be impressed with their software 
doesn't support the basic features of these new cards.

>> As for "minimum of effort" it seems to me that if it
>> were that simple, they would have support for every card Windows supports.

>The simplicity comes in them porting their drivers to OS/2 from other
>platforms, not in porting other existing drivers that they didn't
>write.  It's in their interests as a company to support as many cards as
>possible.  Now it's also easy for them to have these cards supported on
>several platforms at the same time, including OS/2.
 
Then explain the absence of so many newer cards. Most people don't care if a 5 

year old Tseng card is supported. Their Windows arsenal includes a program
that 
gives videocards OpenGL support if the card doesn't have such support
natively.

Does Scitech have OS/2 versions of such software?

>> >EDM/2 has had several updates in the last few weeks.  There's also
>> >Walter Metcalf's Focus on OS/2 which is updated fairly often.
>> 
>> EDM/2? Are you kidding? They went from May until the end of Sept. and all
they
>> had to show were three articles. If the state of OS/2 programming is such
that
>> it can only support 3 articles from the premier OS/2 programming site, then
>> OS/2 is truly in a world of hurt.

>Well.. the main problem is that not too many new APIs are coming out for
>OS/2.  I think the primary reason for this is that programmers have yet
>to exploit the current APIs.  The only new API recently released for
>OS/2 has been MGL, and I myself can't even get the damn libraries to
>build yet.  ;-)

I think that there are other problems. For example, IBM has removed SOM
support 
from VisualAge. Also, since there are clealy fewer programmers for OS/2 you 
have fewer people advancing program techniques, trying to learn OS/2, wanting 
to show OS/2 programming tricks, in addition to the fact that OS/2's API isn't 

advancing.

Makes for a bleak programming experience.

>> >Not on the order of 100/day I'll wager.  ;-P
>> 
>> Nope, but I don't update it either. And guess what? All the software
reviews
>> are current. TWO YEARS LATER.

>Right.  The products probably all went belly-up a while ago.  Things
>change.  You can't expect all products to be under continual
>improvement.  Projects get abandoned and others get picked up and
>pursued.

True. But look at why the products vanished. No demand. I reviewed Intercom 
3.16. This was an OS/2 only internet phone program. When it was under 
development, it advance quickly, now, because the market has dried up, it's 
gone.  

The problems is that, for the most part, things are not changing under OS/2. 
Back in late 95, things were happening with OS/2. Magazines could write 
articles, e-zines were plentiful, and there was plenty to write about. This is 

no longer the case.

>> >Merely that it exists and there are a good number of games that can be
>> >played in OS/2.
>> 
>> As opposed to a good number of games that people actually *want* to play.

>Neither of us know what people want to play, but with 1700+ games,
>they've got a good variety to choose from.  I'd think many people could
>find something that would amuse them in such a list.

I can check best-seller list and easily find what people want to play. I'll be 

willing to wager that none of those 1700 games are on those lists.

>> >Well, the mere amount of interest that is generated from such a small
>> >niche was what I was pointing out.
>> 
>> You have an amount of hits. It is a bit of a stretch to convert that to
>> interest. I was counted as a hit, but I have no interest in playing
emulated
>> games under OS/2.

>So let's assume that a generous 10% of the people to visit the site have
>no interest in it whatsoever and happened upon it by sheer accident. 
>The current hit count is approaching 5000, so 4500 hits were from
>legitimate interest.

But did those translate to 4500 downloads?

>> >I prefer having better access to the technologies of today that I find
>> >useful, such as CPU speed and memory capacity.  I feel that for my
>> >applications, OS/2 gives me better access to such things.
>> 
>> Indeed. I feel, however, that OS/2 doesn't provide better access to the
>> technologies of today, be they hardware or software. Simply put, Windows
runs
>> more applications and supports more current hardware.

>For your use, you're probably right.  For my use, I'm right.

Well, what do you software do you run that doesn't have a Window equivalent? 
What hardware do you run under OS/2 that Windows doesn't support?

>> >None of those problems were "show-stoppers."  I have not ever not been
>> >able to do something I needed to because of those problems.
>> 
>> But they were issues, and you needed IBM to fix them despite saying you
didn't
>> need IBM.

>If I needed them fixed, I'd need IBM to fix them.  However my system was
>fully functional and usable without such fixes.

If your system was fully functional and usable why did you install any 
fixpacks. I assume that number 12 wasn't the first.

>> If you wish, but I never said or implied that there weren't problems.
>>
>> >Are you reliant on them now?  Sure.
>> 
>> So are you. You just won't admit it.

>Sure.  I'm reliant on the fixes that make my system work today.  I'm not
>reliant on any further fixes at this time, however.
 
Even so, you still reliant on them, which was my point.

>> >But the problems were fixed and available.  This doesn't indicate future
>> >reliance.
>> 
>> Of course it does, unless you believe all problems were solved and
technology
>> won't change to add something OS/2 won't support. And given OS/2's state of
>> affairs, it is likely that OS/2 won't support new hardware and software.

>Of course technologies will change and no-one knows if support will be
>added or not.  My point is that my current system can continue to
>function indefinitely (yes even beyond 1/1/2000 ;-)) in its current
>state without any reliance on IBM.  I am not forced to adopt any new
>technologies which could cause that to break down.

I never said you were forced. However, you are reliant on IBM and limited
using 
OS/2 should your needs change.

>> >> But then, it seems that many OS/2 people are used to getting less than
>> >> what they paid for.
>> 
>> >Depends on what you were looking for with each purchase.
>> 
>> No, it doesn't. If two people purchase the same videocard for the same
price,
>> even if one person is expecting less, he is getting less than he paid for.

>If he assigns any value to these features, then you are right.  If he
>does not then he is indifferent to it and will get the best alternative
>that suits his needs, regardless of how it is packaged.

I am right, regardless. Back to the G400. Let's say I want OpenGL. You don't. 
That feature is valuble to me, worthless to you, YET, we still pay the same 

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: forgitaboutit@fake.com                            04-Oct-99 00:37:23
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 03:26:08
Subj: (2/2) Re: Time to move on

price. You still get less value because you paid the same.

Let's say neither of us care about OpenGL. Well, we both got screwed. But we 
both changed our minds. Well, all of a sudden, I'm happy about the money
spent, 
but you are still screwed because you picked OS/2?

What were you thinking? :-)

>> But it does show that you are dependent on IBM, despite your statement to
the
>> contrary.

>So you've never had to work around a problem in Winxx that wasn't
>debilitating?  Do you <rely> on Microsoft to fix these problems or do
>you just avoid the known problems and otherwise continue computing as
>you normally do?

We both rely on the makers of the OS for fixes, only I admit it. A workaround 
is not a fix.
 
>> >So you have switched to OS/2?  I finally got through to you!  ;-)
>> 
>> Sorry, but that would be going backwards. I wouldn't do that.

>Better look at which way your saddle is facing Mr. DoRight.  ;-)

It is safely facing foward.

>> >Where did I imply that "people use Windows because it is cool", etc.?
>> >My point was that people can have the same opinion without necessarily
>> >being right.
>> 
>> My point is that have you consider that all those people are right adn that 
you
>> are mistaken?

>Sure I have.  They might be right for themselves, but for me, they're
>dead wrong.
 
Trust them. Remove the "might." They are right for themselves. 


>> >> An inability to make a profit is but one kind of inferiority.
>> 
>> >In this case, it's the only one that matters to a business.
>> 
>> Wrong again. Potential profitability also matters.

>"Inability to make a profit" -- is this not also similar to "potential
>profitability"?  Let's not play word games.

They are not similar. RealNetworks lost money for years. A few months ago,
they 
problem even. They are now expect to make a profit. People invested in 
RealNetworks because they saw a potential for profit.

This is not the same as an inability to make a profit.


>> >HPFS is quite immune to DOS defraggers.  What did you mean?
>> 
>> That NTFS gives you equal immunity and more ability.

>And was designed how many years later?  Don't compare DOS 5.0 to Win95. 
>It's just as silly.

There's nothing stopping IBM from improving HPFS. NS is adding quotas and  
encryption, for example to NTFS.


>> >Check the newsgroup traffic.  How many people have even so much as
>> >mention Win16 apps in the last 2 years?  Where are you getting
>> >information that OS/2 users are reliant on Win16 apps.  Which Win16
>> >apps?  You made the claim, not me.
>> 
>> Are you kidding? Hardly a day goes by on the comp.os.os2.apps group without
>> someone asking about Quicken, Win-OS/2 something, ICQ, or plugins.

>There's an OS/2 native equivalent of just about everything.  What people
>are stuck on is due to their habits and familiarity, not due to
>inability of the platform.  No one <has to> rely on WinOS/2 if they
>don't want to.  I'm living proof.

Wrong. I use Quicken for many reasons, including Checkfree support. Which OS/2 

equivalent has Checkfree support? Which OS/2 equivalent gives you read/write 
protection for zipdisk? Or parallel-port scanner support? Palmpilot syncing 
with PIMs? Animated Gifs? CD rippers ala' RealJukebox or Musicmatch? Purify? 
Boundchecker? OpenGL?

Sorry, but it is definitely the inability of the platform.

>> Do you read that group?

>Nope.  Too many whiners.  ;-)  [Unlike this group, right?]

I agree. If you can't find what you need and still use OS/2, but still 
complain, you are whining.

>> >> Well, believe it or not, but some people like to use long file named
>> >> directories.
>> 
>> >I do too.  That's why I use HPFS and not FAT.  That's also why I don't
>> >use old software that can't recognize LFNs.
>> 
>> Good 4 you. However, some have different needs and OS/2 does nothing to
address
>> them.

>Then I recommend to them that they seek OS/2 native software to meet
>their needs or choose another platform.  No one should force something
>on themselves if it doesn't fit their needs or function as needed.

Better push the second, because OS/2 has too many gaps.

>> >> That was a big selling point for OS/2 years ago. However, despite
>> >> this, those Windows programs you claim people don't need cannot be
installed
>> >> into a long filenamed directory. Also, you cannot open a file with a
long
>> >> filename using a Win16 program under OS/2.
>> 
>> >Ok.  And...?  No one is crying about it that I've heard.
>> 
>> Exactly, because you haven't been listening.

>See above.

>- Marty

Indeed.

-- 
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            04-Oct-99 08:59:13
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 10:49:05
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Sun, 3 Oct 1999 21:36:12, David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> 
wrote:

> In article <37F4E744.AF7FE193@stny.rr.com>, mamodeo@stny.rr.com says...
> David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >> >That or that fact that it was written by a bunch of l33t h4x0rZ.  I'm
> >> >not sure which would disturb them most.
> >> 
> >> Probably the support issue.
>  
> >Actually I was thinking of the security issue.
>  
> Win9x isn't secure, but companies use it. Why? It is supported. If something 

> goes wrong, you can hold someone accountable.
>  
> 
Excuse me for asking, but _who_ are you going to hold accountable when
(not "if") Win 9x falls on its butt?

It would be nice to know the address of the guy we can sue for such a 
thing. Not for me personally, but I have some friends (well, 
acquaintances actually) that would commit hideous crimes for that 
address.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net
=======================================================
If we could have our cake _and_ eat it,
people would start whining about seconds.
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: theqcc@hotmail.com                                04-Oct-99 10:46:23
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 10:49:05
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: "Quake Cheaters Clan" <theqcc@hotmail.com>

Howdy Zealots

By using OS/2 and continously denegrating Windows, do you consider
yourselves superior to any  other user group?

Imagine this:

Your PC is getting old, long in the tough...slow and the bits seem a bit
more shaky, the hard drive getting a bit tight.... so off down to town you
trot... money in your sweaty hand.
You enter your favourite computer store and see a gleaming new AMD ATHLON or
Pentium III.... wow, 256 mb RAM, 17 Gig HD.... sheesh and a 19 inch
monitor...WOW, but wait... erm... it has Windows 98/2000/NT5
preloaded..erk.... do you buy it or do you not...?
It has great gfx card, sound system and DVD/CD/CDWR... so you do, and when
it gets delivered you wipe off the windows  and install OS/2 warp 3 or 4.
Ugh.
You lose a modern OS for an old almost defunct one.... you cannot
realistically use your new technology to its full capacity... sufficient
drivers, programs, utils etc to make use of the hardware.... I mean look,
for a 486 OS/2 is good, but for a new ultra modern machine OS//2 blows....
it blows harder than hurricane Gilbert....
And the situatiion will not improve... as time moves on OS/2 will get left
further behind... with its few supporters looking onwards... perhspa proud,
perhaps happy, but forver wishing that the trian leaving the station was
their train, and not the mule that they have.

QCC


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Customer of Planet Online (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bbarclay@ca.ibm.com                               04-Oct-99 11:56:21
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 16:43:07
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: Brad BARCLAY <bbarclay@ca.ibm.com>

Esther Schindler wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 29 Sep 1999 18:32:15, Brad BARCLAY <bbarclay@ca.ibm.com>
> wrote:
> 
> |         Still, there may be a way around both the price and the
limitations or
> | any users group who has incorporated themselves.  I'm not speaking for
> | IBM here, but there is *nothing* anywhere that prevents a group of
> | people from incorporating themselves as a private enterprise.  A users
> | group (not necesarily a formal one - perhaps just a "group of users")
> | could get together and, for say $5 each incorporate themselves as a
> | private, not-for-profit company, each holding a single share.  The
> | "corporation" could then purchase a Software Choice subscription, and
> | all of the shareholders could then have the right to download from
> | Software Choice as a part of the corporation.
> 
> Brad, do you have -- or have available to you -- the full terms and
> conditions associated with the Software Choice Subscription? I'd like
> a lawyer to examine the rules before I made an authoritative statement
> about the validity of your suggestion.

	I'll have ot look around for this.  Currently, I have what everyone
else has available publicly via the Internet.  I'll see what I can dig
up :)
 
> (I mention... merely in passing... that the Phoenix OS/2 Society has
> been incorporated as a not-for-profit corporation for over 5 years,
> and has over 500 members. It already offers its members several
> benefits... as vice president of the organization, I'm certainly in
> favor of offering _more_.)

	I would never think of you as someone who would be in favour of
offering "less" (well, except maybe in those cases where less is more...
:).

Brad BARCLAY

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Posted from the OS/2 WARP v4.5 desktop of Brad BARCLAY.
E-Mail:  bbarclay@ca.ibm.com		Location:  2G43D@Torolabs

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Toronto Labs, DB2 for OS/2 Install Developer (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               04-Oct-99 12:13:21
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 16:43:07
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Some gutless weenie wrote:
> 
> Howdy Zealots
> 
> By using OS/2 and continously denegrating Windows, do you consider
> yourselves superior to any  other user group?

How delightfully off-topic and unrelated to anything being discussed in
this thread.  Are you a prerecorded message or something that just keeps
spitting out the same thing.  If you want, I'll write you a little
script that'll post your usual message once a week or so in a random
thread and save you the trouble.

Should you wish to actually discuss any issues or ideas, feel free to do
so.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bbarclay@ca.ibm.com                               04-Oct-99 12:01:17
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 16:43:07
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: Brad BARCLAY <bbarclay@ca.ibm.com>

Esther Schindler wrote:
> But we won't know unless we try, will we?
> 
> I have no idea how many members would take advantage of a
> reduced-price subscription to Software Choice. It would, however, be a
> heck of a membership incentive!

	Speaking entirely hypothetically of course - but as I've always read it
you only ned ONE SW Choice subscription per enterprise.  So that
"reduced-price subscription" could potentially be the subscription price
/ number of users - I imagine you could just tack on an extra $1 to your
yearly membership fees to cover the subscription (assuming your members
were agreeable to the increase, of course :).

	My best suggestion would be to talk to an IBM Sales representitive
about this.  <disclaimer> I'm just a coder, I don't deal with sales or
legal stuff, so anything I suggest might not be possible :)
</disclaimer>

Brad BARCLAY

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Posted from the OS/2 WARP v4.5 desktop of Brad BARCLAY.
E-Mail:  bbarclay@ca.ibm.com		Location:  2G43D@Torolabs

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Toronto Labs, DB2 for OS/2 Install Developer (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bbarclay@ca.ibm.com                               04-Oct-99 12:08:08
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 16:43:07
Subj: Re: Win 2000 burns IT managers...ZDNews

From: Brad BARCLAY <bbarclay@ca.ibm.com>

Kelly Robinson wrote:
> > 6) Some IT shops have already spent their Win 2000 budget on NT Service
> Packs;
> > and....
> 
> Huh?  They're free for free download.  Or $10 or whatever for a CD.  If
> these shops don't know what "download" means, then they can go under.

	The cost involved wih service packs goes beyond the cost of media.  In
busness terms, they'll calculate the cost of used bandwidth and the cost
to actually deply the fixpaks to systems as a part of the overall cost
of the fixpak.

Brad BARCLAY

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Posted from the OS/2 WARP v4.5 desktop of Brad BARCLAY.
E-Mail:  bbarclay@ca.ibm.com		Location:  2G43D@Torolabs

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Toronto Labs, DB2 for OS/2 Install Developer (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: esther@bitranch.com                               04-Oct-99 15:57:00
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 16:43:07
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler)

On Mon, 4 Oct 1999 13:56:53, Mark Kelley <mdk@agad.purdue.edu> wrote:

| There is a difference between paying for an upgrade and paying for the
latest
| Netscape and Java.  I never claimed I wanted free support forever, of
course, that's
| simply your misrepresentation of what I said.  If IBM is going to charge us, 
then
| they should give us something worth charging for.  Netscape and Java? 
Sorry, I don't
| think they're worth the charge, especially when they are offered for free
and every
| other platform.

I understand your point of view, Mark.

Java and Netscape may be offered for free on every other platform... 
but what does it cost each vendor to supply them, and what do they get
back in return?

If, for argument's sake, it costs IBM a hunk of change to pay Netscape
to develop/update a version for OS/2, and Netscape doesn't see a 
reason to do so without being paid for it (it's not like they're 
worried that Microsoft will port IE to the platform)... then IBM would
have to pass on that expense to the customer _somehow_. IBM doesn't 
have a marketing impetus to sell more copies of OS/2; it's clear to 
the most casual observer that they'll provide support to the customers
who are already using it (and "customer" is defined as "big company") 
but that's about it. If you want more than you've got, whatever that 
is, you have to be prepared to pay for it.

Sheesh, I can't believe that I've found myself in the position of 
defending IBM!

--Esther


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: theqcc@hotmail.com                                04-Oct-99 17:20:23
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 16:43:07
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: "Quake Cheaters Clan" <theqcc@hotmail.com>

My point Estheris that as the technology takes ever increasing leaps and
bounds, OS/2 to all intents and purposes remains very much static. But other
OS's are evolving along with the hardware or is it vice versa?.

Very much soon OS/2 will pass the point when it can be considered anything
but a museum curiosity along with the Apple 1, Timex 1000 and Tandy Color
Computer. All find machines I'm sure, but a curiosity nonetheless.

Thats my point. OS/2 is getting left behind - you can't go beating the same
tired old beat out of it forever.

Tell me, do you still use 8-tracks and Betamax?

if you do tell me why.... if you don't why not?

QCC


Esther Schindler <esther@bitranch.com> wrote in message
news:LoEFmgJJ9ecw-pn2-IdQWyReL2wBx@agave.bitranch.com...
> On Mon, 4 Oct 1999 09:46:47, "Quake Cheaters Clan"
> <theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:
> | By using OS/2 and continously denegrating Windows, do you consider
> | yourselves superior to any  other user group?
>
> I don't think this question could have a group answer, just individual
> ones.
>
> Who bothers to denigrate Windows? Life's too short for that. I use
> what works best for me... I don't consider myself superior to anybody
> else, certainly not because of the collection of ones and zeroes that
> I picked. That's as stupid as going to other advocacy groups and tell
> the participants they're all idiots for using something that's
> obviously over the hill.
>
> | Imagine this:
> |
> | Your PC is getting old, long in the tough...slow and the bits seem a bit
> | more shaky, the hard drive getting a bit tight.... so off down to town
you
> | trot... money in your sweaty hand.
> | You enter your favourite computer store and see a gleaming new AMD
ATHLON or
> | Pentium III.... wow, 256 mb RAM, 17 Gig HD.... sheesh and a 19 inch
> | monitor...WOW, but wait... erm... it has Windows 98/2000/NT5
> | preloaded..erk.... do you buy it or do you not...?
> | It has great gfx card, sound system and DVD/CD/CDWR... so you do, and
when
> | it gets delivered you wipe off the windows  and install OS/2 warp 3 or
4.
> | Ugh.
> | You lose a modern OS for an old almost defunct one.... you cannot
> | realistically use your new technology to its full capacity... sufficient
> | drivers, programs, utils etc to make use of the hardware.... I mean
look,
> | for a 486 OS/2 is good, but for a new ultra modern machine OS//2
blows....
> | it blows harder than hurricane Gilbert....
> | And the situatiion will not improve... as time moves on OS/2 will get
left
> | further behind... with its few supporters looking onwards... perhspa
proud,
> | perhaps happy, but forver wishing that the trian leaving the station was
> | their train, and not the mule that they have.
>
> Funny that you mention that. A couple of weeks ago we bought a brand
> new Compaq PC off the shelf at OfficeMax. It works just fine with Warp
> Server. Your point is...?
>
> --Esther


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Customer of Planet Online (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mdk@agad.purdue.edu                               04-Oct-99 11:56:09
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 16:43:07
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: Mark Kelley <mdk@agad.purdue.edu>

Esther Schindler wrote:

> Java and Netscape may be offered for free on every other platform...
> but what does it cost each vendor to supply them, and what do they get
> back in return?
>
> If, for argument's sake, it costs IBM a hunk of change to pay Netscape
> to develop/update a version for OS/2, and Netscape doesn't see a
> reason to do so without being paid for it (it's not like they're
> worried that Microsoft will port IE to the platform)... then IBM would
> have to pass on that expense to the customer _somehow_. IBM doesn't
> have a marketing impetus to sell more copies of OS/2; it's clear to
> the most casual observer that they'll provide support to the customers
> who are already using it (and "customer" is defined as "big company")
> but that's about it. If you want more than you've got, whatever that
> is, you have to be prepared to pay for it.

I agree with what you say.  I guess that's the point at which I have a problem 
with this,
though.  To me, IBM's move makes it clear that they aren't interested in
further developing
the OS/2 client.  I'd be willing to pay the support and get Netscape and Java
if I was
pretty confident that I was investing (although it really isn't that much
money) in
something that had a future.  IBM is not interested (or motivated) in selling
OS/2 in the
future, and that means development will languish.  They'll continue to release 
fixes and
occasional updates like Netscape and Java in order to keep their big customers 
happy, but
they're not interested in SOHO users.  In the two years of support that my
Software Choice
subscription will buy, I'm afraid that I'll have acquired the latest Netscape
and Java and
little else, and at the end of that time period IBM will announce that there
is no more.

I have no intention of getting rid of my OS/2 partitions and all of the
software I've
bought for it and use with it.  It all still works, and does so very well. 
However, it
seems to me that the end is in sight.  When I buy new software, it will make
more sense to
buy products that I will be able to use for more than two years.  (Yes, my
OS/2 products
will work, but as OS/2 falls further behind I'll have to work in NT ever more. 
 As I
mentioned in earlier post, I'm already in this position with Netscape
Calendar.)

> Sheesh, I can't believe that I've found myself in the position of
> defending IBM!

You've always done well writing the truth, no matter what it was.  Sometimes
IBM does
things well, and sometimes it doesn't, but I'm not at all surprised that you'd 
see both.

--
Mark Kelley
Agriculture Information Systems
Purdue University


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Purdue University (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: dgwhiz@earthling.net                              04-Oct-99 16:13:26
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 16:43:07
Subj: new articles, new layouts at IACT

From: dgwhiz@earthling.net (DG)

================================================
  New articles, New layouts at IACT's website
================================================

DATE: 04th October 1999
  TO: OS/2 users, programmers, webmasters etc.


   Some brand new web pages are waiting for you!

   All the HTML pages at IACT's website have been given new
layouts and new graphics, from top to bottom. We trust you
will find the site smoother, better organized, and easier
to navigate from one section to another. All the code and
graphics were made under OS/2 Warp v4.0, btw. Stay tuned
for more totally Warped improvements in the next few weeks.

   As many OS/2ers suggested, we shortened the Cover Page
and relocated the Site Overview to its own clean, new page.
With concise descriptions plus convenient links for each
section, the Overview can serve as an alternate way to
travel across the site. The URLs for both navigation pages
are linked below.

   Of course, we all know that some smoother layouts and a
sharper image won't mean much unless... we offer you real
depth of content. Rest assured, we've got a whole new batch
of articles for you.

   So enjoy Issue #6 of The IACT Quarterly Newsletter,
covering major topics such as standards and user interfaces:

      * questions/concerns in the battle over X.500, open
        directory services and new standards proposed by
        MSFT & Cisco and IBM & RedHat;

      * a better definition of 'user-friendly' software and
        manuals, with suggestions about customization of
        the Windows graphical user interface;

      * important features of the BeOS, e.g. journaled file
        system, multimedia services, realtime processing
        and virtual memory;

      * plus a special sidebar on the BeOS' versatile user
        interface;

      * myths versus facts of compatibility, costs and
        reliability in Windows compared to OSs such as OS/2
        and Linux;

      * and advantages of object-oriented interfaces such as
        OS/2's Workplace Shell compared to the object-based
        GUI of Windows. 


   Btw, if you'd like to write either a commentary for the
Newsletter or a technical article for our "24x7 Reports"
section, see our "Editor's Desk" page for info and e-mail us
about the computer topic that interests you.
     
   Here are some essential URLs to bring you directly to the
Newsletter page and to the main navigation pages:

      - IACT's Cover Page
      http://pages.cthome.net/iact/


      - our "Site Overview" page
      http://pages.cthome.net/iact/about/iact-overview.html

      
      - The IACT Quarterly Newsletter, Issue #6
      http://pages.cthome.net/iact/IQN/6.html


     ------------------------------------------------
     International Alliance for Compatible Technology
           more open standards, user choice and
           free access to compatible technology  
    
   Visit IACT's website at http://pages.cthome.net/iact/



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: DG (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com               04-Oct-99 10:31:20
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 16:43:07
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: "Kim Cheung" <kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com>

On Mon, 04 Oct 1999 12:01:34 -0400, Brad BARCLAY wrote:

>Esther Schindler wrote:
>> But we won't know unless we try, will we?
>> 
>> I have no idea how many members would take advantage of a
>> reduced-price subscription to Software Choice. It would, however, be a
>> heck of a membership incentive!
>
>	Speaking entirely hypothetically of course - but as I've always read it
>you only ned ONE SW Choice subscription per enterprise.  So that
>"reduced-price subscription" could potentially be the subscription price
>/ number of users - I imagine you could just tack on an extra $1 to your
>yearly membership fees to cover the subscription (assuming your members
>were agreeable to the increase, of course :).
>
>	My best suggestion would be to talk to an IBM Sales representitive
>about this.  <disclaimer> I'm just a coder, I don't deal with sales or
>legal stuff, so anything I suggest might not be possible :)
></disclaimer>
>

Well.....yes and no.    While that part is true - you need to "qualify".   
That's the tricky term.

Take the situation of that hypothetical client - and in fact, the case of
Aurora.   Those that have it really didn't have to pay a dime for it per se. 
 Why?   They "qualify".






--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               04-Oct-99 13:27:06
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 16:43:07
Subj: Re: Wardell and IBM--How it might have been...

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

"David T. Johnson" wrote:
> 
> None of us were there at those famous meetings between IBM and Brad
> Wardell.  But, with a little imagination, we can surmise that it might
> have gone something like this:

And with a little spare time on our hands, we can repost the same
compost and conjecture in a separate thread.  Do you have a point to
make there Mr. Johnson or do you just like musing about the Land of
Make-Believe?

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com                           04-Oct-99 12:53:03
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 16:43:07
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: "Jeffrey S. Kobal" <jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:

> >It's a PORT.  Of an existing product.  When 4.61 for OS/2 was
> >shipped, 4.61 was the current version on Windows.  How could
> >the OS/2 version be at the 4.7 level when 4.7 hadn't been done
> >yet?!?
>
> Seems that no problem was made releasing an Unix and Mac version or did this
> not occur to you.

And did it occur to you that Netscape itself produces the Unix and
Mac versions, therefore they are not "ports"?  They do not produce
the OS/2 version, therefore it is up to IBM to port what Netscape
produces for Windows after it is complete.

Sheesh.

Jeffrey S. Kobal
IBM Corporation


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Austin (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com               04-Oct-99 12:15:08
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 19:53:12
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: "Kim Cheung" <kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com>

On Mon, 4 Oct 1999 17:20:46 +0100, Quake Cheaters Clan wrote:

>My point Estheris that as the technology takes ever increasing leaps and
>bounds, OS/2 to all intents and purposes remains very much static. But other
>OS's are evolving along with the hardware or is it vice versa?.
>
>Very much soon OS/2 will pass the point when it can be considered anything
>but a museum curiosity along with the Apple 1, Timex 1000 and Tandy Color
>Computer. All find machines I'm sure, but a curiosity nonetheless.
>
>Thats my point. OS/2 is getting left behind - you can't go beating the same
>tired old beat out of it forever.
>
>Tell me, do you still use 8-tracks and Betamax?
>
>if you do tell me why.... if you don't why not?

That would be true ONLY if we all stop.   On the other hand, many of us are
not.

If you come to WarpStock, I will show you some stuff the Windows people can
only dream about in the next several years.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  04-Oct-99 16:42:17
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 19:53:12
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

Jeffrey S. Kobal <jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com> wrote in message
news:37F8E981.F704134@NOSPAMus.ibm.com...
>
> "David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> > >It's a PORT.  Of an existing product.  When 4.61 for OS/2 was
> > >shipped, 4.61 was the current version on Windows.  How could
> > >the OS/2 version be at the 4.7 level when 4.7 hadn't been done
> > >yet?!?
> >
> > Seems that no problem was made releasing an Unix and Mac version or did
this
> > not occur to you.
>
> And did it occur to you that Netscape itself produces the Unix and
> Mac versions, therefore they are not "ports"?  They do not produce
> the OS/2 version, therefore it is up to IBM to port what Netscape
> produces for Windows after it is complete.

Yep, IBM is responsible for the port of the OS/2 version, not Netscape.
Which was, I believe, David's point in the first place.

> Sheesh.

You're right: I wouldn't want to have to depend on IBM for my version of
Netscape.

 Sheesh!



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: greeneggsnspam@micron.net                         04-Oct-99 15:39:28
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 19:53:12
Subj: Re: My god, somebody woke up!

From: Nathan Herren <greeneggsnspam@micron.net>

My point was that Microsoft, not IBM, is responsible for "consumer
harm".  IBM's move to charge for SWChoice updates that otherwise should
be free is nothing more than marketing-speak for "OS/2 is now on
life-support" and fading fast.  Complaining to IBM about OS/2 isn't
going to matter as much as complaining to the DOJ about Microsoft.  If
you read my post and concluded otherwise then you were mistaken.

Kelly Robinson wrote:
> 
> > I don't like what IBM's doing with the SWChoice subscription requirement
> > any more than the next person.  However, doesn't this feel like
> > "consumer harm" to you?
> 
> Jesus fucking christ, I've said that for years and I was labeled "Microsoft
> licker" or whatever!!!
> 
> It's not just harm IBM has done toward its own userbase, it's also
> exploitation (the only thing of value for 101.2% of OS/2 users is the 32-bit
> IP protocol update - which should be free since OS/2 is marketed as 32-bit,
> yet the IP protocol in warp 4 is 16-bit.  That's exploitation and a
> confirmation to misadvertising.)
> 
> > Lou's email inbox isn't the appropriate place for these complaints.  The
> > DOJ will gladly take comments on how this particular situation is
> > penalizing we OS/2 consumers.
> 
> So by telling the DOJ on how IBM is sodomizing its customers will action
> finally be taken?  Good idea!  About time someone thought laterally...  most
> people here don't.
> 
> > Individually, we are being hurt by IBM's action...something that may not
> > have happened had REAL competition been allowed in the OS arena.  Think
> > about it.  Had IBM been able to build a stronger OS/2 user base then
> > what logical reason would there be to charge for a Browser or JVM?
> > Users would scream loud and clear.  There just aren't enough of us left
> > anymore to change IBM's direction.  Why?  IBM didn't block
> > competition...M$ did.
> 
> IBM doesn't know how to market.  They only got anywhere in the industry
> because, in 1950, they peddled fourth rate vacuum-tube based 'computers'
> using the ideal of 'great customer support'.  Meanwhile, other people had
> superior vacuum-tube based machines but not as big of a mouth as IBM.  Of
> course, I don't know or care how their typewriter industry was, but
> everything they have to do with computers has been generic rubbish at best.
> OS/2 is a very strange exception since, a few problems aside, is a very good
> OS.

-Nathan

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Hewlett-Packard LaserJet Information Systems Test
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: esther@bitranch.com                               04-Oct-99 22:33:01
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 21:24:10
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler)

Oh certainly, there's always something new coming out... which I think
is a good thing, since I get paid to tell people if the Something New 
is worth their financial and time investment. It isn't, always.

OS/2 won't be a museum curiousity as long as it's a product that 
solves a business problem (or a personal computing problem). For some 
people, the change happens sooner rather than later. There are 
millions of people using WordPerfect 5.1, including many famous 
novelists who can easily afford anything they'd like, because it works
for them and it's the fastest word processor they can find. Plus, it's
paid for, they know it, and they're comfortable with it. WP5.1 is no 
longer supported or sold but it's still a viable product for the 
people whom it helps... and helping us work better is the _entire_ 
purpose of these electronic beasties. Or is that a statement you'd 
disagree with?

Why don't I use Betamax? I don't need that level of quality from the 
minor bit of taping I do. However, people who work professionally in 
the video field _do_ use a technology that's a follow-on to Beta. As 
in other fields, professionals are willing to spend more on serious 
tools that help them get their work done well, and product popularity 
isn't their primary criteria.

You _have_ managed to sidestep the original question, though: why 
should you care what the people here use? what difference does it make
in your life? Enquiring minds want to know.

--Esther

On Mon, 4 Oct 1999 16:20:46, "Quake Cheaters Clan" 
<theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:
| My point Estheris that as the technology takes ever increasing leaps and
| bounds, OS/2 to all intents and purposes remains very much static. But other
| OS's are evolving along with the hardware or is it vice versa?.
| 
| Very much soon OS/2 will pass the point when it can be considered anything
| but a museum curiosity along with the Apple 1, Timex 1000 and Tandy Color
| Computer. All find machines I'm sure, but a curiosity nonetheless.
| 
| Thats my point. OS/2 is getting left behind - you can't go beating the same
| tired old beat out of it forever.
| 
| Tell me, do you still use 8-tracks and Betamax?
| 
| if you do tell me why.... if you don't why not?
| 
| QCC

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: huffd@nls.net                                     04-Oct-99 22:53:24
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 21:24:10
Subj: Re: Wardell and IBM--How it might have been...

From: "David D. Huff Jr." <huffd@nls.net>

Thanks David,
Sometimes the starkness of reality can be overwhelming. Linux is looking
better and better. Not what I as a OS/2 user wants to admit. I guess
I don't mind paying for updates. I am one who has bought every version
since 2.1, I like to support the better technology with purchases. Now
I come to wonder about Linux getting free Java? That doesn't sit too
well with me.
I will probably use OS/2 as my primary OS until so long after the fixpacks
have stopped arriving that the machine will no longer boot because of
hardware upgrades.
Call it a premonition but now I know why when I was a kid, I hated freckled,
speckled little pukes named Bill.

Martyr wrote:

> "David T. Johnson" wrote:
> >
> > None of us were there at those famous meetings between IBM and Brad
> > Wardell.  But, with a little imagination, we can surmise that it might
> > have gone something like this:
>
> And with a little spare time on our hands, we can repost the same
> compost and conjecture in a separate thread.  Do you have a point to
> make there Mr. Johnson or do you just like musing about the Land of
> Make-Believe?
>
> - Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: esther@bitranch.com                               04-Oct-99 22:19:22
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 21:24:10
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler)

On Mon, 4 Oct 1999 16:56:18, Mark Kelley <mdk@agad.purdue.edu> wrote:
| I agree with what you say.  I guess that's the point at which I have a
problem with this,
| though.  To me, IBM's move makes it clear that they aren't interested in
further developing
| the OS/2 client.  

Actually, it doesn't say anything to me about that one way or another.
It means they need income to justify further development. And this is 
different from other companies *how*....?

|IBM is not interested (or motivated) in selling OS/2 in the
| future, and that means development will languish.  They'll continue to
release fixes and
| occasional updates like Netscape and Java in order to keep their big
customers happy, but
| they're not interested in SOHO users.

But Mark, they haven't been interested in SOHO users since August 1995
(?) that we know of, when Gerstner told the financial community that 
it was for corporate use. Even when they _were_ interested in 
supporting SOHO users -- for that short period of time -- they were 
particularly inept at getting the message across. As I'm sure you 
recall David Barnes saying, it was the OS/2 users who sold the OS, not
IBM's awesome marketing machine. <wry smile>

At any rate, there's some discussion on the POSSI email list, right 
now, about the feasibility and costs of offering POSSI members a group
price on the subscription. So it might not cost as much as you may be 
imagining. (Then again, it might.)

| You've always done well writing the truth, no matter what it was.  Sometimes 
IBM does
| things well, and sometimes it doesn't, but I'm not at all surprised that
you'd see both.

Thanks for the kind words. <smile> I'm sorry I won't see you at 
Warpstock this year; as it turns out, I'll be in San Francisco for the
weekend for an editorial meeting. But I'm sure we'll get together 
again before too long!

--Esther

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: esther@bitranch.com                               04-Oct-99 22:21:20
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 21:24:10
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler)

On Mon, 4 Oct 1999 10:31:40, "Kim Cheung" 
<kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com> wrote:
| Well.....yes and no.    While that part is true - you need to "qualify".   
| That's the tricky term.

..and I'd love to see IBM justify that an organization wholly and 
publicly devoted to OS/2 and supporting the OS/2 community wouldn't 
qualify for a corporate discount. <evil smile>

--Esther

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: esther@bitranch.com                               04-Oct-99 22:22:12
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 21:24:10
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler)

On Mon, 4 Oct 1999 15:56:42, Brad BARCLAY <bbarclay@ca.ibm.com> wrote:

| > Brad, do you have -- or have available to you -- the full terms and
| > conditions associated with the Software Choice Subscription? I'd like
| > a lawyer to examine the rules before I made an authoritative statement
| > about the validity of your suggestion.
|  
|         I'll have ot look around for this.  Currently, I have what everyone
| else has available publicly via the Internet.  I'll see what I can dig
| up :)

I'd appreciate any information you could find!

--Esther

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: philbike@my-deja.com                              04-Oct-99 22:31:28
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 21:24:10
Subj: Re: pinball.sys BROKEN by SP5??

From: philbike@my-deja.com

In article
<effgnavozarg.fj0z3x0.pminews@news3.ibm.net>,
  "Bob Stan" <rsstan@ibm.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 02 Oct 1999 23:32:06 GMT,
philbike@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> >So with Service Pack 5 have Microsoft BROKEN the
NT 3.51 pinball.sys
> >device drive used to install HPFS???
> I used NT SP5 and pinball.sys with no problems.

Thank you for the input!  I believe that pinball.sys
in unable to handle an IDE drive over 8 gig.  My HPFS
partitions in the first 8 gig are fine, it's just the
extended ones that are hosed.

I was nervous about installing pinball again, but
your post makes me willing to give it a try.

Thanks again!
-Philip Hamm


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com                           04-Oct-99 18:10:08
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 21:24:10
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: "Jeffrey S. Kobal" <jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com>

Joe Malloy wrote:

> Yep, IBM is responsible for the port of the OS/2 version, not Netscape.
> Which was, I believe, David's point in the first place.

No, David's point was that OS/2 is "late to the party" now
that 4.7 has shipped on the other platforms, when the fact is
that 4.61 was the "current" version of the Netscape browser
when 4.61 was shipped on OS/2.  Just because a newer
version has become available doesn't make OS/2 "late to
the party".

> You're right: I wouldn't want to have to depend on IBM for my version of
> Netscape.

I agree with you, actually.  I wouldn't want the OS/2 user
community to have to depend on IBM for an OS/2 version
of the Netscape browser, but the fact remains that Netscape
doesn't produce an OS/2 version of their browser, so we do.

Jeffrey S. Kobal
IBM Corporation


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Austin (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: wsonna@ibm.net                                    04-Oct-99 23:43:26
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 21:24:10
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: wsonna@ibm.net (William Sonna)

On Sun, 3 Oct 1999 10:36:24, Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote:

> 
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> 
> On 10-3-99, 1:46:24 PM, wsonna@ibm.net (William Sonna) wrote regarding 
> Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!:
> 
> > > Seems that no problem was made releasing an Unix and Mac version or 
> did this
> > > not occur to you.
> > >
> > > Sheesh.
> > >
> > > --
> > > ---------------------------------------
> > > David H. McCoy
> > > dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
> > > ---------------------------------------
> 
> > David - Instead of trolling this to death, why don't  tell us just
> > what, exactly Navigator 4.7 does that makes it such a important
> > upgrade and worthy of a discussion in an OS/2 newsgroup?
> 
> > You seem genuinely excited by this release, and having used the
> > program I really can't understand what the fuss is about.  So please
> > tell me:    What does 4.7 do that 4.6 doesn't do?  And why does it
> > matter?
> 
> Support for Shopping with one click of the button and the new AOL 
> Instant Messenger.  
> 

And God knows, my life just wouldn't be complete without them.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: theqcc@hotmail.com                                05-Oct-99 00:08:18
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 21:24:10
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: "Quake Cheaters Clan" <theqcc@hotmail.com>

Esther, Esther, Esther....

Sit down, take a deep breath and relax...

You dont read earlier posts do you Esther?

I thought I had answered that...but here is another explanation, this time
with another analogy...

It matters to me when I see people stuck to what they know and refuse to
move on... almost a reaction against progress... most perplexing indeed.
It's like an old man who is content to sit in his 1940's decorated home,
with 1940's readio that does not pick  up FM, he dresses in 1940's clothes
and uses 1940's electrical aplliance on none-standard electrical sockets...

He may be happy, but he has become a point of fun. People view him with
riddicule rather than respect because of his determined resolve to stick
with what he knows.

Os/2 users are the same. Stuck with what they know. Afraid of change. Afraid
of letting go... Of course if you don't use Microsoft products through a
crusade mentality whereby you hope that your efforts will bring down the
mighty Microsoft then I'm afraid you are one sandwich short of a picnic.

OS/2 sit high upon their rightous high-chairs looking down upon all windows
users, shaking their heads and tut-tutting in an approving way.
That would be fair if it were the case that equal market share was a
realistic option for you. Its not. Time has moved on.

I would like OS/2 users on here to admist that their battle is lost, embrace
the new flesh.

Does this help or do you want me to break it down even further?

BTW - am i a wee bit more interesting that Tim Martin?

Esther Schindler <esther@bitranch.com> wrote in message
news:LoEFmgJJ9ecw-pn2-h8c3pbcc6Gmf@agave.bitranch.com...
> Oh certainly, there's always something new coming out... which I think
> is a good thing, since I get paid to tell people if the Something New
> is worth their financial and time investment. It isn't, always.
>
> OS/2 won't be a museum curiousity as long as it's a product that
> solves a business problem (or a personal computing problem). For some
> people, the change happens sooner rather than later. There are
> millions of people using WordPerfect 5.1, including many famous
> novelists who can easily afford anything they'd like, because it works
> for them and it's the fastest word processor they can find. Plus, it's
> paid for, they know it, and they're comfortable with it. WP5.1 is no
> longer supported or sold but it's still a viable product for the
> people whom it helps... and helping us work better is the _entire_
> purpose of these electronic beasties. Or is that a statement you'd
> disagree with?
>
> Why don't I use Betamax? I don't need that level of quality from the
> minor bit of taping I do. However, people who work professionally in
> the video field _do_ use a technology that's a follow-on to Beta. As
> in other fields, professionals are willing to spend more on serious
> tools that help them get their work done well, and product popularity
> isn't their primary criteria.
>
> You _have_ managed to sidestep the original question, though: why
> should you care what the people here use? what difference does it make
> in your life? Enquiring minds want to know.
>
> --Esther
>
> On Mon, 4 Oct 1999 16:20:46, "Quake Cheaters Clan"
> <theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:
> | My point Estheris that as the technology takes ever increasing leaps and
> | bounds, OS/2 to all intents and purposes remains very much static. But
other
> | OS's are evolving along with the hardware or is it vice versa?.
> |
> | Very much soon OS/2 will pass the point when it can be considered
anything
> | but a museum curiosity along with the Apple 1, Timex 1000 and Tandy
Color
> | Computer. All find machines I'm sure, but a curiosity nonetheless.
> |
> | Thats my point. OS/2 is getting left behind - you can't go beating the
same
> | tired old beat out of it forever.
> |
> | Tell me, do you still use 8-tracks and Betamax?
> |
> | if you do tell me why.... if you don't why not?
> |
> | QCC
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Customer of Planet Online (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com               04-Oct-99 16:56:05
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 21:24:10
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: "Kim Cheung" <kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com>

On 4 Oct 1999 22:21:40 GMT, Esther Schindler wrote:

>On Mon, 4 Oct 1999 10:31:40, "Kim Cheung" 
><kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com> wrote:
>| Well.....yes and no.    While that part is true - you need to "qualify".   
>| That's the tricky term.
>
>...and I'd love to see IBM justify that an organization wholly and 
>publicly devoted to OS/2 and supporting the OS/2 community wouldn't 
>qualify for a corporate discount. <evil smile>

Don't be so sure  <evil smile>




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: fwkirk@ibm.net                                    04-Oct-99 22:02:02
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 21:24:10
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: fwkirk@ibm.net (Frank Kirk)

On Thu, 30 Sep 1999 13:22:23, "Quake Cheaters Clan" 
<theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:

> They marketed right.
> They invested right.

	Silly me.  And I thought you'd say they produced quality software 
right.  

FWK

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: kris@dgraph.com                                   04-Oct-99 06:26:15
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 22:07:06
Subj: Re: IBM is NOT quadzillion times larger than MS

From: Kris Kadela <kris@dgraph.com>


Mike Ruskai wrote:
> 
> On 30 Sep 1999 21:37:15 -0700, Tim Smith wrote:
> 
> >In article <37F3B7AF.E4D4760B@mediaone.net>, fmc  <fmc@mediaone.net> wrote:
> >>I'm no expert on investments, so I can't explain why Microsoft's market
value
> >>is more than 2 and a half times greater than IBM's, while at the same time 
IBM
> >>beats Microsoft on revenue by over 5:1, assets by almost 4:1, and profits
by
> >>140%, but I suspect that Microsoft stock might be "slightly" overvalued.
> >
> >Compare them by either profit margin, or by revenue per employee.  Those
are
> >probably more relevant to how well a company is doing.
> 
> Only if you're goal is cooking books.
> 
> Percentages mean nothing without an actual value.  IBM makes more profit
> in one quarter than Microsoft does in the entire year.  Comparing that
> profit to the gross, or dividing it by the number of employees, isn't even
> interesting, much less relevant.
> 
> When you have a market value so much higher than actual value, as with
> Microsoft, then you absolutely have to keep growing, or your market value
> will bottom out.  If you want a real measure of how well the companies are
> doing, add up what a person could get by selling their assets.  Microsoft
> has hardly any assets at all.

One of M$s top execs recently stated that M$ stock is overvalued. Trying
to hint as to what might happen eventualy?



> 
>  - Mike
> 
> Remove 'spambegone' to send e-mail.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: DigiGraph Technical (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: kris@dgraph.com                                   04-Oct-99 06:33:12
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 22:07:06
Subj: Re: Things OS/2 users cannot do....

From: Kris Kadela <kris@dgraph.com>


Kim Cheung wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 02 Oct 1999 08:24:20 -0700, Daniel Jones wrote:
> 
> >I'd write more, but I'm busy planning my 4th vacation for the
> >year...
> 
> That's the kind of thing an NT network administrator dreams about.

Absolutely right. I only have 2 NT servers in my office and they are a
big pain in the butt. My dinky Warp 4 boxes haven't been rebooted in 9
months (2 months was the longest for NT and when it died it took all the
data with it). I have never lost any data on any Warp box even it it
does crash.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: DigiGraph Technical (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mdk@agad.purdue.edu                               04-Oct-99 08:56:26
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 22:07:06
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: Mark Kelley <mdk@agad.purdue.edu>

pcguido@attglobal.net wrote:

> If you think IBM can afford to support us for free forever; then,
> I'd say oxygen hasn't been reaching _your_ brain for quite a while!

There is a difference between paying for an upgrade and paying for the latest
Netscape and Java.  I never claimed I wanted free support forever, of course,
that's
simply your misrepresentation of what I said.  If IBM is going to charge us,
then
they should give us something worth charging for.  Netscape and Java?  Sorry,
I don't
think they're worth the charge, especially when they are offered for free and
every
other platform.

> Where is the demonstrable difference between getting all the pieces,
> posted as they are ready, and getting new shrinkwrap every 18-24 months?
> Especially when that new shrinkwrap comes in the form of a forced
> update and the concommitant upgrade of all my apps 'to the best
> benefit' from the 'new' OS!

What new pieces?  A new Netscape Communicator and a new Java don't, in my
opinion,
constitute the equivalent of a client upgrade.

>
>
> Would I like a new client? Yup. Why? To make my life easier every
> 18 months or so when Intel, MS and all the other bloatware makes it
> necessary for me to upgrade my PC.
>
> Do I care that MS, RedHat and everybody else sport version numbers
> higher than Warp? No!

I don't care about version numbers, either.  I do care that IBM has apparently 
ceased
development work on OS/2.  Sure, they do fixes and such, but don't seem
interested in
further developing the client.  So while in the past they might have released
a
client and charged us perhaps $200 (which I would gladly pay), now they are
going to
charge the same amount for fixes and such.  That, to me, is a definite step
down in
support, it is a sign of IBM's declining committment to OS/2 as a client.

--
Mark Kelley
Agriculture Information Systems
Purdue University


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Purdue University (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: esther@bitranch.com                               04-Oct-99 16:04:11
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 22:07:06
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler)

On Mon, 4 Oct 1999 09:46:47, "Quake Cheaters Clan" 
<theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:
| By using OS/2 and continously denegrating Windows, do you consider
| yourselves superior to any  other user group?

I don't think this question could have a group answer, just individual
ones.

Who bothers to denigrate Windows? Life's too short for that. I use 
what works best for me... I don't consider myself superior to anybody 
else, certainly not because of the collection of ones and zeroes that 
I picked. That's as stupid as going to other advocacy groups and tell 
the participants they're all idiots for using something that's 
obviously over the hill.

| Imagine this:
|  
| Your PC is getting old, long in the tough...slow and the bits seem a bit
| more shaky, the hard drive getting a bit tight.... so off down to town you
| trot... money in your sweaty hand.
| You enter your favourite computer store and see a gleaming new AMD ATHLON or
| Pentium III.... wow, 256 mb RAM, 17 Gig HD.... sheesh and a 19 inch
| monitor...WOW, but wait... erm... it has Windows 98/2000/NT5
| preloaded..erk.... do you buy it or do you not...?
| It has great gfx card, sound system and DVD/CD/CDWR... so you do, and when
| it gets delivered you wipe off the windows  and install OS/2 warp 3 or 4.
| Ugh.
| You lose a modern OS for an old almost defunct one.... you cannot
| realistically use your new technology to its full capacity... sufficient
| drivers, programs, utils etc to make use of the hardware.... I mean look,
| for a 486 OS/2 is good, but for a new ultra modern machine OS//2 blows....
| it blows harder than hurricane Gilbert....
| And the situatiion will not improve... as time moves on OS/2 will get left
| further behind... with its few supporters looking onwards... perhspa proud,
| perhaps happy, but forver wishing that the trian leaving the station was
| their train, and not the mule that they have.

Funny that you mention that. A couple of weeks ago we bought a brand 
new Compaq PC off the shelf at OfficeMax. It works just fine with Warp
Server. Your point is...?

--Esther

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: davegemini@aol.com                                04-Oct-99 14:10:18
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 22:07:07
Subj: Re: IBM is NOT quadzillion times larger than MS

From: davegemini@aol.com (David Frank)

>One of M$s top execs recently stated >that M$ stock is overvalued. Trying
>to hint as to what might happen >eventualy?

Since Steve Ballmer only said "tech" stock prices are "absurd"  this could as
easily apply to IBM price being absurd  as well as his stock.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: AOL http://www.aol.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: rjf@yyycomasia.com                                04-Oct-99 14:46:10
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 22:07:07
Subj: Re: Win 2000 burns IT managers...ZDNews

From: rjf@yyycomasia.com (rj friedman)

On Sun, 3 Oct 1999 10:26:53, Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote:

> Yeah but if users migrate to a new platform, you still need to pay
> *something* (even the bloody CD media) for the new OS and don't forget 
>shiny new apps.  It's more likely that people will say "Piss on all of you!" 

>and stick to what they currently have and save even more money.

http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2345040,00.ht
ml
IT managers have problems with NT and Win9X which motivated them to 
look to W2K.  While W2K might be a more difficult and costly upgrade, 
sticking with the status quo will eventually prove to be unworkable.  

Especially if MS can get away with using its monopoly 
position to force the market onto W2K through pricing and 
even refusing to ship the old product. These were the 
tactics they used to force the market off of DOS and onto 
Windows, and then off of Win 3.x and onto Win 95. Unless the
Justice Dept. monopoly trial can rein them in, there's 
nothing to prevent them from getting away with it again.

The market doesn't decide what it wants - MS forces what MS 
wants on the market. "Take that, you dogs!" And the dogs 
take it and wag their tails in happiness. Unfortunately, the
rest of the market that aren't cowering dogs have to take 
it, too.



________________________________________________________

[RJ]                 OS/2 - Live it, or live with it. 
rj friedman          Team ABW              
Taipei, Taiwan       rjf@yyycomasia.com 

To send email - remove the `yyy'
________________________________________________________

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: SEEDNet News Service (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: grinnell@acunet.net                               04-Oct-99 15:30:21
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 22:07:07
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: grinnell@acunet.net

In <MPG.125c830293844bf4989a43@news1.mnsinc.com>, David H. McCoy
<forgitaboutit@fake.com> writes:
>Well, once again, OS/2 is late to the party. Which brave person will be the 
>first to step up and proudly shout how Netscape 4.61 "does everything they 
>need", and how you don't need any "bloated" features?
>

David, you remind me of a little kid who goes around the neighborhood
saying, "Nah, nah, my daddy bought me a new bike...and it's better than
yours is."

When you used OS/2 you taunted Windows users, now that you use Windows
you taunt OS/2 users.  Amazing how little you have grown over the years.

Jeff


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: djohnson@isomedia.com                             04-Oct-99 09:01:27
  To: All                                               04-Oct-99 22:07:07
Subj: Wardell and IBM--How it might have been...

From: "David T. Johnson" <djohnson@isomedia.com>

None of us were there at those famous meetings between IBM and Brad
Wardell.  But, with a little imagination, we can surmise that it might
have gone something like this:

<Brad>  I've been waiting for weeks for an answer to my proposal to do
an OS/2 client.  Can't you tell me anything about this?  

<IBM Corporate Guy>  Brad, we've been all over this.  The Big Guy was
using OS/2 on his ThinkPad and the hard disk crashed.  All of his data
was lost.  He doesn't want to even hear about OS/2 ever again.  We have
to approach him very carefully about this.  

<Brad>  The way I heard it, he left the ThinkPad on the roof of his
rental car and drove away.  Then the Airport Shuttle drove over it.  How
can he blame OS/2?  

<IBM Corporate Guy>  The Big Guy says Windows would have booted to 'Safe
Mode' like it always does.  

<Brad>  No! No! No!  'Safe Mode' is only for when there's a problem!  

<IBM Corporate Guy>  Exactly. 

<Brad>  Okay, never mind that.  When will I hear about the OS/2 client?  

<IBM Corporate Guy>  Well, we already have some indications.  But I
can't tell you without the final say-so from the Big Guy.  The way I
hear it, though, Lavelle, his secretary told him that the VP of NCSD was
calling with a question about OS/2 strategy and the Big Guy said "Do we
still sell that?"   Do I need to say more, Brad?  

<Brad>  Okay, I'm getting the picture.  But why?

<IBM Corporate Guy>  It's all very technical, Brad.  

<Brad>  What do you mean?

<IBM Corporate Guy>  Let me draw you a picture.  (Reaches for cocktail
napkin.)  Here's OS/2.  (Draws 'OS/2' in center)  And here's IBM. 
(Draws 'IBM' at edge.)  Now, to get from here to there takes software,
Brad.

<Brad>  I'm with you.  OS/2 needs software apps, right?  

<IBM Corporate Guy>  Huh?  No, No, I mean we need software so that we
can get Outlook Express to send email down to Austin.  We're scratching
our heads on that.  Without that, do you know what we have, Brad? 
Nothing!  Let me spell it out for you.  (Starts to write on napkin--'N'
- 'O' - )  

<Cocktail Waitress> (Interrupting)  Can I bring you boys a drink?  

<Brad>  Wait!  I'm getting an indication of a clear message here.

<IBM Corporate Guy>  You are?  Oh right!!

<Cocktail Waitress>  I'll give you a message.  You guys have been
sitting here for the last hour without buying a single drink.  Not even
a Shirley Temple!  I can't live on my looks.  We have people waiting for
this table.  (Clears table).  

<IBM Corporate Guy>  (Leaving.)  Well, I hope our OS/2 situation is
clear to you, now, Brad. 

<Brad>  Yes, it is.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: forgitaboutit@fake.com                            04-Oct-99 20:37:28
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 04:01:05
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com>

In article <37F8E981.F704134@NOSPAMus.ibm.com>, jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com
says...
>
>"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
>> >It's a PORT.  Of an existing product.  When 4.61 for OS/2 was
>> >shipped, 4.61 was the current version on Windows.  How could
>> >the OS/2 version be at the 4.7 level when 4.7 hadn't been done
>> >yet?!?
>>
>> Seems that no problem was made releasing an Unix and Mac version or did
this
>> not occur to you.
>
>And did it occur to you that Netscape itself produces the Unix and
>Mac versions, therefore they are not "ports"?  They do not produce
>the OS/2 version, therefore it is up to IBM to port what Netscape
>produces for Windows after it is complete.
>
>Sheesh.
>
>Jeffrey S. Kobal
>IBM Corporation
>
>
>

You've got an interesting definition of "port". Even though the three versions 

most likely share quite a bit of the same code, they are not ports because
they 
are produced outside of Netscape?

I afraid that your redefinition does little to change the facts.

Sheesh.

-- 
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: esther@bitranch.com                               05-Oct-99 01:30:28
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 04:01:06
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler)

I most certainly do read earlier posts, Quake, and I'm as relaxed as 
anyone can be after reviewing a book that really shouldn't have been 
written.

This is the first time you've come close to answering the question 
(which more rudely would be phrased as "what skin is it off YOUR nose 
what I do?"). It's still not a complete answer, but I think you're 
saying that it bothers you for people to use "old stuff," in some way.
And for some unfathomable reason you want the satisfaction of people 
admitting that they're wrong in their choice and are willing to 
embrace... well, something else, I don't know or care what.

Beats the crap out of me why you think this matters... but I'm afraid 
that you're setting yourself up for a disappointment. People don't use
or not-use a tool because a stranger expresses his opinion... 
particular when it's a complete stranger without credibility, who 
doesn't have the courage to use his own name. If Chake Queasers Clan 
came along and told me that my 1991 Prelude was old and unsupported 
and I shouldn't use it anymore -- instead I should buy a brand-new 
paymentmobile that this stranger thought was more "in" -- well, I'd 
ignore that, too. My comfort and my efficiency don't rely on your 
opinion.

I don't care if you ridicule me; what's ridicule from someone who 
hides behind a handle?

Plus, you're completely inaccurate:
| Os/2 users are the same. Stuck with what they know. Afraid of change. Afraid
| of letting go... Of course if you don't use Microsoft products through a
| crusade mentality whereby you hope that your efforts will bring down the
| mighty Microsoft then I'm afraid you are one sandwich short of a picnic.

Statistically, as of August last year, OS/2 users used an average of 
2.7 operating systems. (I suspect that the number has crept up by 
then, but I haven't taken the time to re-run the survey.) The survey 
respondents were, nonetheless, gung-ho about the OS/2 (though 
decidedly _not_ about IBM). Most OS/2 users are educated about what 
other OSs do, yet 95% said, in 1998, that they expected to be running 
OS/2 in August 1999. Based on the membership renewal rates for the 
Phoenix OS/2 Society, the world's largest OS/2 user group, that 
statistic has held steady.

You're trying to phrase this discussion as if the majority of OS/2 
users hate Microsoft, love IBM, and refuse to touch any other 
operating system. That isn't so. Most OS/2 users don't care strongly 
about Microsoft (at least not enough to matter), are disgusted with 
IBM, and are OS-literate. They also use OS/2 because they like it, and
I've seen tut-tutting from fewer than a dozen people, in the last 
couple of years. (The tut-tutters seem to have gone to Linux. 
Fortunately, they're a minority in every crowd, just a noisy one.) 

If you want to debate, Quake, then I recommend that you do so based on
accurate statements. You're suffering under several misconceptions.

--Esther

On Mon, 4 Oct 1999 23:08:37, "Quake Cheaters Clan" 
<theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:

| Esther, Esther, Esther....
| 
| Sit down, take a deep breath and relax...
| 
| You dont read earlier posts do you Esther?
| 
| I thought I had answered that...but here is another explanation, this time
| with another analogy...
| 
| It matters to me when I see people stuck to what they know and refuse to
| move on... almost a reaction against progress... most perplexing indeed.
| It's like an old man who is content to sit in his 1940's decorated home,
| with 1940's readio that does not pick  up FM, he dresses in 1940's clothes
| and uses 1940's electrical aplliance on none-standard electrical sockets...
| 
| He may be happy, but he has become a point of fun. People view him with
| riddicule rather than respect because of his determined resolve to stick
| with what he knows.
| 
| Os/2 users are the same. Stuck with what they know. Afraid of change. Afraid
| of letting go... Of course if you don't use Microsoft products through a
| crusade mentality whereby you hope that your efforts will bring down the
| mighty Microsoft then I'm afraid you are one sandwich short of a picnic.
| 
| OS/2 sit high upon their rightous high-chairs looking down upon all windows
| users, shaking their heads and tut-tutting in an approving way.
| That would be fair if it were the case that equal market share was a
| realistic option for you. Its not. Time has moved on.
| 
| I would like OS/2 users on here to admist that their battle is lost, embrace
| the new flesh.
| 
| Does this help or do you want me to break it down even further?
| 
| BTW - am i a wee bit more interesting that Tim Martin?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: wayne@SPAM.tkb.att.ne.jp                          05-Oct-99 09:58:11
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 04:01:06
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: "Wayne Bickell" <wayne@SPAM.tkb.att.ne.jp>

Fuck off

On Mon, 4 Oct 1999 10:46:47 +0100, Quake Cheaters Clan wrote:

:>Howdy Zealots
:>
:>By using OS/2 and continously denegrating Windows, do you consider
:>yourselves superior to any  other user group?
:>
:>Imagine this:
:>
:>Your PC is getting old, long in the tough...slow and the bits seem a bit
:>more shaky, the hard drive getting a bit tight.... so off down to town you
:>trot... money in your sweaty hand.
:>You enter your favourite computer store and see a gleaming new AMD ATHLON or
:>Pentium III.... wow, 256 mb RAM, 17 Gig HD.... sheesh and a 19 inch
:>monitor...WOW, but wait... erm... it has Windows 98/2000/NT5
:>preloaded..erk.... do you buy it or do you not...?
:>It has great gfx card, sound system and DVD/CD/CDWR... so you do, and when
:>it gets delivered you wipe off the windows  and install OS/2 warp 3 or 4.
:>Ugh.
:>You lose a modern OS for an old almost defunct one.... you cannot
:>realistically use your new technology to its full capacity... sufficient
:>drivers, programs, utils etc to make use of the hardware.... I mean look,
:>for a 486 OS/2 is good, but for a new ultra modern machine OS//2 blows....
:>it blows harder than hurricane Gilbert....
:>And the situatiion will not improve... as time moves on OS/2 will get left
:>further behind... with its few supporters looking onwards... perhspa proud,
:>perhaps happy, but forver wishing that the trian leaving the station was
:>their train, and not the mule that they have.
:>
:>QCC
:>
:>

******************************************************
Wayne Bickell
Tokyo, Japan
wayne@tkb.att.ne.jp
******************************************************
           Posted with PMINews 2 for OS/2
  Running on OS/2 Warp 4 (UK)  + FixPak 9
******************************************************



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: AT&T Internet Service (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               04-Oct-99 22:18:27
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 04:01:06
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Wayne Bickell wrote:
> 
> [a better use for QCC's time]

It's reactions like this that probably give that twit a woody in his
pants.  Don't give him/her/it the satasfaction.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com               04-Oct-99 19:48:01
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 04:01:06
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: "Kim Cheung" <kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com>

On Tue, 05 Oct 1999 09:58:23 +0800, Wayne Bickell wrote:

>Fuck off

That's not exactly a response you would expect from an "average" OS/2
neither.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: forgitaboutit@fake.com                            04-Oct-99 23:22:11
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 04:01:06
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com>

In article <37F9600F.457CCB28@stny.rr.com>, mamodeo@stny.rr.com says...
>Wayne Bickell wrote:
>> 
>> [a better use for QCC's time]
>
>It's reactions like this that probably give that twit a woody in his
>pants.  Don't give him/her/it the satasfaction.
>
>- Marty
>

Behold! Truly, the written word doth lives and breathes in c.o.o.a.

-- 
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     04-Oct-99 20:08:21
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 04:01:06
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

On 10-4-99, 5:56:13 PM, "Jeffrey S. Kobal" <jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com> 
wrote regarding Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!:


> Joseph wrote:

> > 4.61 for OS/2 required at least FP5 (Open32 support) which gave me
> > some concern about the quality of the port with that API.

> The FP5 requirement was for Y2K compliance, not Open32
> support.  Communicator for OS/2 does not use the Open32
> porting modules.

Good to know.

FP5 was required for Open32 and Lotus Smartsuite and FP5 shipped with 
the Smartsuite CD-ROM.  I made the assumption FP5's requirement was 
for the same purpose.  Thanks for the information.

I enjoy the OS/2 version of Communicator and with FP11 the OS runs 
well and seems to task switch more responsively - in short, I am 
happy.  The Calendar would be a neat addition to the OS/2 
Communicator.  



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     04-Oct-99 20:47:13
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 04:01:06
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>



>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

On 10-4-99, 11:08:37 PM, "Quake Cheaters Clan" <theqcc@hotmail.com> 
wrote regarding Re: Time to move on:


> Esther, Esther, Esther....

> Sit down, take a deep breath and relax...

> You dont read earlier posts do you Esther?

> I thought I had answered that...but here is another explanation, this 
time
> with another analogy...

> It matters to me when I see people stuck to what they know and refuse 
to
> move on... almost a reaction against progress... most perplexing 
indeed.
> It's like an old man who is content to sit in his 1940's decorated 
home,
> with 1940's readio that does not pick  up FM, he dresses in 1940's 
clothes
> and uses 1940's electrical aplliance on none-standard electrical 
sockets...

And such a person matters to you?  

These personal decisions matter to you like a they would to 14 year 
old who's obsessed with his peers and the right klind of clothes and 
shoes and what slang to use.  This is a child's way of thinking, a 
child's argument.    It is an argument that is lost on adults who are 
not obsessed with conforming, and not worried about acne.

> He may be happy, but he has become a point of fun. People view him 
with
> riddicule rather than respect because of his determined resolve to 
stick
> with what he knows.

Like high school children who ridicule adults and non-conformists - as 
they are the center of their own little world.  What does it matter?

> I would like OS/2 users on here to admist that their battle is lost, 
embrace
> the new flesh.

> Does this help or do you want me to break it down even further?

> BTW - am i a wee bit more interesting that Tim Martin?

How about cowardly for using a boy's tag-line.  It is appropriate tag 
line for you argue like a boy using conformist and peer pressure logic 
as advocacy.

It's an argument a child would use to explain why some style of 
clothes are "old", not hip and cannot be worn to school least his 
friends laugh at him.  It explains why a boy will not wear a coat and 
freeze or get soaked rather then dress for the weather.  

What is neat is how each generation grows up and learns to appreciate 
the old, the 40's radio and style would be seen as hip - an adult 
would appreciate the consistency of a person's life.  A boy would 
laugh - thinking as a boy thinks until he develops into a man.




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     04-Oct-99 20:59:01
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 04:01:06
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>

Esther;

You have to go back to Sophmore year of High School to understand the 
argument.

At that point of development, people feel intense peer pressure to 
conform and are ridiculed for not copying trends.  High school kids 
can laugh at things that are "old" or not popular.  

"Quake Cheaters Clan"  You don't have to image much to understand 
where they guy is coming from or what his world is like.  His opinions 
are as irrelevant to me as any ridicule a "hip" kid would give me for 
using a raincoat in the rain.  

So OS/2 is an "unhip" technology according to the "class of 2002".  
You are talking to a boy.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

On 10-5-99, 1:30:56 AM, esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler) wrote 
regarding Re: Time to move on:


> I most certainly do read earlier posts, Quake, and I'm as relaxed as
> anyone can be after reviewing a book that really shouldn't have been
> written.

> This is the first time you've come close to answering the question
> (which more rudely would be phrased as "what skin is it off YOUR nose
> what I do?"). It's still not a complete answer, but I think you're
> saying that it bothers you for people to use "old stuff," in some way.
> And for some unfathomable reason you want the satisfaction of people
> admitting that they're wrong in their choice and are willing to
> embrace... well, something else, I don't know or care what.

> Beats the crap out of me why you think this matters... but I'm afraid
> that you're setting yourself up for a disappointment. People don't use
> or not-use a tool because a stranger expresses his opinion...
> particular when it's a complete stranger without credibility, who
> doesn't have the courage to use his own name. If Chake Queasers Clan
> came along and told me that my 1991 Prelude was old and unsupported
> and I shouldn't use it anymore -- instead I should buy a brand-new
> paymentmobile that this stranger thought was more "in" -- well, I'd
> ignore that, too. My comfort and my efficiency don't rely on your
> opinion.

> I don't care if you ridicule me; what's ridicule from someone who
> hides behind a handle?

> Plus, you're completely inaccurate:
> | Os/2 users are the same. Stuck with what they know. Afraid of 
change. Afraid
> | of letting go... Of course if you don't use Microsoft products 
through a
> | crusade mentality whereby you hope that your efforts will bring down 
the
> | mighty Microsoft then I'm afraid you are one sandwich short of a 
picnic.

> Statistically, as of August last year, OS/2 users used an average of
> 2.7 operating systems. (I suspect that the number has crept up by
> then, but I haven't taken the time to re-run the survey.) The survey
> respondents were, nonetheless, gung-ho about the OS/2 (though
> decidedly _not_ about IBM). Most OS/2 users are educated about what
> other OSs do, yet 95% said, in 1998, that they expected to be running
> OS/2 in August 1999. Based on the membership renewal rates for the
> Phoenix OS/2 Society, the world's largest OS/2 user group, that
> statistic has held steady.

> You're trying to phrase this discussion as if the majority of OS/2
> users hate Microsoft, love IBM, and refuse to touch any other
> operating system. That isn't so. Most OS/2 users don't care strongly
> about Microsoft (at least not enough to matter), are disgusted with
> IBM, and are OS-literate. They also use OS/2 because they like it, and
> I've seen tut-tutting from fewer than a dozen people, in the last
> couple of years. (The tut-tutters seem to have gone to Linux.
> Fortunately, they're a minority in every crowd, just a noisy one.)

> If you want to debate, Quake, then I recommend that you do so based on
> accurate statements. You're suffering under several misconceptions.

> --Esther

> On Mon, 4 Oct 1999 23:08:37, "Quake Cheaters Clan"
> <theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:

> | Esther, Esther, Esther....
> |
> | Sit down, take a deep breath and relax...
> |
> | You dont read earlier posts do you Esther?
> |
> | I thought I had answered that...but here is another explanation, 
this time
> | with another analogy...
> |
> | It matters to me when I see people stuck to what they know and 
refuse to
> | move on... almost a reaction against progress... most perplexing 
indeed.
> | It's like an old man who is content to sit in his 1940's decorated 
home,
> | with 1940's readio that does not pick  up FM, he dresses in 1940's 
clothes
> | and uses 1940's electrical aplliance on none-standard electrical 
sockets...
> |
> | He may be happy, but he has become a point of fun. People view him 
with
> | riddicule rather than respect because of his determined resolve to 
stick
> | with what he knows.
> |
> | Os/2 users are the same. Stuck with what they know. Afraid of 
change. Afraid
> | of letting go... Of course if you don't use Microsoft products 
through a
> | crusade mentality whereby you hope that your efforts will bring down 
the
> | mighty Microsoft then I'm afraid you are one sandwich short of a 
picnic.
> |
> | OS/2 sit high upon their rightous high-chairs looking down upon all 
windows
> | users, shaking their heads and tut-tutting in an approving way.
> | That would be fair if it were the case that equal market share was a
> | realistic option for you. Its not. Time has moved on.
> |
> | I would like OS/2 users on here to admist that their battle is lost, 
embrace
> | the new flesh.
> |
> | Does this help or do you want me to break it down even further?
> |
> | BTW - am i a wee bit more interesting that Tim Martin?



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com                           04-Oct-99 12:56:06
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 04:01:06
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: "Jeffrey S. Kobal" <jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com>

Joseph wrote:

> 4.61 for OS/2 required at least FP5 (Open32 support) which gave me
> some concern about the quality of the port with that API.

The FP5 requirement was for Y2K compliance, not Open32
support.  Communicator for OS/2 does not use the Open32
porting modules.

Jeffrey S. Kobal
IBM Corporation


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Austin (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         05-Oct-99 08:38:09
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 10:27:11
Subj: Re: I am GLAD IBM wants some money!

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

John Scott writes:

> I do hope you enjoy Tholen's company in my kill file.

Illogical.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  05-Oct-99 08:27:04
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 11:34:06
Subj: Re: I am GLAD IBM wants some money!

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

Something claiming to be a <tholenantispam@hawaii.edu> sputtered:

> > I do hope you enjoy Tholen's company in my kill file.
>
> Illogical.

Ah, you're at it again, eh, Tholen?  Pretending not to understand why people
revile you so.  My comment: Logical.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: uno@40th.com                                      05-Oct-99 13:49:25
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 11:34:06
Subj: Re: The ultimate hacker OS...

From: uno@40th.com (uno@40th.com)

Jerry McBride? (mcbrides@erols.com?) wrote (Tue, 05 Oct 1999 07:23:25 -0400):
>So... "Me move on to something else..."? I don't think so. I already have

Fine, but who's going to do the drivers?  Anyone can write apps (or make
do with what is already available), but few can do drivers (or get OEMs
to do them).  And that's just the start (eg, not all hardware comes with
public data sheets).

IBM OS/2 has a skeleton crew maintaining it.  The only way I see anything
truly usable coming from it now is if the entire OS/2 Warp 4.whatever
code base was released.  Has to be that since the public OS/2 system docs
are really, really, really lousy.


(Hey, if I could think of a something good to mention, I would have.)
First wave...

 '`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'
 Corne1 Huth  -  http://40th.com/
 Bullet database engines/servers 3.1  Win32-WinCE-OS2-Linux+

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Yanaguana (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: esther@bitranch.com                               05-Oct-99 15:33:28
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 14:43:29
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler)

On Mon, 4 Oct 1999 20:59:02, Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote:

| You have to go back to Sophmore year of High School to understand the 
| argument.

Perhaps. But I do give everybody the benefit of the doubt. I've met 
14-year-old boys who were wiser than grownups, too; I don't judge 
someone by his (or her) age.

In any case, I was "different" even in my sophmore year of high 
school. <grin> I became extremely religious, marched in protests at 
the United Nations... I guess I was never a conformist!

--Esther 


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: damon@lexmark.com                                 05-Oct-99 11:38:01
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 14:43:29
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: Brian Damon <damon@lexmark.com>

Quake Cheaters Clan wrote:
> 
> Esther, Esther, Esther....
> 
> Sit down, take a deep breath and relax...

> It matters to me when I see people stuck to what they know and refuse to
> move on... almost a reaction against progress... most perplexing indeed.
> It's like an old man who is content to sit in his 1940's decorated home,
> with 1940's readio that does not pick  up FM, he dresses in 1940's clothes
> and uses 1940's electrical aplliance on none-standard electrical sockets...
> 
> He may be happy, but he has become a point of fun. People view him with
> riddicule rather than respect because of his determined resolve to stick
> with what he knows.
> 
> Os/2 users are the same. Stuck with what they know. Afraid of change. Afraid
> of letting go... Of course if you don't use Microsoft products through a
> crusade mentality whereby you hope that your efforts will bring down the
> mighty Microsoft then I'm afraid you are one sandwich short of a picnic.
> 
> OS/2 sit high upon their rightous high-chairs looking down upon all windows
> users, shaking their heads and tut-tutting in an approving way.
> That would be fair if it were the case that equal market share was a
> realistic option for you. Its not. Time has moved on.
> 
> I would like OS/2 users on here to admist that their battle is lost, embrace
> the new flesh.
> 
> Does this help or do you want me to break it down even further?
> 
> BTW - am i a wee bit more interesting that Tim Martin?

Let's see, a condescending attitude followed by "readio", "aplliance on
none-standard", "a point of fun", "riddicule", "rightous", "Its not", 
"users on here to admist". Well, we can certainly appreciate the
fact that you don't stick with what you know. I'd say you are very
similar to Tim Martin. All you need now are some aliases popping in
here to support you. If you really want to do it right, drop the "I"
and simply use "we" when expressing your thoughts.

Brian
-- 
Disclaimer: All opinions expressed are mine alone and do not represent
the views of my employer, Lexmark International, Inc.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Lexmark International, Inc (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mdk@agad.purdue.edu                               05-Oct-99 10:57:15
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 14:43:29
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: Mark Kelley <mdk@agad.purdue.edu>

Esther Schindler wrote:

> On Mon, 4 Oct 1999 16:56:18, Mark Kelley <mdk@agad.purdue.edu> wrote:
> | I agree with what you say.  I guess that's the point at which I have a
problem with this,
> | though.  To me, IBM's move makes it clear that they aren't interested in
further developing
> | the OS/2 client.
>
> Actually, it doesn't say anything to me about that one way or another.
> It means they need income to justify further development. And this is
> different from other companies *how*....?

What development?  An updated browser and the latest Java?  There is little
else that they've
mentioned that would be of any use to SOHO users.  To me, that is not
development of OS/2 at all.

I understand the idea here.  However, this time "development" seems rather
limited.  And it's
backwards.  Usually, a company develops a product and then promotes and sells
it.  With the
income from sales, they can further develop the product, making it better over 
time.  It's up to
the company to do sufficient marketing to sell enough of the product to have
money enough to
reinvest.

This time, though, IBM is doing something different.  Its words now seem to
be: "You want a new
product?  Fine.  Send us some money and we'll see what we can do."  (Actually, 
it's even less
than that, since IBM has made NO statement regarding a new product.  This is
the most tenuous of
vaporware ... really little more than dreamware or hopeware.  Or maybe
imaginationware.)

I would rather it had worked the normal way, with IBM developing OS/2 in order 
to attract
customers and make sales.  Clearly that is not going to happen.  But doesn't
it seem to you that
IBM would sell a lot more products, including Aurora, if they gave all the
fixes and add-ons
away, encouraging more and more people to buy the product?  If Aurora's sales
increased, IBM
would do much better and earn much more than they're gonna get by selling
support for existing
customers.  It just seems to me that IBM has this backwards ... unless they
have no intention or
hope of increasing their user base.

> |IBM is not interested (or motivated) in selling OS/2 in the
> | future, and that means development will languish.  They'll continue to
release fixes and
> | occasional updates like Netscape and Java in order to keep their big
customers happy, but
> | they're not interested in SOHO users.
>
> But Mark, they haven't been interested in SOHO users since August 1995
> (?) that we know of, when Gerstner told the financial community that
> it was for corporate use. Even when they _were_ interested in
> supporting SOHO users -- for that short period of time -- they were
> particularly inept at getting the message across. As I'm sure you
> recall David Barnes saying, it was the OS/2 users who sold the OS, not
> IBM's awesome marketing machine. <wry smile>

Yes, I do remember David Barnes and his words.  I miss those good ol' days. 
<*sigh*>  But yes,
you are correct, Gerstner laid it all out very clearly several years ago.  We
all knew what he
meant, but hoped that we could somehow change IBM's mind.  And in the
meantime, OS/2 has
continued to work well and get the job done.  There've been good products to
buy for it (alas,
less now than before) and it's been a  fun ride.  I'll keep using OS/2 into
the future, too.

However, this time it seems to me that IBM has made action of Gerstner's
words.  With no
indication that there will be an updated Warp client or even further
development other than
fixpaks, we are being asked to pay as much as for a new client.  This appears
to me to be a last
gasp before death.  No longer able or willing to develop the product, they are 
reduced to getting
any money they can from the product by charging for the hopes and dreams of
OS/2 users.  (As
relates to the SOHO users; corporate users are really the ones who will fund
this effort, of
course, and they are the only ones IBM really wants as customers now.)  It is, 
to me, an obvious
action by IBM to underscore Gerstner's words earlier.

> At any rate, there's some discussion on the POSSI email list, right
> now, about the feasibility and costs of offering POSSI members a group
> price on the subscription. So it might not cost as much as you may be
> imagining. (Then again, it might.)

Now, this does interest me.  Not so much for the cost ($200 isn't all that
much, after all) as
for the principle.  If SOHO users can unite and work unitedly to awaken IBM,
perhaps there is
some hope, after all.

> | You've always done well writing the truth, no matter what it was. 
Sometimes IBM does
> | things well, and sometimes it doesn't, but I'm not at all surprised that
you'd see both.
>
> Thanks for the kind words. <smile> I'm sorry I won't see you at
> Warpstock this year; as it turns out, I'll be in San Francisco for the
> weekend for an editorial meeting. But I'm sure we'll get together
> again before too long!

I hope you have a good time, and perhaps TM will show up to have lunch with
you!  By the way, I
just received my renewal notice from POSSI, and I'm sending it in right away.  
I have lost hope
in IBM, but not in other OS/2 users and not in OS/2 itself.  It'll still be my 
preferred platform
until, by IBM's negligence, I lose the ability to keep up enough to do my work 
with it.

--
Mark Kelley
Agriculture Information Systems
Purdue University


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Purdue University (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: djohnson@isomedia.com                             05-Oct-99 09:03:02
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 16:51:11
Subj: Re: I am GLAD IBM wants some money!

From: "David T. Johnson" <djohnson@isomedia.com>


Joe Malloy wrote:
> 
> Something claiming to be a <tholenantispam@hawaii.edu> sputtered:
> 
> > > I do hope you enjoy Tholen's company in my kill file.
> >
> > Illogical.
> 
> Ah, you're at it again, eh, Tholen?  Pretending not to understand why people
> revile you so.  My comment: Logical.

No, no, you don't understand.  Dave means that it is illogical to
suggest that two people in a kill file could provide company to each
other.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com                           05-Oct-99 11:42:17
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 16:51:11
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: "Jeffrey S. Kobal" <jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com>


"David H. McCoy" wrote:

> You've got an interesting definition of "port". Even though the three
versions
> most likely share quite a bit of the same code, they are not ports because
they
> are produced outside of Netscape?

Here's my definition of "port": The process or end-result of a
migration of an existing application from one platform to
another.

Is your definition any different?

Netscape has a single source tree for all platforms that they
produce, with some branches for the platform-specific code
(Note: No OS/2 branch).  They develop one version across
all of those platforms (not OS/2), then IBM gets the source
and has to port (see definition above) that version to OS/2.

> I afraid that your redefinition does little to change the facts.

How can one do anything to change facts?  I'm merely
trying to give you the facts that demonstrate that your
earlier statements were unfounded.

If, however, your desire is not to be correctly informed, but
instead to continue making brash statements about things
you do not understand, then I won't waste any more of
either of our time.

Sheesh.  (How long are we going to keep THAT up?)

Jeffrey S. Kobal
IBM Corporation


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Austin (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: djohnson@isomedia.com                             05-Oct-99 09:55:10
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 16:51:11
Subj: IBM and Sledgehammer...OS/2 Death?

From: "David T. Johnson" <djohnson@isomedia.com>

Details of the new 64-bit 'Sledgehammer' processor made by AMD are
coming out today.  This processor is designed to compete with the 64-bit
Intel 'Itanium' (formerly named 'Merced') processor.  Read more at: 

http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2347717,00.html

Some key details:

"AMD's chip will be compatible with older 32-bit Intel-compatible
software, which runs on chips like Intel's Pentium. But AMD's
no-more-mimicking-Intel strategy means that it will have to persuade
software developers to adapt their 64-bit programs to run on AMD's
SledgeHammer chip."

"AMD's SledgeHammer chip will be designed to run the older 32-bit
software at high speeds, in contrast to the relatively slow performance
that is expected for the 32-bit software on the Merced chip. And since
AMD's new "x86 64" architecture will offer a less radical style of
computing than Merced, Krelle said, it will be far easier for
programmers to write 64-bit versions of the software." 

It looks like there are three different incompatible 64-bit computing
futures for us.  Alpha, Itanium/Merced, and now, Sledgehammer.  The
current 32-bit OS/2 will run slowly on Merced, fast on Sledgehammer, and
(like Windows 2000) not at all on Alpha.  So...is this BAD news for OS/2
or GOOD news?  You may recall that Sm@rt Reseller ran a story last year
which said that IBM was 'suffocating' OS/2 because they had not yet
announced a port of OS/2 to Merced.  In case you've forgotten, here is
the link:

http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/content/smro/0519/317223.html

Since that story was written, Intel has announced several major delays
of Merced such that was only a few weeks ago that Intel claimed that
they had actually gotten some software to run on a prototype.  So I have
a few conclusions of own to list:  (Are you listening, Esther?)

1) IBM has not announced a port of OS/2 to Sledgehammer...yet.  But that
does NOT mean OS/2 is dead.  (Am I the first to say this?)

2) IBM looks pretty SM@RT to me to not rush in to support the shaky and
flaky Merced technology.

3)  AMD's 64-bit approach is much like the one Intel took in moving from
16-bit to the 32-bit x386 processor.  This is the approach that Intel
SHOULD have taken with Merced but didn't.

4)  IBM has not approved a 'Sledgehammer' OS/2 client by Brad Wardell. 
Maybe this is the end for OS/2!  (Am I the first to say this?)  Time for
hankie squeezing and hand-wringing over at the Stardock news
server...

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com               05-Oct-99 11:13:25
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 16:51:11
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: "Kim Cheung" <kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com>

On Tue, 05 Oct 1999 10:57:30 -0500, Mark Kelley wrote:

>Now, this does interest me.  Not so much for the cost ($200 isn't all that
much, after all) as
>for the principle.  If SOHO users can unite and work unitedly to awaken IBM,
perhaps there is
>some hope, after all.

If you are thinking that this will "change IBM's mind", then DON'T do it.  
You will only hate IBM that much more.  IBM has NOT been inconsistent
regarding their view on SOHO OS/2 user.

If your view is "what can WE do for OURSELF" as a bunch of OS/2 user, then
there would be fruit for further discussion.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: richard@NOSPAMwebtrek.com                         05-Oct-99 18:19:00
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 16:51:11
Subj: Making fun of people 

From: richard@NOSPAMwebtrek.com (Richard R. Klemmer)

On Mon, 4 Oct 1999 23:08:37, "Quake Cheaters Clan" 
<theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:

Completely off the subject, since your analogy didn't even come close 
to relating to people using whatever operating system they choose, but
I have to comment on this.

> It's like an old man who is content to sit in his 1940's decorated home,
> with 1940's readio that does not pick  up FM, he dresses in 1940's clothes
> and uses 1940's electrical aplliance on none-standard electrical sockets...
> 
> He may be happy, but he has become a point of fun. People view him with
> riddicule rather than respect because of his determined resolve to stick
> with what he knows.

Why would people either ridicule or respect this mythical person?  Why
couldn't they just let him live the way he wants to?  Is he hurting 
someone?  If he is content, then why should anyone else care?

A better question is, do you make fun of and ridicule people who 
choose to live or do things in different ways then you do?  Is that 
what makes you upset?  Do you walk down the street and yell at perfect
strangers because you think they dress funny or look funny, or don't 
wear their hair the same way you do?  And judging by your opinion in 
Operating Systems, whatever is in the majority would be the only 
allowable behavior and appearance.

You're an odd bird, Quake (or is that quack?)  I must admit you've 
been good for a few laughs, even though you couldn't do a good job of 
trolling this newsgroup.  However, your personal attacks on 
individuals (and nations) is getting a bit annoying.

-----------------------------
Richard R. Klemmer
richard@webtrek.com
http://www.webtrek.com
-----------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: WebTrek L.L.C. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: richard@NOSPAMwebtrek.com                         05-Oct-99 18:23:16
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 16:51:11
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: richard@NOSPAMwebtrek.com (Richard R. Klemmer)

On Tue, 5 Oct 1999 03:22:23, David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> 
wrote:

> 
> Behold! Truly, the written word doth lives and breathes in c.o.o.a.
> 

I was never an English Major (but I played one on TV once), however I 
believe that your use of "the written word" is singular, which means 
you should have used "live" and "breath" instead of their plural 
forms.

I figured since you insist on posting irrelevant messages, I might as 
well join in the fun.  :-)

-----------------------------
Richard R. Klemmer
richard@webtrek.com
http://www.webtrek.com
-----------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: WebTrek L.L.C. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mdk@agad.purdue.edu                               05-Oct-99 13:48:18
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 16:51:11
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: Mark Kelley <mdk@agad.purdue.edu>

"Richard R. Klemmer" wrote:

> On Tue, 5 Oct 1999 03:22:23, David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > Behold! Truly, the written word doth lives and breathes in c.o.o.a.
> >
>
> I was never an English Major (but I played one on TV once), however I
> believe that your use of "the written word" is singular, which means
> you should have used "live" and "breath" instead of their plural
> forms.
>
> I figured since you insist on posting irrelevant messages, I might as
> well join in the fun.  :-)

Okay, I'll join in, too!  :)  There are two correct ways to say this if
he is gonna try to use English from that era:

Truly, the written word doth live and breathe in c.o.o.a.; or

Truly, the written word liveth and breatheth in c.o.o.a.

("Doth" is third-person singular of "do," equivalent to the modern
"does."  And, of course, a good "forsooth" wouldn't hurt, either!)

--
Mark Kelley
Agriculture Information Systems
Purdue University


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Purdue University (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: nospam_ktk@netlabs.org                            05-Oct-99 21:54:00
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 16:51:11
Subj: Re: IBM and Sledgehammer...OS/2 Death?

From: "Adrian Gschwend" <nospam_ktk@netlabs.org>

On Tue, 05 Oct 1999 09:55:20 -0400, David T. Johnson wrote:

>It looks like there are three different incompatible 64-bit computing
>futures for us.  Alpha, Itanium/Merced, and now, Sledgehammer.  The
>current 32-bit OS/2 will run slowly on Merced, fast on Sledgehammer, and
>(like Windows 2000) not at all on Alpha.  So...is this BAD news for OS/2
>or GOOD news?  You may recall that Sm@rt Reseller ran a story last year

Forget all the processors as long as they are not available. Merced is dead
IMHO, not OS/2.

cu

Adrian


---
Adrian Gschwend
@ OS/2 Netlabs

ICQ: 22419590
ktk@netlabs.org
-------
The OS/2 OpenSource Project:
http://www.netlabs.org


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OS/2 Netlabs (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jek404@usa.net                                    05-Oct-99 20:43:10
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 19:53:18
Subj: Warpstock '99 Atlanta, GA USA

From: "Johnny Kitchens" <jek404@usa.net>

Outstanding Software and Specials At Warpstock '99 Atlanta


Warpstock '99 Atlanta Press Release
October 5, 1999
For Immediate Release

Warpstock is THE place to find the latest OS/2 Software. You'll find both
new and updated software from a large assortment of vendors, and be ready to
buy because you won't believe the "show specials" that will be available for
Warpstock attendees!

For example, Hethmon Brothers will be offering their first class Inet.Mail
Pro 1.5 for $399, a full $100 off the normal retail price! Version 1.3 will
be also available at discounted prices. Inet.Mail Pro for OS/2 is a full
featured SMTP and POP3 server for OS/2.

Sundial Systems, the Warped Jeopardy! sponsor and major OS/2 software house
("Sundial has the Answers"), will show their full product line. Look for
outstanding savings on their Mesa 2 spreadsheet; DBExpert relational
database and application builder; Relish, RelishNet, and RelishWeb, all for
time management; the Clearlook word processor; and Rover Pack desktop
enhancements. Plus, get a sneak preview of a new anti-spam product,
code-named Kiwi.

Perfect Niche Software will offer an incredible discount on SMACK!, the easy
to use label printing program. The retail price of SMACK! is $69.95, but
Warpstock attendees can license SMACK! for only $44.95, a $25.00 savings!

Serenity Systems will be supporting a pavilion where more than a dozen ISVs
will demonstrate their applications on Managed Clients supported by
Serenity's amazing WiseManager system. Serenity will also demonstrate their
new WiseTalker Database Server, and will preview their Building Automation
and Security Software, including the "security camera" application. User and
prospective channel partners can look for some "show specials" as well.

And Theta Band software, with Julien Pierre at the helm, has planned special
discounts on their WarpCharge and MMPack software for Warpstock attendees.
WarpCharge lets your web site take credit card orders online, and MMPack is
a top-of-the-line multimedia package.

You'll also see IBM's latest products including OS/2 Warp Server for
e-business, and Workspace On-Demand. IBM is giving over a dozen
presentations, and it's a perfect opportunity for you to see the future
through IBM's eyes.

JBC Software Development will offer a fantastic 30% discount on their
HomePage Publisher and GpfRexx products. HomePage Publisher is the most
powerful OS/2 web page editor on the market. GpfRexx is a visual application
generator that combines the ease of a WYSIWYG visual programming environment
with the power of Rexx.

Also, Armin Schwarz of the Warped Code Cellar has announced discounted
pricing for his powerful House/2, House/290, and UPS Monitor products. Get
all three programs at Warpstock for only $34.00, and Warp your whole house!
HOUSE/2 is designed for easy operation of X10 home control devices, and UPS
Monitor is a utility program to monitor most American Power Conversion (APC)
Uninterruptible Power Sources (UPS) for power line status.

Aviar will showcase several unique OS/2 products including KidStuff for
OS/2, KidStuff for OS/2 Plus Pack, Oz of Prevention System, and "Object Rexx
by Example". The KidStuff titles are edutainment packages for little
children, while "Object Rexx by Example" is a book which teaches Object
Rexx. The Oz of Prevention System is the world's only OS/2 native
speech-aware Computerized Maintenance Management System for Plant Engineers,
Maintenance Managers, and Operations Personnel.

Uwe Schlenter has made special arrangements to provide drastically reduced
prices on his WarpNote, BioGraph/2, and PM Checksum programs. Plus you can
see Phoenix Software's Think Tool Pro desktop database alternative and
CrossTec's NetOp Remote Control for OS/2 remote control software.

With Software and Specials like these, you know you don't want to miss the
premier OS/2 event of the century, Warpstock '99 Atlanta!

OS/2 users from around the world will meet October 16-17 in Atlanta. Visit
http://www.warpstock.org for the complete information about this very
special OS/2 event.


# # # # #
Press release by Tom Bolick (tbolick@ibm.net).


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: MediaOne - Atlanta (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@ifa.hawaii.edu                     05-Oct-99 20:55:19
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 19:53:18
Subj: Re: I am GLAD IBM wants some money!

From: tholenAntiSpam@ifa.hawaii.edu

David T. Johnson writes:

> Joe Malloy wrote:

>> I wrote:

>>>> I do hope you enjoy Tholen's company in my kill file.

>>> Illogical.

>> Ah, you're at it again, eh, Tholen?  Pretending not to understand why
people
>> revile you so.  My comment: Logical.

> No, no, you don't understand.

Par for Joe Malloy.

> Dave means that it is illogical to suggest that two people in a kill
> file could provide company to each other.

Indeed.  But what do you expect in Joe Malloy's "reality"?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: rigor@mindspring.com                              05-Oct-99 17:15:13
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 19:53:18
Subj: Re: Warpstock '99 Atlanta, GA USA

From: "Sam Brown" <rigor@mindspring.com>

shit wake up nobody uses os/2 any more??

maybe you accidently search/replaced windows NT with os/2.
hahaha



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: MindSpring Enterprises (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mainetti@visionnaire.com.br                       05-Oct-99 20:02:28
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 19:53:18
Subj: Y2K problem with OS/2 TCP/IP stacks ?

From: "Sergio Mainetti Jr." <mainetti@visionnaire.com.br>

  Hello.
  I'm working in a project to look for Y2K problems in an OS/2
TCP/IP stack.

  I'm working with OS/2 version 3.0 and up and using the TCP/IP
stack from Netmanage's PC/TCP (formerly FTP Software's PC/TCP).

  Does anyone know, or have had, any problems with dates with this
environment ?  

  Best regards,

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sergio Mainetti Jr.                                         Visionnaire
mainetti@visionnaire.com.br                     R. Fernando Amaro, 1139
http://www.visionnaire.com.br                   Curitiba, PR  80050-020
Tel/Fax: +55 (41) 262-5646                                       Brasil
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Visionnaire/CITS (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               05-Oct-99 18:32:06
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 21:22:25
Subj: Re: Warpstock '99 Atlanta, GA USA

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Crossposted to:
atl.forsale??
^^^

We've definitely seen a reduction in the quality of trolls around here. 
This one doesn't even have the mental capacity to correctly add an
irrelevant crossposting, let alone form a sentence.

Sam Brown wrote:
> 
> shit wake up nobody uses os/2 any more??
> 
> maybe you accidently search/replaced windows NT with os/2.
> hahaha

If anyone around here replaced windoze NT with OS/2 it surely wouldn't
have been an accident.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  05-Oct-99 18:43:11
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 21:22:25
Subj: Re: I am GLAD IBM wants some money!

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

Oy!  tholenAntiSpam@ifa.hawaii.edu babbled:

> >> Ah, you're at it again, eh, Tholen?  Pretending not to understand why
people
> >> revile you so.  My comment: Logical.
>
> > No, no, you don't understand.

> > Dave means that it is illogical to suggest that two people in a kill
> > file could provide company to each other.
>
> Indeed.

Ok, prove it, if you think you can, Tholen.  Otherwise, my interpretation
stands.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jdc0014@InfoNET.st-johns.nf.ca                    05-Oct-99 22:56:20
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 21:22:25
Subj: Re: IBM and Sledgehammer...OS/2 Death?

From: jdc0014@InfoNET.st-johns.nf.ca (John Hong)

Adrian Gschwend (nospam_ktk@netlabs.org) wrote:

: Forget all the processors as long as they are not available. Merced is dead
: IMHO, not OS/2.

	Dunno about dead, but Merced has certainly been a flop.  Even 
Hewlett-Packard, who are co-developing Merced with Intel are in fact 
telling their customers to not buy it.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: St. John's InfoNET (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             05-Oct-99 23:01:11
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 21:22:25
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <7tbd8g$rvs$4@newsreader3.core.theplanet.net>,
  "Quake Cheaters Clan" <theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:

Quack, Quack, Quack . . .

Relax, take it easy, take a deep breath.

> It matters to me when I see people stuck to what they know and refuse
> to move on...

But *why* does it matter?  What possible difference could it make to
your little world what others do or do not do? Are you so insecure that
you have to act as a global Hall Monitor, making sure that everyone
complies to *your* personal idea of what's kosher?

Are you really that much of a Facist?

> almost a reaction against progress...

Considering that OS/2 had memory protection, Object-Oriented GUI,
pre-emptive multitasking, advanced, installable file systems, etc.,
three quarters of a decade before Windows, it's amusing that you would
associate OS/2 use with "reaction against progress."  Frankly, that
would be more fitting to Windows use, as would "[being] stuck in what
they know."

Whomever "they" may be.

> most perplexing indeed.

Indeed.

> It's like an old man who is content to sit in his 1940's decorated
> home, with 1940's readio that does not pick  up FM, he dresses in
> 1940's clothes and uses 1940's electrical aplliance on none-standard
> electrical sockets...

You know, I knew a gentleman rather like this once, when I was going to
college.  I paid my way through school as a barber, and one of my
customers was a gentleman to whom we referred simply as "The Colonel."
You see, he was retired from the military, and he drove around in a
***MINT CONDITION*** mid-1940's Cadillac.

I mean, it was cherry. The envy of the town.

And yes, he wore clothing from the era, the whole nine yards.

Too bad you can't appreciate such things. Youth is, after all,
absolutely wasted on youth.

> He may be happy, but he has become a point of fun. People view him
> with riddicule rather than respect because of his determined resolve
> to stick with what he knows.

Correction: The insecure view him with ridicule, and he becomes "a point
of fun" (whatever that's supposed to mean) among those with low
self-esteem.

> Os/2 users are the same. Stuck with what they know. Afraid of change.

See above. OS/2 users were doing 32-bit, PMT computing, and surfing the
'net as well, before it became "hip."

-- snip --

> OS/2 sit high upon their rightous high-chairs looking down upon all
> windows users, shaking their heads and tut-tutting in an approving
> way.

A few may, perhaps, but then there are legions of Windows users (such as
yourself) who do the same thing in reverse . . .

-- snip --

> I would like OS/2 users on here to admist that their battle is lost,
> embrace the new flesh.

"Embrace the new flesh?"  Spoken like a true Inner Party member.

"Hail to Big Brother!"

"War is Peace!"

"Freedom is Slavery!"

"Ignorance is Strength!"

No.  The "battle" won't be "lost" until OS/2 ceases to exist.

-- snip --


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: forgitaboutit@fake.com                            05-Oct-99 20:00:27
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 21:22:25
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com>

In article <8X3qmJZBd3Ft-pn2-SvmNJFbcZ4Eh@cj238562-a.dlcty1.va.home.com>, 
richard@NOSPAMwebtrek.com says...
>On Tue, 5 Oct 1999 03:22:23, David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> 
>wrote:
>
>> 
>> Behold! Truly, the written word doth lives and breathes in c.o.o.a.
>> 
>
>I was never an English Major (but I played one on TV once), however I 
>believe that your use of "the written word" is singular, which means 
>you should have used "live" and "breath" instead of their plural 
>forms.

Because of the "doth", but you are correct. I shouldn't added that. :-)

>I figured since you insist on posting irrelevant messages, I might as 
>well join in the fun.  :-)



>-----------------------------
>Richard R. Klemmer
>richard@webtrek.com
>http://www.webtrek.com
>-----------------------------
>
>



-- 
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: forgitaboutit@fake.com                            05-Oct-99 20:03:02
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 21:22:25
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com>

In article <37FA4804.4376D982@agad.purdue.edu>, mdk@agad.purdue.edu says...
>"Richard R. Klemmer" wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 5 Oct 1999 03:22:23, David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Behold! Truly, the written word doth lives and breathes in c.o.o.a.
>> >
>>
>> I was never an English Major (but I played one on TV once), however I
>> believe that your use of "the written word" is singular, which means
>> you should have used "live" and "breath" instead of their plural
>> forms.
>>
>> I figured since you insist on posting irrelevant messages, I might as
>> well join in the fun.  :-)
>
>Okay, I'll join in, too!  :)  There are two correct ways to say this if
>he is gonna try to use English from that era:
>
>Truly, the written word doth live and breathe in c.o.o.a.; or



>Truly, the written word liveth and breatheth in c.o.o.a.
>
>("Doth" is third-person singular of "do," equivalent to the modern
>"does."  And, of course, a good "forsooth" wouldn't hurt, either!)

Hark!! I stand here before thee, greatly chastised, my image darkened with 
shame.

OOO-ESSS TOOOOOO!! Forgive!!!!

>--
>Mark Kelley
>Agriculture Information Systems
>Purdue University
>
>
>

-- 
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: forgitaboutit@fake.com                            05-Oct-99 20:10:23
  To: All                                               05-Oct-99 21:22:25
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com>

In article <37FA2A7B.4FA7D8A3@NOSPAMus.ibm.com>, jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com 
says...
>
>
>"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
>> You've got an interesting definition of "port". Even though the three
versions
>> most likely share quite a bit of the same code, they are not ports because
they
>> are produced outside of Netscape?
>
>Here's my definition of "port": The process or end-result of a
>migration of an existing application from one platform to
>another.

Then would the Unix, Mac, and Windows versions all ports that and as I said, 
all were timely.

>Is your definition any different?
>
>Netscape has a single source tree for all platforms that they
>produce, with some branches for the platform-specific code
>(Note: No OS/2 branch).  They develop one version across
>all of those platforms (not OS/2), then IBM gets the source
>and has to port (see definition above) that version to OS/2.

I never said anything to the contrary.

>> I afraid that your redefinition does little to change the facts.
>
>How can one do anything to change facts?  I'm merely
>trying to give you the facts that demonstrate that your
>earlier statements were unfounded.

How so? Here are my earlier statements
"Well, once again, OS/2 is late to the party. Which brave person will be the 
first to step up and proudly shout how Netscape 4.61 "does everything they 
need", and how you don't need any "bloated" features?

Of course, the same thing was said about 4.61, when 4.04 was out.
And 4.04 when 2.02 was out.

I imagine, many won't need anything in 4.7 until its available for release, 
right. Of course, by the time that happens, it will cost you $200.

But what the heck? In this time of declining hardware prices, why not pay $200 

for something that others get for free and isn't guaranteed to actually ship."

and this
"Seems that no problem was made releasing an Unix and Mac version or did this 
not occur to you.

Sheesh."

Exactly which statement is unfounded?

>If, however, your desire is not to be correctly informed, but
>instead to continue making brash statements about things
>you do not understand, then I won't waste any more of
>either of our time.

Exactly which statements were brash or incorrect? For the reasons you laid
out, 
OS/2 is one version behind. Exactly how does your explanation which lays out 
why OS/2 is one version behind invalidate ANY of my statements.

For that matter, which statements are your correcting?


>Sheesh.  (How long are we going to keep THAT up?)
>

Shee.... to be continued...

>Jeffrey S. Kobal
>IBM Corporation
>
>
>

-- 
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: wsonna@ibm.net                                    06-Oct-99 00:32:03
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 03:33:25
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: wsonna@ibm.net (William Sonna)

On Mon, 4 Oct 1999 23:08:37, "Quake Cheaters Clan" 
<theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Esther, Esther, Esther....
> 
> Sit down, take a deep breath and relax...
> 
> You dont read earlier posts do you Esther?
> 
> I thought I had answered that...but here is another explanation, this time
> with another analogy...
> 
> It matters to me when I see people stuck to what they know and refuse to
> move on... almost a reaction against progress... most perplexing indeed.
> It's like an old man who is content to sit in his 1940's decorated home,
> with 1940's readio that does not pick  up FM, he dresses in 1940's clothes
> and uses 1940's electrical aplliance on none-standard electrical sockets...
> 
> He may be happy, but he has become a point of fun. People view him with
> riddicule rather than respect because of his determined resolve to stick
> with what he knows.
> 

While we're on the subject of nerdish idiots, anyone want to wager 
whether Flake Cheezer owns REAL Doc Martens, or K-Mart clones?

One Pokeman card says the Big Cheez went for the clones!!!!

[big snip]

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: wsonna@ibm.net                                    06-Oct-99 00:53:08
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 03:33:25
Subj: Re: Warpstock '99 Atlanta, GA USA

From: wsonna@ibm.net (William Sonna)

On Tue, 5 Oct 1999 22:32:13, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:

> Crossposted to:
> atl.forsale??
> ^^^
> 
> We've definitely seen a reduction in the quality of trolls around here. 
> This one doesn't even have the mental capacity to correctly add an
> irrelevant crossposting, let alone form a sentence.
> 

It only stands to reason -  all the COMPETENT trolls have moved to 
comp.os.linux.advocacy.

Bush league trolls = Further evidence of OS/2's continued decline and 
pending discontinuation.

DenBeste, take note - we just may be witnessing cut number nine 
hundred and ninety three!

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: hunters@thunder.indstate.edu                      06-Oct-99 00:51:24
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 03:33:25
Subj: Re: Warpstock '99 Atlanta, GA USA

From: hunters@thunder.indstate.edu

In article <7tdplf$6nq$1@nntp3.atl.mindspring.net>,
  "Sam Brown" <rigor@mindspring.com> wrote:

> shit wake up nobody uses os/2 any more??

They don't?? Then why the hell are we having a user conference in
Atlanta!? :) I hope these plane tickets are refundable!

> maybe you accidently search/replaced windows NT with os/2.
> hahaha

You're a "Ke\/\/l H@|<3r", aren't you...

--
-Steven Hunter               *OS/2 Warp 4 * |Warpstock '99 | Oct 16-17|
hunters@thunder.indstate.edu *AMD K6-2 400* |       Atlanta GA        |


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: huffd@nls.net                                     06-Oct-99 02:14:23
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 03:33:25
Subj: Re: The ultimate hacker OS...

From: "David D. Huff Jr." <huffd@nls.net>

I came to that conclusion a week ago. Heck who is it that while driving
the nicest car on the block worries that it will some day become a rusted
bucket of bolts? Does the owner of a '65 Mustang or '69 Cuda wonder
where he'll get parts? Yup, does he find them or build them? Yup
When you consider the alternative..enough, said.

Jerry McBride wrote:

> This just occured to me. Since the latest revelation of IBM seems to almost
> guarentee that OS/2 will become even more of a niche OS. I've been
considering
> the OS landscape, contemplating making a move to something else.
>
> My choices are rather few, being either windows, linux or solaris. I was
making
> a list of features that each has or lacks and it dawned on me, as brightly
as
> the sun... Why even fool around with those other OSes? I'd contantly compare
> them to OS/2, just like I was already doing...
>
> OS/2, with IBM's help, has just become the ultimate hobby/hacker OS that
there
> ever was. Think about it, Warp 3.0 and Warp 4.0 with the latest fixpaks are
> going to be around forever. As times goes on, with the support of a bunch of
> die-hard users, it'll become more entrenched than ever before. It could even
> become the Linux of tomorrow one day. It certainly has the potential, with
the
> kernal source code floating around...
>
> I don't have the foggiest idea what IBM has in it's coporate mind, but it
just
> guarenteed that OS/2 will be around for a long, long time. Even after they
> ultimately drop it entirely. Geezz... even copies of Wseb GA are turning up
> for free FTP over seas...
>
> So... "Me move on to something else..."? I don't think so. I already have
> what I want. Now to get IBM to totally let it go, so it can proliferate.
From
> IBM's coporate view, it must be perplexing that so many people still use/run
> OS/2. Probably just as perplexing as our view of how IBM is trying to get us
> to move away from it. Funny actually... The harder I get pushed, the more
I'll
> refuse to move.
>
> --
>
>
*******************************************************************************

> *            Sometimes, the BEST things in life really ARE free...           
 *
> *       Get a FREE copy of NetRexx 1.150 for your next java project at:      
 *
> *                     http://www2.hursley.ibm.com/netrexx                    
 *
>
*******************************************************************************

>
> /----------------------------------------\
> | From the desktop of: Jerome D. McBride |
> |         mcbrides@erols.com             |
> \----------------------------------------/
>
> --

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@ifa.hawaii.edu                     06-Oct-99 02:57:26
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 03:33:25
Subj: Re: Warpstock '99 Atlanta, GA USA

From: tholenAntiSpam@ifa.hawaii.edu

Sam Brown writes:

> shit wake up nobody uses os/2 any more??

Why are you using question marks at the end of a declarative sentence?

By the way, somebody does use OS/2.  Looks like the readers here are
not the ones who need to wake up.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: rsteiner@visi.com                                 05-Oct-99 22:36:10
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 03:33:25
Subj: Re: Warpstock '99 Atlanta, GA USA

From: rsteiner@visi.com (Richard Steiner)

Here in comp.os.os2.beta, "Sam Brown" <rigor@mindspring.com>
spake unto us, saying:

>shit wake up nobody uses os/2 any more??

Welcome to the real world, my son.  :-)

-- 
   -Rich Steiner  >>>--->  rsteiner@visi.com  >>>---> Bloomington, MN
     OS/2 + Linux + BeOS + FreeBSD + Solaris + WinNT4 + Win95 + DOS
      + VMWare + Fusion + vMac + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven! :-)
                           Doo dee doo dee...

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: FIELDATA FORTRAN ENTHUSIASTS CLUB (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     05-Oct-99 21:35:04
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 03:33:25
Subj: Re: IBM and Sledgehammer...OS/2 Death?

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>

No home PC user will be running 64-bit computers based on the Intel Merced
or AMD 64-bit processor.   64-bit processing is a useful as SMP -- not much
to us.  In the early and mid 90's NT users would taunt OS/2 users about SMP
and how common SMP was going to be in 1997 and onward.  Pahh.  Today the
hottest PCs are integrated, low cost $600 systems and they are primarily
used as web terminals.

PC computing as we know it will stay at 32-bit.

Advanced 64 and 128 bit computers running in the home will be made by Sega,
Sony and Nintendo et al..  The consumer bottlenecks are in graphics and
bandwidth.



"David T. Johnson" wrote:

> Details of the new 64-bit 'Sledgehammer' processor made by AMD are
> coming out today.  This processor is designed to compete with the 64-bit
> Intel 'Itanium' (formerly named 'Merced') processor.  Read more at:
>
> http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2347717,00.html
>
> Some key details:
>
> "AMD's chip will be compatible with older 32-bit Intel-compatible
> software, which runs on chips like Intel's Pentium. But AMD's
> no-more-mimicking-Intel strategy means that it will have to persuade
> software developers to adapt their 64-bit programs to run on AMD's
> SledgeHammer chip."
>
> "AMD's SledgeHammer chip will be designed to run the older 32-bit
> software at high speeds, in contrast to the relatively slow performance
> that is expected for the 32-bit software on the Merced chip. And since
> AMD's new "x86 64" architecture will offer a less radical style of
> computing than Merced, Krelle said, it will be far easier for
> programmers to write 64-bit versions of the software."
>
> It looks like there are three different incompatible 64-bit computing
> futures for us.  Alpha, Itanium/Merced, and now, Sledgehammer.  The
> current 32-bit OS/2 will run slowly on Merced, fast on Sledgehammer, and
> (like Windows 2000) not at all on Alpha.  So...is this BAD news for OS/2
> or GOOD news?  You may recall that Sm@rt Reseller ran a story last year
> which said that IBM was 'suffocating' OS/2 because they had not yet
> announced a port of OS/2 to Merced.  In case you've forgotten, here is
> the link:
>
> http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/content/smro/0519/317223.html
>
> Since that story was written, Intel has announced several major delays
> of Merced such that was only a few weeks ago that Intel claimed that
> they had actually gotten some software to run on a prototype.  So I have
> a few conclusions of own to list:  (Are you listening, Esther?)
>
> 1) IBM has not announced a port of OS/2 to Sledgehammer...yet.  But that
> does NOT mean OS/2 is dead.  (Am I the first to say this?)
>
> 2) IBM looks pretty SM@RT to me to not rush in to support the shaky and
> flaky Merced technology.
>
> 3)  AMD's 64-bit approach is much like the one Intel took in moving from
> 16-bit to the 32-bit x386 processor.  This is the approach that Intel
> SHOULD have taken with Merced but didn't.
>
> 4)  IBM has not approved a 'Sledgehammer' OS/2 client by Brad Wardell.
> Maybe this is the end for OS/2!  (Am I the first to say this?)  Time for
> hankie squeezing and hand-wringing over at the Stardock news
> server...

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: wayne@SPAM.tkb.att.ne.jp                          06-Oct-99 13:46:08
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 03:33:25
Subj: Re: Things OS/2 users cannot do....

From: "Wayne Bickell" <wayne@SPAM.tkb.att.ne.jp>

On Thu, 30 Sep 1999 13:48:41 +0100, Quake Cheaters Clan wrote:

:>Take criticism

Mmmmmmmmmmm

:>Take reality in large amounts (only then in selected portions)

Reality is an illusion caused by lack of alcohol

:>Take a break (from abusing all other OS's)

I use several OSs, Next to OS/2 the only one half decent is BeOS

:>Take stock (of their true position as a bit player in the OS world)

I know what works for me

:>Take control (of themselves from frothing when Windows family is promoted)

There's a breeze in here

:>Take comment that seems to go against their own propoganda

I use what works

:>Take their systems into the next century

It's already Y2K compliant

:>Take the fact that they are an endangered lot

Like the British

:>Take part in Quake III gameplay (oops, may as well throw in most new games)

Don't have time for games. some people have to work unlike the masses of
lazy, unemployable people in the UK.

:>Take as red the nice feeling of being SUPPORTED

Bought a new jock strap today

:>Take a magazine off then shop shelf

And put it down again

:>Take a cover CD with good FREE software (PC Plus springs to mind in UK)

Personal Computer World (UK) has an OS/2 column

:>-------(BeOS, Linux, Windows, DOS all get supported) - the latest issue has
:>Staroffice 5.1 on the disc with Linux version next month...NO OS/2 will be
:>put on,

Already got the CD from Sun

 Automenu play studio and a 10,000 software suite from Seagate....
:>Info 7 & Analysis)....

Got SmartSuite for OS/2 and StarOffice 5.1

:>Have you stopped drooling yet chumps? You losers are so out of the loop you
:>are like a small community of inbred hill-billies, with you 'pa' being your
:>own uncle... its about time that you all spread your wings and left your
:>little cramped and dirty OS/2 cage.

What's your point? Or as I said before "Fuck Off"

BTW. I'm British too but I had the good sense to get out.

******************************************************
Wayne Bickell
Tokyo, Japan
wayne@tkb.att.ne.jp
******************************************************
           Posted with PMINews 2 for OS/2
  Running on OS/2 Warp 4 (UK)  + FixPak 9
******************************************************



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: AT&T Internet Service (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     05-Oct-99 22:29:05
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 03:33:25
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


"David H. McCoy" wrote:

> In article <37FA2A7B.4FA7D8A3@NOSPAMus.ibm.com>, jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com
> says...
> >
> >
> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >
> >> You've got an interesting definition of "port". Even though the three
versions
> >> most likely share quite a bit of the same code, they are not ports
because they
> >> are produced outside of Netscape?
> >
> >Here's my definition of "port": The process or end-result of a
> >migration of an existing application from one platform to
> >another.
>
> Then would the Unix, Mac, and Windows versions all ports that and as I said,
> all were timely.

They cannot be ports since they are the same codebase.

If you repeat yourself three more times or if you post a marvel comicbook
character
(maybe Galactus) retort then you'll be right.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     05-Oct-99 22:36:20
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 03:33:26
Subj: Re: Y2K problem with OS/2 TCP/IP stacks ?

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>

I don't have a good answer.

I knew Netmanage engineers and don't recall them making or reselling a
TCP/IP stack for OS/2 -- I would have gotten one instead of buying Warp 3.0
Connect.  I assume you are using their DOS TCP/IP stack in an OS/2 DOS VM.
I would seek help on the TCP/IP stack from Netmange (not sure how they have
faired in the past few years given they were basically sellling a TCP/IP
stack and tool sfor Windows3.1).

IBM's TCP/IP stack is documented on thier Y2K site.  It's found with a
search on the main IBM web site.  If you are running WARP Connect then
there is a possibility of using a Y2K compliant OS/2 TCP/IP stack in a DOS
or Windows VM.  I have found help at Judy's Warped World.

She has links to getting OS/2 and TCP/IP running in DOS and iwndows
sessions.
http://www.gt-online.com/~bri/


"Sergio Mainetti Jr." wrote:

>   Hello.
>   I'm working in a project to look for Y2K problems in an OS/2
> TCP/IP stack.
>
>   I'm working with OS/2 version 3.0 and up and using the TCP/IP
> stack from Netmanage's PC/TCP (formerly FTP Software's PC/TCP).
>
>   Does anyone know, or have had, any problems with dates with this
> environment ?
>
>   Best regards,
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Sergio Mainetti Jr.                                         Visionnaire
> mainetti@visionnaire.com.br                     R. Fernando Amaro, 1139
> http://www.visionnaire.com.br                   Curitiba, PR  80050-020
> Tel/Fax: +55 (41) 262-5646                                       Brasil
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: nospam_ktk@netlabs.org                            06-Oct-99 12:00:10
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 14:39:26
Subj: Re: IBM and Sledgehammer...OS/2 Death?

From: "Adrian Gschwend" <nospam_ktk@netlabs.org>

On 5 Oct 1999 22:56:40 GMT, John Hong wrote:

>	Dunno about dead, but Merced has certainly been a flop.  Even 
>Hewlett-Packard, who are co-developing Merced with Intel are in fact 
>telling their customers to not buy it.

Exactly, so that's the reason because we should not care about new processor
support for OS/2 until they are *really* available.

cu

Adrian


---
Adrian Gschwend
@ OS/2 Netlabs

ICQ: 22419590
ktk@netlabs.org
-------
The OS/2 OpenSource Project:
http://www.netlabs.org


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OS/2 Netlabs (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mdk@agad.purdue.edu                               06-Oct-99 08:30:25
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 14:39:26
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: Mark Kelley <mdk@agad.purdue.edu>

Be thou not so contrite; it becometh thee not.

"David H. McCoy" wrote:

> In article <37FA4804.4376D982@agad.purdue.edu>, mdk@agad.purdue.edu says...
> >"Richard R. Klemmer" wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 5 Oct 1999 03:22:23, David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Behold! Truly, the written word doth lives and breathes in c.o.o.a.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I was never an English Major (but I played one on TV once), however I
> >> believe that your use of "the written word" is singular, which means
> >> you should have used "live" and "breath" instead of their plural
> >> forms.
> >>
> >> I figured since you insist on posting irrelevant messages, I might as
> >> well join in the fun.  :-)
> >
> >Okay, I'll join in, too!  :)  There are two correct ways to say this if
> >he is gonna try to use English from that era:
> >
> >Truly, the written word doth live and breathe in c.o.o.a.; or
>
> >Truly, the written word liveth and breatheth in c.o.o.a.
> >
> >("Doth" is third-person singular of "do," equivalent to the modern
> >"does."  And, of course, a good "forsooth" wouldn't hurt, either!)
>
> Hark!! I stand here before thee, greatly chastised, my image darkened with
> shame.
>
> OOO-ESSS TOOOOOO!! Forgive!!!!
>
> >--
> >Mark Kelley
> >Agriculture Information Systems
> >Purdue University
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> ---------------------------------------
> David H. McCoy
> dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
> ---------------------------------------

--
Mark Kelley
Agriculture Information Systems
Purdue University


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Purdue University (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: rjf@yyycomasia.com                                06-Oct-99 14:49:18
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 14:39:27
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: rjf@yyycomasia.com (rj friedman)

On Mon, 4 Oct 1999 15:30:42, grinnell@acunet.net wrote:

David, you remind me of a little kid who goes around the neighborhood
saying, "Nah, nah, my daddy bought me a new bike...and it's better than
yours is."
 
When you used OS/2 you taunted Windows users, now that you use Windows
you taunt OS/2 users.  Amazing how little you have grown over the years.

What can you expect from someone who gave one of his main 
reasons for switching to NT as so that he could blow up 
people in Quakeworld.




________________________________________________________

[RJ]                 OS/2 - Live it, or live with it. 
rj friedman          Team ABW              
Taipei, Taiwan       rjf@yyycomasia.com 

To send email - remove the `yyy'
________________________________________________________

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: SEEDNet News Service (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ispy@groovyshow.com                               06-Oct-99 09:40:20
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 14:39:27
Subj: Re: The ultimate hacker OS...

From: "Kelly Robinson" <ispy@groovyshow.com>

Jerry McBride <mcbrides@erols.com> wrote in message
news:t+d+38D5w2pG090yn@erols.com...
> This just occured to me. Since the latest revelation of IBM seems to
almost
> guarentee that OS/2 will become even more of a niche OS. I've been
considering
> the OS landscape, contemplating making a move to something else.
>
> My choices are rather few, being either windows, linux or solaris. I was
making
> a list of features that each has or lacks and it dawned on me, as brightly
as
> the sun... Why even fool around with those other OSes? I'd contantly
compare
> them to OS/2, just like I was already doing...

You forgot BeOS and Crapintosh, so it's not as limited as you pretend it to
be.

> OS/2, with IBM's help, has just become the ultimate hobby/hacker OS that
there
> ever was.

And Linux is pudding by comparison?  Dream on.

> Think about it, Warp 3.0 and Warp 4.0 with the latest fixpaks are
> going to be around forever.

Yup, and NT by comparison will die *just like that*.  I don't think so.

> As times goes on, with the support of a bunch of
> die-hard users, it'll become more entrenched than ever before. It could
even
> become the Linux of tomorrow one day. It certainly has the potential, with
the
> kernal source code floating around...

OS/2 had its chance.  IBM screwed up.  You don't get second chances.  On the
other hand, it would be fun to get a hacker to fix up the SIQ problem
(asynchronous is not a complete fix).

> I don't have the foggiest idea what IBM has in it's coporate mind, but it
just
> guarenteed that OS/2 will be around for a long, long time. Even after they
> ultimately drop it entirely. Geezz... even copies of Wseb GA are turning
up
> for free FTP over seas...
>
> So... "Me move on to something else..."? I don't think so. I already have
> what I want. Now to get IBM to totally let it go, so it can proliferate.
From
> IBM's coporate view, it must be perplexing that so many people still
use/run
> OS/2. Probably just as perplexing as our view of how IBM is trying to get
us
> to move away from it. Funny actually... The harder I get pushed, the more
I'll
> refuse to move.

I know the feeling, but for a different topic...

>
>
> --
>
>
****************************************************************************
***
> *            Sometimes, the BEST things in life really ARE free...
*
> *       Get a FREE copy of NetRexx 1.150 for your next java project at:
*
> *                     http://www2.hursley.ibm.com/netrexx
*
>
****************************************************************************
***
>
> /----------------------------------------\
> | From the desktop of: Jerome D. McBride |
> |         mcbrides@erols.com             |
> \----------------------------------------/
>
> --
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: http://extra.newsguy.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ispy@groovyshow.com                               06-Oct-99 09:36:14
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 14:39:27
Subj: Re: pinball.sys BROKEN by SP5??

From: "Kelly Robinson" <ispy@groovyshow.com>

Hmmm, NTFS peformance might be bad, but that delightful 16-bit HPFS is
nothing to hype about!

When I ditched OS/2 for NT, the very first thing about NT that I noticed was
how infinitely faster it was compared to OS/2.

<philbike@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:7t64lm$d8u$1@nnrp1.deja.com...
> So with Service Pack 5 have Microsoft BROKEN the NT 3.51 pinball.sys
> device drive used to install HPFS???
>
> Oh SHIT!
>
> Not really shit as of course, I've got everything backed up ;)
>
> I mean oh darn.  If I can't access my large HPFS partitions in NT is
> there any way to access NTFS partitions in OS/2?   (though I cringe at
> the crappy NTFS performance)
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: http://extra.newsguy.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: djohnson@isomedia.com                             06-Oct-99 09:08:18
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 16:31:22
Subj: Re: IBM and Sledgehammer...OS/2 Death?

From: "David T. Johnson" <djohnson@isomedia.com>


Joseph wrote:
> 
> No home PC user will be running 64-bit computers based on the Intel Merced
> or AMD 64-bit processor.   64-bit processing is a useful as SMP -- not much
> to us.  In the early and mid 90's NT users would taunt OS/2 users about SMP
> and how common SMP was going to be in 1997 and onward.  Pahh.  Today the
> hottest PCs are integrated, low cost $600 systems and they are primarily
> used as web terminals.
> 
> PC computing as we know it will stay at 32-bit.

I think that this was Intel's point of view with their Merced processor
for 'home computing.'  But AMD has released a killer 32-bit chip in the
Athlon that is better than anything Intel can offer right now.  So Intel
has been repositioning Merced as a 'wave of the future' 64-bit chip a la
Microsoft and their '32-bit' Windows 95 stuff in 1994.  AMD has
responded with their 'Sledgehammer.'  Details are still sketchy but
according to AMD, Sledgehammer is designed to run both 32-bit and 64-bit
software and switch modes with predecoder instructions.  It *sounds*
brilliant.  What this means is that Sledgehammer will compete with both
32-bit and 64-bit processors made by Intel.  And software porting of
existing software to AMD's 64-bit design should be relatively easy. 
Porting to Intel's tortured 64-bit Merced design has proven to be MUCH
more difficult.  Even Microsoft admits that the initial Merced Windows
2000 version will be mostly 32-bit and will therefore run quite slowly. 
If AMD gets Sledgehammer out of the door, I would definitely expect OS/2
(at least WSeB) to be ported to it very quickly and cheaply.  Along with
Windows 2000, Linux, BeOS, etc...  

Of course, this could be all be AMD marketing hype but I tend to doubt
it.  AMD has really delivered with their Athlon processor and their
credibility is pretty good right now.         


> 
> Advanced 64 and 128 bit computers running in the home will be made by Sega,
> Sony and Nintendo et al..  The consumer bottlenecks are in graphics and
> bandwidth.
> 
> "David T. Johnson" wrote:
> 
> > Details of the new 64-bit 'Sledgehammer' processor made by AMD are
> > coming out today.  This processor is designed to compete with the 64-bit
> > Intel 'Itanium' (formerly named 'Merced') processor.  Read more at:
> >
> > http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2347717,00.html
> >
> > Some key details:
> >
> > "AMD's chip will be compatible with older 32-bit Intel-compatible
> > software, which runs on chips like Intel's Pentium. But AMD's
> > no-more-mimicking-Intel strategy means that it will have to persuade
> > software developers to adapt their 64-bit programs to run on AMD's
> > SledgeHammer chip."
> >
> > "AMD's SledgeHammer chip will be designed to run the older 32-bit
> > software at high speeds, in contrast to the relatively slow performance
> > that is expected for the 32-bit software on the Merced chip. And since
> > AMD's new "x86 64" architecture will offer a less radical style of
> > computing than Merced, Krelle said, it will be far easier for
> > programmers to write 64-bit versions of the software."
> >
> > It looks like there are three different incompatible 64-bit computing
> > futures for us.  Alpha, Itanium/Merced, and now, Sledgehammer.  The
> > current 32-bit OS/2 will run slowly on Merced, fast on Sledgehammer, and
> > (like Windows 2000) not at all on Alpha.  So...is this BAD news for OS/2
> > or GOOD news?  You may recall that Sm@rt Reseller ran a story last year
> > which said that IBM was 'suffocating' OS/2 because they had not yet
> > announced a port of OS/2 to Merced.  In case you've forgotten, here is
> > the link:
> >
> > http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/content/smro/0519/317223.html
> >
> > Since that story was written, Intel has announced several major delays
> > of Merced such that was only a few weeks ago that Intel claimed that
> > they had actually gotten some software to run on a prototype.  So I have
> > a few conclusions of own to list:  (Are you listening, Esther?)
> >
> > 1) IBM has not announced a port of OS/2 to Sledgehammer...yet.  But that
> > does NOT mean OS/2 is dead.  (Am I the first to say this?)
> >
> > 2) IBM looks pretty SM@RT to me to not rush in to support the shaky and
> > flaky Merced technology.
> >
> > 3)  AMD's 64-bit approach is much like the one Intel took in moving from
> > 16-bit to the 32-bit x386 processor.  This is the approach that Intel
> > SHOULD have taken with Merced but didn't.
> >
> > 4)  IBM has not approved a 'Sledgehammer' OS/2 client by Brad Wardell.
> > Maybe this is the end for OS/2!  (Am I the first to say this?)  Time for
> > hankie squeezing and hand-wringing over at the Stardock news
> > server...

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: TheCentralScrutinizer.165@pobox.com               06-Oct-99 15:49:27
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 16:31:22
Subj: Re: IBM and Sledgehammer...OS/2 Death?

From: TheCentralScrutinizer.165@pobox.com ()

On Tue, 05 Oct 1999 21:35:09 -0400, Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote:
>No home PC user will be running 64-bit computers based on the Intel Merced
>or AMD 64-bit processor.   64-bit processing is a useful as SMP -- not much
>to us.  In the early and mid 90's NT users would taunt OS/2 users about SMP

It should be great for mickysoft bloatware!  No more 4GB addressing
limitation. 

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: http://extra.newsguy.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cvopicka@erols.com                                06-Oct-99 12:49:28
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 16:31:22
Subj: Re: Warpstock '99 Atlanta, GA USA

From: Ron Vopicka <cvopicka@erols.com>

> > 
> > shit wake up nobody uses os/2 any more??
> > 
> > maybe you accidently search/replaced windows NT with os/2.
> > hahaha
> > 
> 
> Wake up yourself, and go back to the Windows news groups, where you 
> belong.

Seconded!

Who are all these "nobodies" talking in this news group (with one
exception)?

Ron

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: doug.bissett"at"attglobal.net                     06-Oct-99 16:37:09
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 19:55:16
Subj: Re: Warpstock '99 Atlanta, GA USA

From: doug.bissett"at"attglobal.net (Doug Bissett)

On Tue, 5 Oct 1999 21:15:26, "Sam Brown" <rigor@mindspring.com> wrote:

> 
> shit wake up nobody uses os/2 any more??
> 
> maybe you accidently search/replaced windows NT with os/2.
> hahaha
> 

Wake up yourself, and go back to the Windows news groups, where you 
belong.

OS/2 is alive, well, AND, it still outperforms any Windows version.
******************************
From the PC of Doug Bissett
doug.bissett at attglobal.net
The " at " must be changed to "@"
******************************

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: djohnson@isomedia.com                             06-Oct-99 09:41:17
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 19:55:16
Subj: Re: IBM and Sledgehammer...OS/2 Death?

From: "David T. Johnson" <djohnson@isomedia.com>


John Hong wrote:
> 
> Adrian Gschwend (nospam_ktk@netlabs.org) wrote:
> 
> : Forget all the processors as long as they are not available. Merced is
dead
> : IMHO, not OS/2.
> 
>         Dunno about dead, but Merced has certainly been a flop.  Even
> Hewlett-Packard, who are co-developing Merced with Intel are in fact
> telling their customers to not buy it.

Sorry, I was being a little sarcastic about another death for OS/2. 
Merced isn't dead but I think that Intel is starting to connect up IVs
and a respirator.  If AMD delivers Sledgehammer, I cannot see any
compelling technical reason for software vendors to prefer
Merced/Itanium over Sledgehammer and I can see MANY reasons for them to
prefer Sledgehammer over Itanium.  I predict that Windows 2000 on the
Itanium will go the way of Windows NT on the Alpha and just quietly
expire one day.  And Intel will have to get to work on a copycat 64-bit
design.  

And IBM?  IBM looks brilliant for not squandering a lot of money porting
WSeB to Itanium.  Whatever IBM wasted several years ago on trying to
port OS/2 to the Power PC chip, they have now saved by avoiding the
Itanium.  Way to go IBM!!

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: djohnson@isomedia.com                             06-Oct-99 09:58:00
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 19:55:16
Subj: Re: The ultimate hacker OS...

From: "David T. Johnson" <djohnson@isomedia.com>


Kelly Robinson wrote:
> 
> 
> OS/2 had its chance.  IBM screwed up.  You don't get second chances.  On the
> other hand, it would be fun to get a hacker to fix up the SIQ problem
> (asynchronous is not a complete fix).
> 
This really dates you.  You sound like you are in a time warp from 1995.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jdc0014@InfoNET.st-johns.nf.ca                    06-Oct-99 19:56:21
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 19:55:16
Subj: Re: IBM and Sledgehammer...OS/2 Death?

From: jdc0014@InfoNET.st-johns.nf.ca (John Hong)

David T. Johnson (djohnson@isomedia.com) wrote:

: And IBM?  IBM looks brilliant for not squandering a lot of money porting
: WSeB to Itanium.  Whatever IBM wasted several years ago on trying to
: port OS/2 to the Power PC chip, they have now saved by avoiding the
: Itanium.  Way to go IBM!!

	Pretty much standard practice as per IBM goes, really.  IBM will 
go with whatever is making money and waves in the popular media.  Hence the 
reason why they're going into a lot of Linux stuff lately.  Merced is 
not making any money and has been getting a little chaffed in the media, 
therefore, IBM will not spend anytime on it until it does.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: St. John's InfoNET (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com                           06-Oct-99 12:38:26
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 19:55:16
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: "Jeffrey S. Kobal" <jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:

> >Here's my definition of "port": The process or end-result of a
> >migration of an existing application from one platform to
> >another.
>
> Then would the Unix, Mac, and Windows versions all ports that and as I said,
> all were timely.

But they are NOT ports.  They are all part of the initial development
of the browser.... there is no "existing application" until all of those
versions are complete, since the development of them is all done at
the same time from the same code base.

> Here are my earlier statements
> "Well, once again, OS/2 is late to the party. Which brave person will be the
> first to step up and proudly shout how Netscape 4.61 "does everything they
> need", and how you don't need any "bloated" features?

The only statement I was refuting was the "late to the party" line.
When 4.61 shipped on OS/2, 4.61 was the current version on Mac,
Unix, and Windows as well.  Therefore, since we were on par with
the other platforms, we were not "late to the party".  Just because
they have shipped another version since then doesn't mean that
IBM has to do the same with the OS/2 port of the browser.

> "Seems that no problem was made releasing an Unix and Mac version or did
this
> not occur to you.
> Exactly which statement is unfounded?

The "late to the party", and the implication that the Unix and
Mac "versions" are ports of the browser, when all three of
them are actually ONE product that is built by Netscape.

> Exactly which statements were brash or incorrect?

See above.

> For the reasons you laid out, OS/2 is one version behind.

And if Netscape ships a 4.71 version next week, it will be
two versions behind.  That's what happens when porting
an application.

> Exactly how does your explanation which lays out why
> OS/2 is one version behind invalidate ANY of my statements.

The invalid premise is that the platforms on which Netscape
ships their product are all ports as well, when it is really just
three packages of one single product.  Unless Netscape and
IBM decide to add OS/2 to the single development effort
that Netscape has for the other three platforms, the OS/2
version will always have to be ported, and will always be a
little behind.  We put a lot of effort to have 4.61 for OS/2
ship while 4.61 was still the "current" version, but that
obviously couldn't last for long.

Jeffrey S. Kobal
IBM Corporation


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Austin (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: higginsr@bellsouth.net                            06-Oct-99 14:29:06
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 19:55:16
Subj: Re: Warpstock '99 Atlanta, GA USA

From: RickH <higginsr@bellsouth.net>

That would be us nobodies over here in ATL.FORSALE Which brings another
question to mind. Why post that in a forsale group anyways?


Ron Vopicka wrote:

> > >
> > > shit wake up nobody uses os/2 any more??
> > >
> > > maybe you accidently search/replaced windows NT with os/2.
> > > hahaha
> > >
> >
> > Wake up yourself, and go back to the Windows news groups, where you
> > belong.
>
> Seconded!
>
> Who are all these "nobodies" talking in this news group (with one
> exception)?
>
> Ron

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: blanders@freedomgroup.com                         06-Oct-99 16:10:25
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 19:55:16
Subj: Re: FP12:  A Piece Of Cake!

From: "Bill" <blanders@freedomgroup.com>

On 3 Oct 1999 18:49:50 GMT, pcguido@attglobal.net wrote:

>In <37F67653.9344D6EE@adan.kingston.net>, "Mark L. Kahnt"
<kahnt@adan.kingston.net> writes:
>|Jim Stuyck wrote:
>||
>|| "Mark L. Kahnt" wrote:
>||
>|| > Frank McKenney wrote:
>|| > >
>|| > > In <37F4306B.4315DA13@adan.kingston.net>, "Mark L. Kahnt"
<kahnt@adan.kingston.net> writes:
>|| > > >Frank McKenney wrote:
>|| >
>|| > [***SNIP!!!***]
>|| >
>|| > >
>|| > > Well, now that you mention it...
>|| > >
>|| > > Back in the mid-70s a professor at Princeton developed a method for
>|| > > reproducing semi-photograph-quality graphic output from a 1403 line
>|| > > printer (for the younger readers, that's one of those heavy-duty boxes
>|| > > attached to an IBM mainframe that will, on occasion, suck up and spit
>|| > > out a full box of 14"-wide paper in seconds (;-)).
>
>Oh Yeah! Wasn't that a hoot to see & hear? When the little brushes that
>read the carriage control tape would get too dirty... whoosh! If you
>didn't have a stacker, the paper would stand up off the top of the
>printer and go straight across the room.
>
>I was actually lucky enough to see this happen twice. Thanks for the
>memory! :)
>
I prefer the stories from the card days of 2nd and 3rd shift
operators lifting floor panels, looking for their beer stash,
and dropping the panel on a fire sensor and dumping the halon.
And being buried under a cards.

Bill



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: News@The-Net-4U.com                               06-Oct-99 21:34:14
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 19:55:17
Subj: Re: The ultimate hacker OS...

From: News@The-Net-4U.com (M.P. van Dobben de Bruijn)

> uno@40th.com (uno@40th.com) wrote:

> Fine, but who's going to do the drivers?  Anyone can write apps (or make
> do with what is already available), but few can do drivers (or get OEMs
> to do them).  And that's just the start (eg, not all hardware comes with
> public data sheets).

You may want to go to Warpstock next week. Complete courses on
how to create your own drivers, even a line-for-line going over one training.
That one may <g> interest you. It of course does not solve the problem of
the producers not always wanting to give the datasheets, but that is no dif-
ferent for other not mainstream OS's (where the producer creates the driver
themselves) and does not make any difference if IBM is maintaining OS/2 or
that we do it ourselves. Perhaps producers might even easier release to IBM.

Regards from Leeuwarden
Peter van Dobben de Bruijn
---
usethenet.at.the-net-4u.com (at becomes @)
----

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TeleKabel (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: diin@xs4all.nl                                    06-Oct-99 22:04:18
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 21:36:00
Subj: Re: Warpstock '99 Atlanta, GA USA

From: diin@xs4all.nl (DiiN)

In article <7tdplf$6nq$1@nntp3.atl.mindspring.net>,
"Sam Brown" <rigor@mindspring.com> wrote:

>maybe you accidently search/replaced windows NT with os/2.
>hahaha

The big and slow Dino's allready died out, and of course NT will die out
as well.
ha ha ha :-)

-- 

Groetens, Dieter.

***Email  diin@xs4all.nl (Dieter)
***Netmail 2:280/815.16

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Klompen en Molens! (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: possum@tree.branch                                06-Oct-99 22:31:21
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 21:36:00
Subj: Re: pinball.sys BROKEN by SP5??

From: possum@tree.branch (Mike Trettel)

On Wed, 6 Oct 1999 09:36:28 -0500, Kelly Robinson <ispy@groovyshow.com> wrote:
>Hmmm, NTFS peformance might be bad, but that delightful 16-bit HPFS is
>nothing to hype about!
>
>When I ditched OS/2 for NT, the very first thing about NT that I noticed was
>how infinitely faster it was compared to OS/2.
>

Must be an alternate reality.  In my experience NT is quite a bit slower
than OS/2 on the same hardware.  Also, HPFS (the file system itself) is 32
bit.  HPFS.IFS (the driver for the file system) in Warp client is 16 bit,
and in Warp Server is 32 bit.  Now, NTFS is 32 bit all around as far as I
recall, but one should not confuse bitness with speed. A well written and
optimized 16 bit driver can and will be faster than a poorly written non
optimized 32 bit driver any day.  Mind you, I'm not saying that NTFS is
badly done, but to claim that it's faster than HPFS solely based upon
bitness (which seems to be your implication) is poor logic.  HPFS has its
faults, but speed and fault tolerance are not among them.


-- 
===========
Mike Trettel    trettel (Shift 2) fred (dinky little round thing) net

I don't buy from spammers.  No exceptions.  Fix the reply line to mail me.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Twinco, Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: uno@40th.com                                      06-Oct-99 23:43:08
  To: All                                               06-Oct-99 21:36:00
Subj: Re: pinball.sys BROKEN by SP5??

From: uno@40th.com (uno@40th.com)

Mike Trettel? (possum@tree.branch?) wrote (Wed, 06 Oct 1999 22:31:43 GMT):
>Must be an alternate reality.  In my experience NT is quite a bit slower
>than OS/2 on the same hardware.  Also, HPFS (the file system itself) is 32

If your apps are disk-bound, NT does blow the doors off of OS2 HPFS.
Screen output is much faster in NT, too, especially noticable in cmd
lines.

>optimized 16 bit driver can and will be faster than a poorly written non
>optimized 32 bit driver any day.  Mind you, I'm not saying that NTFS is

I see you haven't used NT much.  OS2's HPFS 2 MB cache just can't
compete with 100 MB of cache.

>bitness (which seems to be your implication) is poor logic.  HPFS has its
>faults, but speed and fault tolerance are not among them.

Problem is, you have to run chkdsk on HPFS when it boots dirty, which
can take a large part of a coffee break or two.  NTFS doesn't -- it
starts up in a second. 


 '`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'

 Corne1 Huth  -  http://40th.com/
 Bullet database engines/servers 3.1  Win32-WinCE-OS2-Linux+

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Yanaguana (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: forgitaboutit@fake.com                            06-Oct-99 20:43:15
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 03:16:29
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com>

In article <37FB892C.46B62F4C@NOSPAMus.ibm.com>, jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com 
says...
>
>"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
>> >Here's my definition of "port": The process or end-result of a
>> >migration of an existing application from one platform to
>> >another.
>>
>> Then would the Unix, Mac, and Windows versions all ports that and as I
said,
>> all were timely.
>
>But they are NOT ports.  They are all part of the initial development
>of the browser.... there is no "existing application" until all of those
>versions are complete, since the development of them is all done at
>the same time from the same code base.

Are you kidding? Really, are you?

>> Here are my earlier statements
>> "Well, once again, OS/2 is late to the party. Which brave person will be
the
>> first to step up and proudly shout how Netscape 4.61 "does everything they
>> need", and how you don't need any "bloated" features?
>
>The only statement I was refuting was the "late to the party" line.
>When 4.61 shipped on OS/2, 4.61 was the current version on Mac,
>Unix, and Windows as well.  Therefore, since we were on par with
>the other platforms, we were not "late to the party".  Just because
>they have shipped another version since then doesn't mean that
>IBM has to do the same with the OS/2 port of the browser.

Exactly how do you define "late"? 

>> "Seems that no problem was made releasing an Unix and Mac version or did
this
>> not occur to you.
>> Exactly which statement is unfounded?
>
>The "late to the party", and the implication that the Unix and
>Mac "versions" are ports of the browser, when all three of
>them are actually ONE product that is built by Netscape.

Let's try this. How do you port the Navigator to OS/2?

>> Exactly which statements were brash or incorrect?
>
>See above.
>
>> For the reasons you laid out, OS/2 is one version behind.
>
>And if Netscape ships a 4.71 version next week, it will be
>two versions behind.  That's what happens when porting
>an application.
>
>> Exactly how does your explanation which lays out why
>> OS/2 is one version behind invalidate ANY of my statements.
>
>The invalid premise is that the platforms on which Netscape
>ships their product are all ports as well, when it is really just
>three packages of one single product.  Unless Netscape and
>IBM decide to add OS/2 to the single development effort
>that Netscape has for the other three platforms, the OS/2
>version will always have to be ported, and will always be a
>little behind.  We put a lot of effort to have 4.61 for OS/2
>ship while 4.61 was still the "current" version, but that
>obviously couldn't last for long.
>
>Jeffrey S. Kobal
>IBM Corporation
>
>

Boy, you are a master of redefinition and rationalization. 

-- 
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com                           06-Oct-99 20:24:18
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 03:16:29
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: "Jeffrey S. Kobal" <jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:

> >But they are NOT ports.  They are all part of the initial development
> >of the browser.... there is no "existing application" until all of those
> >versions are complete, since the development of them is all done at
> >the same time from the same code base.
>
> Are you kidding? Really, are you?

No, I'm not.  That description is accurate, though of course Netscape
could choose not to package one of the those platforms when making
a new version of the browser, but since they are all together that would
not make much sense?

> Exactly how do you define "late"?

Within the context of this discussion, I'd say that "late" would
mean that the application that shipped on OS/2 was back-level
from what was available on other platforms at the time, which
was not the case when 4.61 shipped on OS/2.  Now that a new
version has shipped on the other platforms, the OS/2 version is
down-level, but not significantly; we had to "cut and run" with
a certain level of the Netscape browser, since it does take some
effort (several months of development and test) to port it
between the operating systems, and it is not cost-effective to do
that with each little point-release that comes out of Netscape.

> Let's try this. How do you port the Navigator to OS/2?

We receive the code from Netscape that contains the Unix,
Mac, and Windows common codebase, then we enable the
platform-specific codepaths that OS/2 would need (usually
the Windows path, though sometimes Unix) and fill in the
gaps with OS/2-specific code (of which there is quite a bit).
Then we make sure everything is working reasonably well,
add in some OS/2-specific features, mix in some translation
and internationalization enhancements, and put it through
the ringer, so to speak (a couple of months of testing).  Of
course, I'm over-simplifying the process, but that should
give you the general idea.

> Boy, you are a master of redefinition and rationalization.

If by "redefintion" you mean correcting your mis-use of
the terms "port" and "late", then I'll have to agree.  I believe
my use of those terms would prove to be consistent with
others that understand the industry.

As for "rationalization", I may be guilty of some of that,
seeing as I find it distressing that the OS/2 market does not
force software developers to develop to it directly, causing
interested parties to have to play catch-up in order to keep
up-to-date with technologies available on other platforms.
The situation does, however, have its benefits, since the
"interested party" is able to wait until said technology
stabilizes before bringing it across, reducing development
costs, and is also free to improve upon the functionality
and stability in the process of doing the port.

Jeffrey S. Kobal
IBM Corporation


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Austin (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@ifa.hawaii.edu                     07-Oct-99 02:51:08
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 03:17:00
Subj: Re: pinball.sys BROKEN by SP5??

From: tholenAntiSpam@ifa.hawaii.edu

Kelly Robinson writes:

> Hmmm, NTFS peformance might be bad, but that delightful 16-bit HPFS is
> nothing to hype about!

OS/2 has faster file and print services than NT.

> When I ditched OS/2 for NT, the very first thing about NT that I noticed
> was how infinitely faster it was compared to OS/2.

Both impossible and illogical.  Too bad the organizations that compared
the file and print services found OS/2 to be faster than NT.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@ifa.hawaii.edu                     07-Oct-99 02:54:07
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 03:17:00
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenAntiSpam@ifa.hawaii.edu

David H. McCoy writes [to Jeffrey S. Kobal]:

> Boy, you are a master of redefinition and rationalization. 

How ironic.

Want to see some of your own rationalization?  Just answer the question
about why you're in an OS/2 newsgroup.  No cross-posting in this case.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     06-Oct-99 21:04:11
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 03:17:00
Subj: Re: pinball.sys BROKEN by SP5??

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


"uno@40th.com" wrote:

> Mike Trettel? (possum@tree.branch?) wrote (Wed, 06 Oct 1999 22:31:43 GMT):
> >Must be an alternate reality.  In my experience NT is quite a bit slower
> >than OS/2 on the same hardware.  Also, HPFS (the file system itself) is 32
>
> If your apps are disk-bound, NT does blow the doors off of OS2 HPFS.
> Screen output is much faster in NT, too, especially noticable in cmd
> lines.

No.  The pro generalization is not correct.

Disk bound apps can run faster in the HPFS - it all depends on the type of
file
access being done.  Ramdonly accessing a file can be done faster in HPFS.  NT
can only cache 512MB so most large databases are not cacheable by NT.  If what
you are accessing fits in the cahce then it the cache will help.

NT has it's doors blow off by video drivers being they run in Ring 0 -- a dumb
way to try to increase performance.  Video drivers are the most common point
of
failure for NT.

The "Big Board" which ran a z-80 CPU and the CMP OS had dedicated hardware
support for cmd screen scrolling.  No PC, not even NT can beat it for cmd line
performance.   Not a very telling metric.

> >optimized 16 bit driver can and will be faster than a poorly written non
> >optimized 32 bit driver any day.  Mind you, I'm not saying that NTFS is
>
> I see you haven't used NT much.  OS2's HPFS 2 MB cache just can't
> compete with 100 MB of cache.

100 MB of disk cache?  Can't you make a relevant argument?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu                    07-Oct-99 01:09:28
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 05:18:12
Subj: Opera for OS/2 makes progress

From: Jason <malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu>

Dispite the naysayers, Opera for OS/2 is making progress it would seem.  
We've moved up two points on the scale!  We still have a long ways to go, 
but I'm glad things are looking up.

http://www.opera.com/alt_os.html

-Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jasper_de_keijzer@nl.compuware.com                07-Oct-99 09:32:26
  To: malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu                    07-Oct-99 05:18:12
Subj: Re: Opera for OS/2 makes progress

To: Jason <malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu>
From: Jasper de Keijzer <jasper_de_keijzer@nl.compuware.com>

Jason,

This is good news!!

Jasper de Keijzer.
http://home-5.worldonline.nl/~jdekeij


Jason wrote:
> 
> Dispite the naysayers, Opera for OS/2 is making progress it would seem.
> We've moved up two points on the scale!  We still have a long ways to go,
> but I'm glad things are looking up.
> 
> http://www.opera.com/alt_os.html
> 
> -Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Compuware Uniface Amsterdam (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: theqcc@hotmail.com                                07-Oct-99 08:57:27
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 05:18:12
Subj: LOL

From: "Quake Cheaters Clan" <theqcc@hotmail.com>

WOW

Progress indeed. Yes, you have at least beaten the now long-dead Amiga
platform.... yes, a new day is dawning for the OS/2 community.

At this rate you will soon be getting a working version by the year 2010.

QCC



Jason <malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu> wrote in message
news:37fc2b24@oit.umass.edu...
> Dispite the naysayers, Opera for OS/2 is making progress it would seem.
> We've moved up two points on the scale!  We still have a long ways to go,
> but I'm glad things are looking up.
>
> http://www.opera.com/alt_os.html
>
> -Jason


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Customer of Planet Online (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            07-Oct-99 08:19:26
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 10:30:28
Subj: Re: Opera for OS/2 makes progress

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

Yay Opera!

.. so *score* already.


On Thu, 7 Oct 1999 06:09:56, Jason <malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu> 
wrote:

> Dispite the naysayers, Opera for OS/2 is making progress it would seem.  
> We've moved up two points on the scale!  We still have a long ways to go, 
> but I'm glad things are looking up.
> 
> http://www.opera.com/alt_os.html
> 
> -Jason

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net
=======================================================
If we could have our cake _and_ eat it,
people would start whining about seconds.
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: uno@40th.com                                      07-Oct-99 10:31:12
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 10:30:29
Subj: Re: pinball.sys BROKEN by SP5??

From: uno@40th.com (uno@40th.com)

Joseph? (josco@ibm.net?) wrote (Wed, 06 Oct 1999 21:04:23 -0400):
>No.  The pro generalization is not correct.

What-ever.  HPFS is fine if you walk in baby-steps to keep under its 2MB
cache limit.  Otherwise, NTFS, like I said, just blows the doors of HPFS.

IBM almost had a real cache with Warp 4, but as Doug A. told it, no one
wanted to pay for the testing.  And there you have it, still, in 1999 --
a 2 MB disk cache (an amount that Netscape looses at the click of a mouse).

>100 MB of disk cache?  Can't you make a relevant argument?

See sig.  Sorry about the snips, but I don't support ignorance due to
laziness -- reminds me too much of myself (ha!).

 '`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'
 Corne1 Huth  -  http://40th.com/
 Bullet database engines/servers 3.1  Win32-WinCE-OS2-Linux+

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Yanaguana (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: possum@tree.branch                                07-Oct-99 11:53:17
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 10:30:29
Subj: Re: pinball.sys BROKEN by SP5??

From: possum@tree.branch (Mike Trettel)

On 6 Oct 1999 23:43:16 GMT, uno@40th.com <uno@40th.com> wrote:
>
>Mike Trettel? (possum@tree.branch?) wrote (Wed, 06 Oct 1999 22:31:43 GMT):
>>Must be an alternate reality.  In my experience NT is quite a bit slower
>>than OS/2 on the same hardware.  Also, HPFS (the file system itself) is 32
>
>If your apps are disk-bound, NT does blow the doors off of OS2 HPFS.
>Screen output is much faster in NT, too, especially noticable in cmd
>lines.

Don't get me going about the NT command line-why MS can't provide a decent
scripting language out of the box for NT is beyond me.

>
>>optimized 16 bit driver can and will be faster than a poorly written non
>>optimized 32 bit driver any day.  Mind you, I'm not saying that NTFS is
>
>I see you haven't used NT much.  OS2's HPFS 2 MB cache just can't
>compete with 100 MB of cache.

Actually, I use NT every day at work.  My observations are based upon that
of an end user using NT as a desktop OS.  I imagine that your observations
are based upon a differing use-as seen by your use of a 100 MB cache.
That's more memory than what's available as ram in my work PC!  Yes, I am
well aware of the 2 MB cache limit in HPFS, and I wish that there was a
legal way to make it bigger.  I am not claiming that HPFS is "better" than
NTFS in every respect-clearly NTFS has features that would be desirable in
the HPFS filesystem.

 >
>>bitness (which seems to be your implication) is poor logic.  HPFS has its
>>faults, but speed and fault tolerance are not among them.
>
>Problem is, you have to run chkdsk on HPFS when it boots dirty, which
>can take a large part of a coffee break or two.  NTFS doesn't -- it
>starts up in a second. 

Yep, that's one of the things I would like to see.  I would hate to run
chkdsk on a 20G hard drive-it takes long enough the few times I've had to
run it on my 4.3G.  I've never lost data though-to me that's a good thing.

>
>
> '`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'
>
> Corne1 Huth  -  http://40th.com/
> Bullet database engines/servers 3.1  Win32-WinCE-OS2-Linux+

Best regards,
-- 
===========
Mike Trettel    trettel (Shift 2) fred (dinky little round thing) net

I don't buy from spammers.  No exceptions.  Fix the reply line to mail me.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: pcguido@attglobal.net                             07-Oct-99 15:00:23
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 14:41:21
Subj: Re: OS/2 1.x revisited:RAM prices up, Windows2000 down

From: pcguido@attglobal.net

In <19991003.18064463@mis.configured.host>, Joseph <josco@ibm.net> writes:
|
|
|||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
|
|On 10-3-99, 1:44:42 AM, ckh@hknet.com (Oliver Chung) wrote regarding=20=
|
|Re: OS/2 1.x revisited:RAM prices up, Windows2000 down:
|
|
|| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
|
|| In article=20
|<Pine.SGI.3.93.991001125608.10854A-100000@sea.monterey.edu>,
|| josco <josco@sea.monterey.edu> wrote
|
|| >As RAM becomes more expensive due to the EarthQuake in Tawian, RAM=20=
|
|hungry
|| >Windows2000 is going to suffer.  Shortages are expected in November=20=
|
|and
|| >Computer hardware company stocks are down due to the RAM shortage=20=
|
|impact
|| >on the sales of PCs.
|
|| Will there be another RAM Doubler placebo software for Win2000? :)
|
|I bet a placebo would sell.  It's hard to tell RAM requirements until=20=
|
|all debugging code is removed so I'm not sure what the final result=20
|will be for W2K.  My guess is that a 64MB system is below the minimal=20=
|
|with 96MB and 128MB more likely to be the *minimal* amout for running=20=
|
|MS's Office apps. =20
|
|IMHO 64MB is minimal for OS/2 WARP 4.0 when running new apps like=20
|StarOffice/2 on a network.  =20

When I played around with W2K Beta 1, I believe the recommendation
was 128 MB. Of course that was for the 'server' version; but, there's
very little internal difference between win server & client, just a
monster price increase!

Guido

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: pcguido@attglobal.net                             07-Oct-99 15:04:12
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 14:41:21
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: pcguido@attglobal.net

In <LoEFmgJJ9ecw-pn2-xFxTZJ7uttYL@agave.bitranch.com>, esther@bitranch.com
(Esther Schindler) writes:
|On Sun, 3 Oct 1999 18:53:24, pcguido@attglobal.net wrote:
|
|| Is Jeff Glatt right, you would all band together to beat a $100/yr fee?
|| And IBM is supposed to pay for Netscape & Java support for OS/2 how?
|
|Taking a valid discount for a product one values is part of the
|American way of life. Or do you typically spend more than you need to?
|
|--Esther

Think bigger, Esther. Maybe you could get _every_ OS/2 user to join up
with you, eh? Then IBM could save time by just sending _you_ the updates!

I'll take any discount validly obtained; and, it's my opinion that your
little plan is not such a discount. Why don't you run that idea by your
contacts at IBM and then let us know what you've discovered...

regards,

Guido

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: pcguido@attglobal.net                             07-Oct-99 15:18:23
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 14:41:21
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: pcguido@attglobal.net

In <19991004.20590260@mis.configured.host>, Joseph <josco@ibm.net> writes:
|Esther;
|
|You have to go back to Sophmore year of High School to understand the=20=
|
|argument.
|
|At that point of development, people feel intense peer pressure to=20
|conform and are ridiculed for not copying trends.	High school kids=20
|can laugh at things that are "old" or not popular. =20
|
|"Quake Cheaters Clan"  You don't have to image much to understand=20
|where they guy is coming from or what his world is like.  His opinions=20=
|
|are as irrelevant to me as any ridicule a "hip" kid would give me for=20=
|
|using a raincoat in the rain. =20
|
|So OS/2 is an "unhip" technology according to the "class of 2002". =20
|You are talking to a boy.

Absotively-Posolutely. But is sounds more like "class of 2003" to me...

Could you imagine trying to explain a tube amp, a Dual 701 and
speakers the size of dressers to this guy? Or carburetors?

Don't bother, life's too short.

Guido

|||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
|
|On 10-5-99, 1:30:56 AM, esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler) wrote=20=
|
|regarding Re: Time to move on:
|
|
|| I most certainly do read earlier posts, Quake, and I'm as relaxed as
|| anyone can be after reviewing a book that really shouldn't have been
|| written.
|
|| This is the first time you've come close to answering the question
|| (which more rudely would be phrased as "what skin is it off YOUR nose=
|
|| what I do?"). It's still not a complete answer, but I think you're
|| saying that it bothers you for people to use "old stuff," in some way.=
|
|| And for some unfathomable reason you want the satisfaction of people
|| admitting that they're wrong in their choice and are willing to
|| embrace... well, something else, I don't know or care what.
|
|| Beats the crap out of me why you think this matters... but I'm afraid=
|
|| that you're setting yourself up for a disappointment. People don't use=
|
|| or not-use a tool because a stranger expresses his opinion...
|| particular when it's a complete stranger without credibility, who
|| doesn't have the courage to use his own name. If Chake Queasers Clan
|| came along and told me that my 1991 Prelude was old and unsupported
|| and I shouldn't use it anymore -- instead I should buy a brand-new
|| paymentmobile that this stranger thought was more "in" -- well, I'd
|| ignore that, too. My comfort and my efficiency don't rely on your
|| opinion.
|
|| I don't care if you ridicule me; what's ridicule from someone who
|| hides behind a handle?
|
|| Plus, you're completely inaccurate:
|| | Os/2 users are the same. Stuck with what they know. Afraid of=20
|change. Afraid
|| | of letting go... Of course if you don't use Microsoft products=20
|through a
|| | crusade mentality whereby you hope that your efforts will bring down=
|=20
|the
|| | mighty Microsoft then I'm afraid you are one sandwich short of a=20=
|
|picnic.
|
|| Statistically, as of August last year, OS/2 users used an average of
|| 2.7 operating systems. (I suspect that the number has crept up by
|| then, but I haven't taken the time to re-run the survey.) The survey
|| respondents were, nonetheless, gung-ho about the OS/2 (though
|| decidedly _not_ about IBM). Most OS/2 users are educated about what
|| other OSs do, yet 95% said, in 1998, that they expected to be running=
|
|| OS/2 in August 1999. Based on the membership renewal rates for the
|| Phoenix OS/2 Society, the world's largest OS/2 user group, that
|| statistic has held steady.
|
|| You're trying to phrase this discussion as if the majority of OS/2
|| users hate Microsoft, love IBM, and refuse to touch any other
|| operating system. That isn't so. Most OS/2 users don't care strongly
|| about Microsoft (at least not enough to matter), are disgusted with
|| IBM, and are OS-literate. They also use OS/2 because they like it, and=
|
|| I've seen tut-tutting from fewer than a dozen people, in the last
|| couple of years. (The tut-tutters seem to have gone to Linux.
|| Fortunately, they're a minority in every crowd, just a noisy one.)
|
|| If you want to debate, Quake, then I recommend that you do so based on=
|
|| accurate statements. You're suffering under several misconceptions.
|
|| --Esther
|
|| On Mon, 4 Oct 1999 23:08:37, "Quake Cheaters Clan"
|| <theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:
|
|| | Esther, Esther, Esther....
|| |
|| | Sit down, take a deep breath and relax...
|| |
|| | You dont read earlier posts do you Esther?
|| |
|| | I thought I had answered that...but here is another explanation,=20=
|
|this time
|| | with another analogy...
|| |
|| | It matters to me when I see people stuck to what they know and=20
|refuse to
|| | move on... almost a reaction against progress... most perplexing=20=
|
|indeed.
|| | It's like an old man who is content to sit in his 1940's decorated=20=
|
|home,
|| | with 1940's readio that does not pick  up FM, he dresses in 1940's=20=
|
|clothes
|| | and uses 1940's electrical aplliance on none-standard electrical=20=
|
|sockets...
|| |
|| | He may be happy, but he has become a point of fun. People view him=20=
|
|with
|| | riddicule rather than respect because of his determined resolve to=20=
|
|stick
|| | with what he knows.
|| |
|| | Os/2 users are the same. Stuck with what they know. Afraid of=20
|change. Afraid
|| | of letting go... Of course if you don't use Microsoft products=20
|through a
|| | crusade mentality whereby you hope that your efforts will bring down=
|=20
|the
|| | mighty Microsoft then I'm afraid you are one sandwich short of a=20=
|
|picnic.
|| |
|| | OS/2 sit high upon their rightous high-chairs looking down upon all =
|
|windows
|| | users, shaking their heads and tut-tutting in an approving way.
|| | That would be fair if it were the case that equal market share was a=
|
|| | realistic option for you. Its not. Time has moved on.
|| |
|| | I would like OS/2 users on here to admist that their battle is lost,=
|=20
|embrace
|| | the new flesh.
|| |
|| | Does this help or do you want me to break it down even further?
|| |
|| | BTW - am i a wee bit more interesting that Tim Martin?
|
|
|



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: djohnson@isomedia.com                             07-Oct-99 08:40:14
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 14:41:21
Subj: Re: Opera for OS/2 makes progress

From: "David T. Johnson" <djohnson@isomedia.com>


Jason wrote:
> 
> Dispite the naysayers, Opera for OS/2 is making progress it would seem.
> We've moved up two points on the scale!  We still have a long ways to go,
> but I'm glad things are looking up.

It's great that Opera is making some progress with OS/2.  But there are
already several browser options for OS/2 such as StarOffice 5.1, Hotjava
Browser 3.0, and Netscape 4.61.  It seems like these other browser
options would tend to discourage the Opera people a little bit.   



> 
> http://www.opera.com/alt_os.html
> 
> -Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu                      07-Oct-99 13:29:19
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 16:38:27
Subj: Re: The ultimate hacker OS...

From: Jason <malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu>

uno@40th.com <uno@40th.com> wrote:

: Jerry McBride? (mcbrides@erols.com?) wrote (Tue, 05 Oct 1999 07:23:25
-0400):
:>So... "Me move on to something else..."? I don't think so. I already have

: Fine, but who's going to do the drivers?  Anyone can write apps (or make
: do with what is already available), but few can do drivers (or get OEMs
: to do them).  And that's just the start (eg, not all hardware comes with
: public data sheets).

Linux is helping to open up drivers.  On top of that, IBM has committed 
to developing drivers for OS/2, and it has announced DVD support and 
bought SDD/2  

: IBM OS/2 has a skeleton crew maintaining it.  The only way I see anything
: truly usable coming from it now is if the entire OS/2 Warp 4.whatever
: code base was released.  Has to be that since the public OS/2 system docs
: are really, really, really lousy.

Why is it a skeleton crew and not a full crew?   Maybe they have as many 
people maintaining it as they feel is necessary.  


: (Hey, if I could think of a something good to mention, I would have.)
: First wave...

I'm sure you tried really hard to. ;-)

-Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com               07-Oct-99 09:56:25
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 16:38:27
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: "Kim Cheung" <kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com>

On 7 Oct 1999 15:04:25 GMT, pcguido@attglobal.net wrote:

>In <LoEFmgJJ9ecw-pn2-xFxTZJ7uttYL@agave.bitranch.com>, esther@bitranch.com
(Esther Schindler) writes:
>|On Sun, 3 Oct 1999 18:53:24, pcguido@attglobal.net wrote:
>|
>|| Is Jeff Glatt right, you would all band together to beat a $100/yr fee?
>|| And IBM is supposed to pay for Netscape & Java support for OS/2 how?
>|
>|Taking a valid discount for a product one values is part of the
>|American way of life. Or do you typically spend more than you need to?
>|
>|--Esther
>
>Think bigger, Esther. Maybe you could get _every_ OS/2 user to join up
>with you, eh? Then IBM could save time by just sending _you_ the updates!
>
>I'll take any discount validly obtained; and, it's my opinion that your
>little plan is not such a discount. Why don't you run that idea by your
>contacts at IBM and then let us know what you've discovered...
>

The focus is not necessarily the cost factor.   It should be focused in
obtaining an equivalent level of survice from IBM.    Certain people at IBM
has a funny way of thinking about the world: if you don't work for a global
50 company, in their little mind, you shouldn't be using OS/2 in the first
place and so why would you need this and that.   So, as time go along, they
will most likely fight you every inch of the way to say: the individual
subscriber shouldn't have this, shouldn't have that and so forth.

That's what I am concern with.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cawort01@spam.netcom.com                          07-Oct-99 17:15:00
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 16:38:27
Subj: Re: pinball.sys BROKEN by SP5??

From: cawort01@spam.netcom.com

In <7tfmp9$vvp@enews1.newsguy.com>, "Kelly Robinson" <ispy@groovyshow.com>
writes:
>Hmmm, NTFS peformance might be bad, but that delightful 16-bit HPFS is
>nothing to hype about!
>
>When I ditched OS/2 for NT, the very first thing about NT that I noticed was
>how infinitely faster it was compared to OS/2.
>

let me guess, you actually turned your computer ON when you tried to use NT?

do this

get a directory with about 1200 items.  Using NT open that sucker up and
select
all of those cutesy little icons and drag them to copy them to a JAZ drive. 
Watch
NT completely CHOKE.... LOL more stable/fast my a**.  More like more Locked
up.




><philbike@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:7t64lm$d8u$1@nnrp1.deja.com...
>> So with Service Pack 5 have Microsoft BROKEN the NT 3.51 pinball.sys
>> device drive used to install HPFS???
>>
>> Oh SHIT!
>>
>> Not really shit as of course, I've got everything backed up ;)
>>
>> I mean oh darn.  If I can't access my large HPFS partitions in NT is
>> there any way to access NTFS partitions in OS/2?   (though I cringe at
>> the crappy NTFS performance)
>>
>>
>> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>> Before you buy.
>
>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Louisville (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu                      07-Oct-99 13:22:25
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 20:07:03
Subj: Re: LOL

From: Jason <malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu>

Piss off

Quake Cheaters Clan <theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:
: WOW

: Progress indeed. Yes, you have at least beaten the now long-dead Amiga
: platform.... yes, a new day is dawning for the OS/2 community.

: At this rate you will soon be getting a working version by the year 2010.

: QCC



: Jason <malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu> wrote in message
: news:37fc2b24@oit.umass.edu...
:> Dispite the naysayers, Opera for OS/2 is making progress it would seem.
:> We've moved up two points on the scale!  We still have a long ways to go,
:> but I'm glad things are looking up.
:>
:> http://www.opera.com/alt_os.html
:>
:> -Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu                      07-Oct-99 13:24:27
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 20:07:03
Subj: Re: The ultimate hacker OS...

From: Jason <malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu>

David T. Johnson <djohnson@isomedia.com> wrote:


: Kelly Robinson wrote:
:> 
:> 
:> OS/2 had its chance.  IBM screwed up.  You don't get second chances.  On
the
:> other hand, it would be fun to get a hacker to fix up the SIQ problem
:> (asynchronous is not a complete fix).
:> 
: This really dates you.  You sound like you are in a time warp from 1995.

He is.

-Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          07-Oct-99 19:30:21
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 20:07:03
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>Joe Malloy
>Tell me, Tholen, why are you here?  You falsely claim not to be an advocate
>of OS/2 but here you are, in comp.os.os2.ADVOCACY.

Indeed. That's the million dollar question. And after reviewing so
much of Tholen's claptrap over the years, and documenting (in my
digest of his posts) the exceedingly moronic crap he has posted, I've
discovered the answer -- the reason why he's in this newsgroup,
posting *hypocritical, contradictory* nonsense (replete with "logic"
that is totally devoid of common sense) just to annoy people whose
opinions he doesn't like, is because he's a dimwitted anti-social clod
with emotional/psychological problems stemming from a very poor
upbringing.

That's all anyone needs to know about him

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  07-Oct-99 15:06:03
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 20:07:03
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

He's at it again!  Something calling itself a
<tholenAntiSpam@ifa.hawaii.edu> tholened:

> > Boy, you are a master of redefinition and rationalization.
>
> How ironic.

Yes, it is indeed ironic that you think those conditions above don't apply
to you, Tholen.

> Want to see some of your own rationalization?

Nah, I've seen plenty of rationalizations for your behavior, none of which
was in slightest convincing, Tholen.

> Just answer the question about why you're in an OS/2 newsgroup.

Tell me, Tholen, why are you here?  You falsely claim not to be an advocate
of OS/2 but here you are, in comp.os.os2.ADVOCACY.  Do make up your mindlet,
Tholen.

> No cross-posting in this case.

Which is more that you can say for the vast majority of your claptrap.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  07-Oct-99 15:06:03
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 20:07:03
Subj: Re: pinball.sys BROKEN by SP5??

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

Oy, he's still at it!  Something claiming to be a
<tholenAntiSpam@ifa.hawaii.edu> tholened:

> > Hmmm, NTFS peformance might be bad, but that delightful 16-bit HPFS is
> > nothing to hype about!

> > When I ditched OS/2 for NT, the very first thing about NT that I noticed
> > was how infinitely faster it was compared to OS/2.

> Both impossible and illogical.

Perhaps in whatever alternate reality you're inhabiting, Tholen, but logical
for most of us who are using it.  Why do you persist in FUDding an OS you've
never even seen except over someone's shoulder?



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: forgitaboutit@fake.com                            07-Oct-99 16:34:24
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 20:07:04
Subj: Re: Opera for OS/2 makes progress

From: David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com>

In article <37fc2b24@oit.umass.edu>, malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu says...
>Dispite the naysayers, Opera for OS/2 is making progress it would seem.  
>We've moved up two points on the scale!  We still have a long ways to go, 
>but I'm glad things are looking up.
>
>http://www.opera.com/alt_os.html
>
>-Jason
>

Great! Two points and what almost two years later, OS/2 is behind the Psion
and 
BeOS.

-- 
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: nospam_ktk@netlabs.org                            07-Oct-99 23:24:02
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 20:07:04
Subj: Re: LOL

From: "Adrian Gschwend" <nospam_ktk@netlabs.org>

On Thu, 7 Oct 1999 08:57:54 +0100, Quake Cheaters Clan wrote:

>Progress indeed. Yes, you have at least beaten the now long-dead Amiga
>platform.... yes, a new day is dawning for the OS/2 community.
>
>At this rate you will soon be getting a working version by the year 2010.

Hmm, normaly I don't answer that stupid mails but you will be surprised how
fast we can port it to OS/2. We got the code two weeks ago and now we can
already display the window. The BeOS guys had to invest 1.5 years to get a
first beta.

but what do I expect from a stupid quake head...




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OS/2 Netlabs (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: nospam_ktk@netlabs.org                            07-Oct-99 23:24:23
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 20:07:04
Subj: Re: Opera for OS/2 makes progress

From: "Adrian Gschwend" <nospam_ktk@netlabs.org>

On Thu, 07 Oct 1999 08:40:29 -0400, David T. Johnson wrote:

>It's great that Opera is making some progress with OS/2.  But there are
>already several browser options for OS/2 such as StarOffice 5.1, Hotjava
>Browser 3.0, and Netscape 4.61.  It seems like these other browser
>options would tend to discourage the Opera people a little bit.   

Just check how fast Opera is and you will never use another browser!




---
Adrian Gschwend
@ OS/2 Netlabs

ICQ: 22419590
ktk@netlabs.org
-------
The OS/2 OpenSource Project:
http://www.netlabs.org


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OS/2 Netlabs (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu                      07-Oct-99 17:56:21
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 20:07:04
Subj: Re: Opera for OS/2 makes progress

From: Jason <malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu>

David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> wrote:
: In article <37fc2b24@oit.umass.edu>, malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu says...
:>Dispite the naysayers, Opera for OS/2 is making progress it would seem.  
:>We've moved up two points on the scale!  We still have a long ways to go, 
:>but I'm glad things are looking up.
:>
:>http://www.opera.com/alt_os.html
:>
:>-Jason
:>

: Great! Two points and what almost two years later, OS/2 is behind the Psion
and 
: BeOS.

I'm sorry Dave, you are wrong.  The current Opera for OS/2 project is 
only a couple months old.  Perhaps you should find a newsgroup where 
you'd me more useful?

-Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: forgitaboutit@fake.com                            07-Oct-99 16:33:28
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 20:07:04
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com>

In article <37FBF654.BFDEBA19@NOSPAMus.ibm.com>, jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com 
says...
>
Well, I see no point in dicussing this further. Clearly, you would rather 
redefine such well understood terms like "port" and "late" than have a
rational 
discourse. This has proven to be an interesting window into the mind of an
OS/2 
developer though. 

>Jeffrey S. Kobal
>IBM Corporation
>
>
>

-- 
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               07-Oct-99 15:35:22
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 20:07:04
Subj: (1/2) Re: Time to move on

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> 
> In article <37F8186D.42A0E5A@stny.rr.com>, mamodeo@stny.rr.com says...
> "David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >
> > In article <37F4E744.AF7FE193@stny.rr.com>, mamodeo@stny.rr.com says...
> > David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >> >> >That or that fact that it was written by a bunch of l33t h4x0rZ.  I'm
> >> >> >not sure which would disturb them most.
> >> >>
> >> >> Probably the support issue.
> >>
> >> >Actually I was thinking of the security issue.
> >>
> >> Win9x isn't secure, but companies use it. Why? It is supported. If
something
> >> goes wrong, you can hold someone accountable.
> 
> >And where is Win9x deployed?  As a firewall for the office?  No.  It's
> >deployed where it is the least risky because it is an inexpensive
> >solution.  They can afford to have their internal network insecure as
> >long as they're protected from external sources.  The absolutely cannot
> >afford to put Win9x as their firewall, in spite of it being a well
> >supported platform.  I think the same holds true, to a lesser extent,
> >with Linux.
> 
> The point is that support is important for these companies no matter the
> context. A secure OS with no support is something that corps. still look
down
> on.

And an insecure OS with excellent support is worthless as well in many
positions.  Context does matter.

> >> >> >I'm in the minority of the computer using public, not the <OS/2>
using
> >> >> >crowd.  You were talking about people complaining about OS/2.  What
are
> >> >> >these "companies" going to complain about OS/2 for if they don't use
> >> >> >it?  Stick to your own context please.
> >> >>
> >> >> We are talking about support. Would you like for me to post the
context?
> >>
> >> >Yes we were (it actually would have been helpful to keep a line or two
> >> >more context in there), but you mentioned all of the people
> >> >complaining.  The only people I hear complaining are SOHO users (or
> >> >former SOHO users) here.  And my personal "gut" feeling FWIW, etc., is
> >> >that of those SOHO users many more are satasfied with their current
> >> >quality of OS than dissatasfied.
> >>
> >> This issue came up because you claimed support isn't important. I say it
is. My
> >> "gut" as well as conversations with people who adminster machines tells
me that
> >> they wish hold someone accountable.
> 
> >I claimed support wasn't important for <me>.  Are you going to argue
> >that point?  I don't need to hold anyone accountable for anything
> >because my system works fine and nothing I do is "mission critical".
> >Having said that I also trust that all of my data is safe and in "good
> >hands" due to past good experience with the product.
> 
> And that is why I said that you are in the minority. Support isn't important 
to
> you. Fine. It is important to most,  hence, you are in the minority.

The minority of what?  Computer users or OS/2 users?  You were
generalizing about OS/2 users originally I believe.
 
> >> >> Interesting. But that wasn't what I asked. You guys seem woefully out
of touch.
> >> >> Has it occured to you that most people do this?
> >>
> >> >I actually wasn't quite sure what you were asking.  Could you restate
> >> >perhaps?
> >>
> >> Has it occurred to your that most people purchase their computer stuff
based on
> >> need and not coolness.\>
> 
> >It's occurred to me that it's possible, but my experience actually has
> >shown otherwise with many people I know.  "Mom, do you really need a
> >450MHz machine?  Do you know what that means?" "Yes I need it."
> 
> The problem with that particular brand of reasoning, namely, that your
mother
> doesn't need a P3-450 for email is basically irrelevent because as the CPU
> speeds go up, they stop making old ones.

She could have bought a bottom-of-the-line system or simply inherited
one of my old systems, but she felt she needed a 450MHz processor. 
Unfortunately, she is not alone in her ignorance.  Far from it, in my
experience.
 
> But to counterpoint you, my mother-in-law has a 486DX2/66 and, despite P3
> commercials, doesn't feel that she needs a new machine.

I envy you.  My dad is still using my 486/33 because I told him he
doesn't need any more for what he does and he actually listens to me. 
He's been happy with it for the last 5 years with no complaints.
 
> >> >Depends on the functionality you require.
> >>
> >> No, it doesn't. The G400 doesn't have an OS/2 version with no OpenGl or
> >> Direct3d support. Even if you don't need those features, you pay for
them.
> 
> >Right I pay for lots of things I have no intention of using.  It's part
> >of life.  Do you use "Enhanced 911 service" that you get charged for on
> >your phone bill every month?  It's all in the packaging.  To get
> >something you want, you often have to also get and pay for things you
> >don't.
> 
> However, I CAN use enhanced 911. OS/2, in our G400 example, doesn't give you
> the option. I can purchase a G400 like you. I can then decide not to use the
> OpenGL support.

So you can "change your mind" and start dialing 911 regularly for its
enhanced service?  I've got the option to use the G400's advanced
capabilities if I feel like rebooting.  I'm not locked into anything. 
I'm not pushing exclusive use of anything.
 
> You cannot make such a choice, because your *only* option is that you cannot
> use OpenGL. If I change my mind, under Windows, I can elect to use OpenGL.
> 
> If you change your mind, under OS/2, you *still* cannot use OpenGL.

If I change my mind, I'll just reboot.
 
> There is a difference between choosing not to use a thing, and being unable
to
> use a thing.

Right.  I'd choose not to use such feature if I had it.
 
> >> >One of the big reasons I
> >> >always hold out on buying a new machine so long is that it will
> >> >invariably come with some BS "technologies" that I don't want.  One such
> >> >example of the recent past is Plug N Pray.  Another such example for me
> >> >currently is ACPI (soft power on/off) and the ATX power supply
> >> >associated with it.  Personally, most of the functionality OS/2 is
> >> >missing is functionality that I never gave a rats ass about to begin
> >> >with.  3D acceleration is another such technology for me.
> >>
> >> Not a good reason. Every new machine ships with USB, ACPI, and PnP
support. You
> >> may not use them, in fact, with OS/2, you definitely don't, but they are
there
> >> nonetheless. Whether or not they are "BS" is a matter of opinion. The
problem
> >> if you have no choice because you cannot even take advantage of the
stuff,
> >> "BS" or otherwise.
> 
> >The real problem is not having a choice as to whether they are there or
> >not.  If I really wanted to use any of these features, I wouldn't be
> >trying to shoe-horn OS/2 onto my system.  I would choose the tool that
> >best suits my needs.
> 
> That's w[h]ere we differ. I prefer to use something that increases my
options. I
> can then decide, "Hey, let me give that feature a try."

Well, I laid all my options in front of me ahead of time, and decided
what was more important to me.  3D acceleration and other such things
didn't make the cut.

[some snippage]

> >> > The aforementioned G400 video card is a perfect example. Surely, you
see that
> >> > this is a bad thing.
> >>
> >> >Depends on who considers it.
> >>
> >> Not at all. No matter who consider it, paying for features you cannot use
> >> sucks.
> 
> >Yup, but life sucks like that.
> 
> I disagree. I am hard pressed to think of examples of paying for features I
> cannot use as opposed to paying for features I just don't use.

It's all part of the cost.  To get the good, you get the "bad" or
undesired as well.  If it's still worth it for you to get the good at
the given price you get it.  Otherwise you seek alternatives.  Surely
you don't desire <every> feature of <everything> you own.
 
> >> >Worse in what sense?  The recent Software Choice stuff?
> >>
> >> Across the board. Video, soundcards, controllers, scanners, you name it
and
> >> OS/2 is getting worse about supporting it.
> 
> >There is enough support necessary for me to do what I need and want to
> >do and there's no sign of that deteriorating yet.
> 
> Again, you are in a minority.

Again of what?
 
> >> >Well, the main issue is that Scitech has reasonable clout and good
> >> >relationships with many video card manufacturers and they have the base
> >> >system in place to expand all of their driver support to OS/2 with a
> >> >minimum of effort.  The will certainly keep improving their support
> >> >level.
> >>
> >> The main issue is despite Scitech, OS/2 support for new video techologies 
is
> >> still severely lacking.
> 
> >In terms of 3D gingerbread, sure.
> 
> It isn't gingerbread.

It is to me, and probably many other OS/2 users.

> These are basic features of the card. Basic. And Scitech
> doesn't support them.

It will.

> I find it difficult to be impressed with their software
> doesn't support the basic features of these new cards.

They're making great strides, but it will take time.  They also
mentioned plans for universal sound drivers.
 
> >> As for "minimum of effort" it seems to me that if it
> >> were that simple, they would have support for every card Windows
supports.
> 
> >The simplicity comes in them porting their drivers to OS/2 from other
> >platforms, not in porting other existing drivers that they didn't
> >write.  It's in their interests as a company to support as many cards as
> >possible.  Now it's also easy for them to have these cards supported on
> >several platforms at the same time, including OS/2.
> 
> Then explain the absence of so many newer cards.

Specs have not been released to them as of yet or they are working on
the drivers currently.

> Most people don't care if a 5
> year old Tseng card is supported.

Most people that don't have such cards, sure.  Many people do have 1 or
2 year old cards which are supported, however.

> Their Windows arsenal includes a program that
> gives videocards OpenGL support if the card doesn't have such support
natively.
> 
> Does Scitech have OS/2 versions of such software?

MGL has its own OpenGL implementation, as well as IBM's released
software OpenGL.
 
> >> >EDM/2 has had several updates in the last few weeks.  There's also
> >> >Walter Metcalf's Focus on OS/2 which is updated fairly often.
> >>
> >> EDM/2? Are you kidding? They went from May until the end of Sept. and all 
they
> >> had to show were three articles. If the state of OS/2 programming is such 
that
> >> it can only support 3 articles from the premier OS/2 programming site,
then
> >> OS/2 is truly in a world of hurt.
> 
> >Well.. the main problem is that not too many new APIs are coming out for
> >OS/2.  I think the primary reason for this is that programmers have yet
> >to exploit the current APIs.  The only new API recently released for
> >OS/2 has been MGL, and I myself can't even get the damn libraries to
> >build yet.  ;-)
> 
> I think that there are other problems. For example, IBM has removed SOM
support
> from VisualAge.

To reduce their porting efforts to less capable platforms.

> Also, since there are clealy fewer programmers for OS/2 you
> have fewer people advancing program techniques, trying to learn OS/2,
wanting
> to show OS/2 programming tricks, in addition to the fact that OS/2's API
isn't
> advancing.

True, but this is less true today than it used to be last year.
 
> Makes for a bleak programming experience.

Well, it takes a certain "frontiersman" feel to it.  ;-)

> >> >Not on the order of 100/day I'll wager.  ;-P
> >>
> >> Nope, but I don't update it either. And guess what? All the software
reviews
> >> are current. TWO YEARS LATER.
> 
> >Right.  The products probably all went belly-up a while ago.  Things
> >change.  You can't expect all products to be under continual
> >improvement.  Projects get abandoned and others get picked up and
> >pursued.
> 
> True. But look at why the products vanished. No demand. I reviewed Intercom
> 3.16. This was an OS/2 only internet phone program. When it was under
> development, it advance quickly, now, because the market has dried up, it's
> gone.
> 
> The problems is that, for the most part, things are not changing under OS/2.
> Back in late 95, things were happening with OS/2. Magazines could write
> articles, e-zines were plentiful, and there was plenty to write about. This
is
> no longer the case.

It has had a long dead period where people were using it, but no big
contributions occurred.  That is no longer the case however.  Whether or
not the initial damage done was enough to finish it off remains to be
seen, but it has had a late rally of sorts.

> >> >Merely that it exists and there are a good number of games that can be
> >> >played in OS/2.
> >>
> >> As opposed to a good number of games that people actually *want* to play.
> 
> >Neither of us know what people want to play, but with 1700+ games,
> >they've got a good variety to choose from.  I'd think many people could
> >find something that would amuse them in such a list.
> 
> I can check best-seller list and easily find what people want to play. I'll
be
> willing to wager that none of those 1700 games are on those lists.

Best seller lists don't list arcade games.  That doesn't mean people
don't play them.

> >> >Well, the mere amount of interest that is generated from such a small
> >> >niche was what I was pointing out.
> >>
> >> You have an amount of hits. It is a bit of a stretch to convert that to
> >> interest. I was counted as a hit, but I have no interest in playing
emulated
> >> games under OS/2.
> 
> >So let's assume that a generous 10% of the people to visit the site have
> >no interest in it whatsoever and happened upon it by sheer accident.
> >The current hit count is approaching 5000, so 4500 hits were from
> >legitimate interest.
> 
> But did those translate to 4500 downloads?

Likely not, but I still uphold that it represents a lot of interest for
such a small niche.
 
> >> >I prefer having better access to the technologies of today that I find
> >> >useful, such as CPU speed and memory capacity.  I feel that for my
> >> >applications, OS/2 gives me better access to such things.
> >>
> >> Indeed. I feel, however, that OS/2 doesn't provide better access to the
> >> technologies of today, be they hardware or software. Simply put, Windows
runs

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               07-Oct-99 15:35:22
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 20:07:04
Subj: (2/2) Re: Time to move on

> >> more applications and supports more current hardware.
> 
> >For your use, you're probably right.  For my use, I'm right.
> 
> Well, what do you software do you run that doesn't have a Window equivalent?

I don't care because I don't want windoze equivalents of software since
it's not my chosen platform.  I know one piece of software I can't get
on windoze, however:  the WPS.

> What hardware do you run under OS/2 that Windows doesn't support?

Again, I don't care.  It's not what windoze doesn't support.  It's how
well it is utilized.  I'd take OS/2's memory usage, multitasking, and
memory management over windoze 3D acceleration, etc. any day.
 
> >> >None of those problems were "show-stoppers."  I have not ever not been
> >> >able to do something I needed to because of those problems.
> >>
> >> But they were issues, and you needed IBM to fix them despite saying you
didn't
> >> need IBM.
> 
> >If I needed them fixed, I'd need IBM to fix them.  However my system was
> >fully functional and usable without such fixes.
> 
> If your system was fully functional and usable why did you install any
> fixpacks.

Why do you install NT service packs?  Was your system really lacking
anything before?  The fixpacks have enhanced the environment and made
things work better, but they were far from unworkable before.

> I assume that number 12 wasn't the first.

If it was then it would have been number 1.  ;-P 

> >> If you wish, but I never said or implied that there weren't problems.
> >>
> >> >Are you reliant on them now?  Sure.
> >>
> >> So are you. You just won't admit it.
> 
> >Sure.  I'm reliant on the fixes that make my system work today.  I'm not
> >reliant on any further fixes at this time, however.
> 
> Even so, you still reliant on them, which was my point.

I don't need any new fixes to keep my current system humming along
smoothly.  That's the bottom line.
 
> >> >But the problems were fixed and available.  This doesn't indicate future
> >> >reliance.
> >>
> >> Of course it does, unless you believe all problems were solved and
technology
> >> won't change to add something OS/2 won't support. And given OS/2's state
of
> >> affairs, it is likely that OS/2 won't support new hardware and software.
> 
> >Of course technologies will change and no-one knows if support will be
> >added or not.  My point is that my current system can continue to
> >function indefinitely (yes even beyond 1/1/2000 ;-)) in its current
> >state without any reliance on IBM.  I am not forced to adopt any new
> >technologies which could cause that to break down.
> 
> I never said you were forced. However, you are reliant on IBM and limited
using
> OS/2 should your needs change.

If my needs change, and OS/2 no longer supports them, then I will dump
OS/2.  Simple as that.  I don't forsee that happening any time soon.
 
> >> >> But then, it seems that many OS/2 people are used to getting less than
> >> >> what they paid for.
> >>
> >> >Depends on what you were looking for with each purchase.
> >>
> >> No, it doesn't. If two people purchase the same videocard for the same
price,
> >> even if one person is expecting less, he is getting less than he paid
for.
> 
> >If he assigns any value to these features, then you are right.  If he
> >does not then he is indifferent to it and will get the best alternative
> >that suits his needs, regardless of how it is packaged.
> 
> I am right, regardless.

Regardless of how wrong you are?  ;-P

> Back to the G400. Let's say I want OpenGL. You don't.
> That feature is valuble to me, worthless to you, YET, we still pay the same
> price. You still get less value because you paid the same.

If I want the other features of the G400, such as more on-board RAM,
better performance, and higher refresh rates, I have no problem paying a
"premium" for these features.  If another card offers the same features
minus OpenGL, and if it's cheaper, I'll buy it.  We all pay for more
than we use in nearly all areas of life.
 
> Let's say neither of us care about OpenGL. Well, we both got screwed. But we
> both changed our minds. Well, all of a sudden, I'm happy about the money
spent,
> but you are still screwed because you picked OS/2?
> 
> What were you thinking? :-)

If I changed my mind, I'd just reboot.  My hard drive is not etched in
stone.
 
> >> But it does show that you are dependent on IBM, despite your statement to 
the
> >> contrary.
> 
> >So you've never had to work around a problem in Winxx that wasn't
> >debilitating?  Do you <rely> on Microsoft to fix these problems or do
> >you just avoid the known problems and otherwise continue computing as
> >you normally do?
> 
> We both rely on the makers of the OS for fixes, only I admit it. A
workaround
> is not a fix.

Currently, there's nothing I can't do with OS/2 that it's supposed to be
able to do.  Hence, I don't need any further fixes to keep my current
system running.
 
> >> >So you have switched to OS/2?  I finally got through to you!  ;-)
> >>
> >> Sorry, but that would be going backwards. I wouldn't do that.
> 
> >Better look at which way your saddle is facing Mr. DoRight.  ;-)
> 
> It is safely facing foward.

Then you'd better turn yourself around.
 
> >> >Where did I imply that "people use Windows because it is cool", etc.?
> >> >My point was that people can have the same opinion without necessarily
> >> >being right.
> >>
> >> My point is that have you consider that all those people are right adn
that you
> >> are mistaken?
> 
> >Sure I have.  They might be right for themselves, but for me, they're
> >dead wrong.
> 
> Trust them. Remove the "might." They are right for themselves.

My mother isn't.  Many others are clueless too.  By the same token, many
are also right for themselves.
 
> >> >> An inability to make a profit is but one kind of inferiority.
> >>
> >> >In this case, it's the only one that matters to a business.
> >>
> >> Wrong again. Potential profitability also matters.
> 
> >"Inability to make a profit" -- is this not also similar to "potential
> >profitability"?  Let's not play word games.
> 
> They are not similar. RealNetworks lost money for years. A few months ago,
they
> problem even. They are now expect to make a profit. People invested in
> RealNetworks because they saw a potential for profit.
> 
> This is not the same as an inability to make a profit.

Where's this going David?  My point was that the reason OS/2 is doing so
poorly is that it likely hasn't has enough return to justify much
further expenditure on it.  If it were a superior product or an inferior
one, if it turned a profit, it would be promoted and supported to this
very day.
 
> >> >HPFS is quite immune to DOS defraggers.  What did you mean?
> >>
> >> That NTFS gives you equal immunity and more ability.
> 
> >And was designed how many years later?  Don't compare DOS 5.0 to Win95.
> >It's just as silly.
> 
> There's nothing stopping IBM from improving HPFS.

They have with HPFS386.  But M$ is "stopping" that.  That's why they've
moved on to JFS.

> NS is adding quotas and encryption, for example to NTFS.

Quotas are nice, but encryption is a bloody waste IMHO.  I have no idea
if JFS supports either of these, but I believe quotas are supported.

> >> >Check the newsgroup traffic.  How many people have even so much as
> >> >mention Win16 apps in the last 2 years?  Where are you getting
> >> >information that OS/2 users are reliant on Win16 apps.  Which Win16
> >> >apps?  You made the claim, not me.
> >>
> >> Are you kidding? Hardly a day goes by on the comp.os.os2.apps group
without
> >> someone asking about Quicken, Win-OS/2 something, ICQ, or plugins.
> 
> >There's an OS/2 native equivalent of just about everything.  What people
> >are stuck on is due to their habits and familiarity, not due to
> >inability of the platform.  No one <has to> rely on WinOS/2 if they
> >don't want to.  I'm living proof.
> 
> Wrong. I use Quicken for many reasons, including Checkfree support. Which
OS/2
> equivalent has Checkfree support?

That depends.  What the hell is Checkfree support?  I'm not crying over
lack of that.

> Which OS/2 equivalent gives you read/write protection for zipdisk?

IOMEGA is releasing new drivers.

> Or parallel-port scanner support?

Does SANE support such things?  I have no idea.

> Palmpilot syncing with PIMs? 

There's Java apps for that.

> Animated Gifs?

Are you joking?

> CD rippers ala' RealJukebox or Musicmatch? 

There's at least one.  Don't know what it is because I don't care, but
I've heard of one.

> Purify?  Boundchecker?

So we can write sloppy code?

> OpenGL?

What about it?
 
> Sorry, but it is definitely the inability of the platform.

Hey... it's not for everyone.  I never said it was.
 
> >> >> Well, believe it or not, but some people like to use long file named
> >> >> directories.
> >>
> >> >I do too.  That's why I use HPFS and not FAT.  That's also why I don't
> >> >use old software that can't recognize LFNs.
> >>
> >> Good 4 you. However, some have different needs and OS/2 does nothing to
address
> >> them.
> 
> >Then I recommend to them that they seek OS/2 native software to meet
> >their needs or choose another platform.  No one should force something
> >on themselves if it doesn't fit their needs or function as needed.
> 
> Better push the second, because OS/2 has too many gaps.

Depends on your needs.  It has 0 gaps for me.
 
- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: forgitaboutit@fake.com                            07-Oct-99 17:51:01
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 21:23:27
Subj: (1/2) Re: Time to move on

From: David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com>

In article <37FCF610.790D9FF1@stny.rr.com>, mamodeo@stny.rr.com says...
> In article <37F8186D.42A0E5A@stny.rr.com>, mamodeo@stny.rr.com says...
> "David H. McCoy" wrote:

>> The point is that support is important for these companies no matter the
>> context. A secure OS with no support is something that corps. still look
down
>> on.

>And an insecure OS with excellent support is worthless as well in many
>positions.  Context does matter.

Not for support. For corporations, security is context driven. Support is not. 


>> >I claimed support wasn't important for <me>.  Are you going to argue
>> >that point?  I don't need to hold anyone accountable for anything
>> >because my system works fine and nothing I do is "mission critical".
>> >Having said that I also trust that all of my data is safe and in "good
>> >hands" due to past good experience with the product.
>> 
>> And that is why I said that you are in the minority. Support isn't
important to
>> you. Fine. It is important to most,  hence, you are in the minority.

>The minority of what?  Computer users or OS/2 users?  You were
>generalizing about OS/2 users originally I believe.
 
Since OS/2 users are within the domain of computer uses, either will suffice. 
However, YOU, Marty, a person who claims to be independent of support, are in
a 
minority, whether that minority is computer users or OS/2 users.

The overwhelming number of either wants support from the company that makes
the 
OS.

>> >It's occurred to me that it's possible, but my experience actually has
>> >shown otherwise with many people I know.  "Mom, do you really need a
>> >450MHz machine?  Do you know what that means?" "Yes I need it."
>> 
>> The problem with that particular brand of reasoning, namely, that your
mother
>> doesn't need a P3-450 for email is basically irrelevent because as the CPU
>> speeds go up, they stop making old ones.

>She could have bought a bottom-of-the-line system or simply inherited
>one of my old systems, but she felt she needed a 450MHz processor. 
>Unfortunately, she is not alone in her ignorance.  Far from it, in my
>experience.
 
Did you ask her why?

>> But to counterpoint you, my mother-in-law has a 486DX2/66 and, despite P3
>> commercials, doesn't feel that she needs a new machine.

>I envy you.  My dad is still using my 486/33 because I told him he
>doesn't need any more for what he does and he actually listens to me. 
>He's been happy with it for the last 5 years with no complaints.
 
See, I didn't tell my mother-in-law anything. I asked her what she wanted to 
do, explained options, mentioned things she may have wanted to do in the
future 
and let her make a educated decision. In my experience, most people are quite 
capable of doing this.

>> >Right I pay for lots of things I have no intention of using.  It's part
>> >of life.  Do you use "Enhanced 911 service" that you get charged for on
>> >your phone bill every month?  It's all in the packaging.  To get
>> >something you want, you often have to also get and pay for things you
>> >don't.
>> 
>> However, I CAN use enhanced 911. OS/2, in our G400 example, doesn't give
you
>> the option. I can purchase a G400 like you. I can then decide not to use
the
>> OpenGL support.

>So you can "change your mind" and start dialing 911 regularly for its
>enhanced service?  I've got the option to use the G400's advanced
>capabilities if I feel like rebooting.  I'm not locked into anything. 
>I'm not pushing exclusive use of anything.


But I don't have to change my phone, and I don't have to change my operating 
system. You must reboot because your OS has locked you, not in, but out. I can 

change my mind about OpenGL and just start using it.

No reboot required.
 
>> You cannot make such a choice, because your *only* option is that you
cannot
>> use OpenGL. If I change my mind, under Windows, I can elect to use OpenGL.
>> 
>> If you change your mind, under OS/2, you *still* cannot use OpenGL.

>If I change my mind, I'll just reboot.
 
In otherwords, you must change your OS. I don't have to reboot. I can just use 

it. Whenver, and without disrupting whatever it is I am doing.

>> There is a difference between choosing not to use a thing, and being unable 
to
>> use a thing.

>Right.  I'd choose not to use such feature if I had it.
 
No. Since, when using OS/2, you cannot use it, you have no choice. That would 
be like someone in prison saying "I am choosing to be here".

>> >The real problem is not having a choice as to whether they are there or
>> >not.  If I really wanted to use any of these features, I wouldn't be
>> >trying to shoe-horn OS/2 onto my system.  I would choose the tool that
>> >best suits my needs.
>> 
>> That's w[h]ere we differ. I prefer to use something that increases my
options. I
>> can then decide, "Hey, let me give that feature a try."

>Well, I laid all my options in front of me ahead of time, and decided
>what was more important to me.  3D acceleration and other such things
>didn't make the cut.

Ditto. I also decided that perhaps my needs would change and that I wanted 
something that was as "future-proof" as possible. After all, what is not 
important to one today, may be important tomorrow.

>[some snippage]

>> >Yup, but life sucks like that.
>> 
>> I disagree. I am hard pressed to think of examples of paying for features I
>> cannot use as opposed to paying for features I just don't use.

>It's all part of the cost.  To get the good, you get the "bad" or
>undesired as well.  If it's still worth it for you to get the good at
>the given price you get it.  Otherwise you seek alternatives.  Surely
>you don't desire <every> feature of <everything> you own.
 
Again, there is a large difference in paying for what you CANNOT use as
opposed 
to what you DO NOT use. When you CANNOT use, choice is removed and options are 

limited. When you DON NOT use, choice is intact and options are available.

>> >> >Worse in what sense?  The recent Software Choice stuff?
>> >>
>> >> Across the board. Video, soundcards, controllers, scanners, you name it
and
>> >> OS/2 is getting worse about supporting it.
>> 
>> >There is enough support necessary for me to do what I need and want to
>> >do and there's no sign of that deteriorating yet.
>> 
>> Again, you are in a minority.

>Again of what?
 
See above.

>> >> The main issue is despite Scitech, OS/2 support for new video
techologies is
>> >> still severely lacking.
>> 
>> >In terms of 3D gingerbread, sure.
>> 
>> It isn't gingerbread.

>It is to me, and probably many other OS/2 users.

But you don't make the cards, so even if that statement is true, your opinion 
doesn't matter. If things like Direct3d support or say, TV-out(which I don't 
use, and don't have on my card), are included with the card, by definition
they 
are not gingerbread. They are standard features. For example, the TnT2 costs 
less than the TnT2 Ultra. Why? The Ultra clocks higher. That higher clock
speed 
is gingerbread and it costs extra. But both support D3D. That is standard.

>> These are basic features of the card. Basic. And Scitech
>> doesn't support them.

>It will.

First, you have no evidence of this, so that statement is both useless and 
worthless. Second, you contradict earlier statements. If 3d features are
basic, 
but considered "gingerbread" and important to many OS/2 users, why on Earth 
would Scitech waste time implemented features that are consider useless by so 
many?

>> I find it difficult to be impressed with their software
>> doesn't support the basic features of these new cards.

>They're making great strides, but it will take time.  They also
>mentioned plans for universal sound drivers.
 
Great strides don't matter. Plans don't matter. We don't deal in vaporware 
remember? Only what we can use here and now. Here and now, such support
doesn't 
exist and universal sound drivers don't exist.

If you need such items today, you are out of luck. 

>> >> As for "minimum of effort" it seems to me that if it
>> >> were that simple, they would have support for every card Windows
supports.
>> 
>> >The simplicity comes in them porting their drivers to OS/2 from other
>> >platforms, not in porting other existing drivers that they didn't
>> >write.  It's in their interests as a company to support as many cards as
>> >possible.  Now it's also easy for them to have these cards supported on
>> >several platforms at the same time, including OS/2.
>> 
>> Then explain the absence of so many newer cards.

>Specs have not been released to them as of yet or they are working on
>the drivers currently.

No good. The Voodoo has been unchanged for almost 3 years, the TnT for more 
than a year. And STILL no support. What proof do you have that they are even 
working on such support?


>> Most people don't care if a 5
>> year old Tseng card is supported.

>Most people that don't have such cards, sure.  Many people do have 1 or
>2 year old cards which are supported, however.

And many people have 1 to 2 year old cards that are not.

>> Their Windows arsenal includes a program that
>> gives videocards OpenGL support if the card doesn't have such support
natively.
>> 
>> Does Scitech have OS/2 versions of such software?

>MGL has its own OpenGL implementation, as well as IBM's released
>software OpenGL.
 
I'm afraid that wasn't what I asked.  Let's try again. This is from Scitech's 
site 
"What is SciTech GLDirect?
SciTech GLDirect allows you to run OpenGL-based games and other applications 
using your graphics card's DirectX 6.x drivers. SciTech GLDirect even supports 

the latest applications that use OpenGL 1.2. Download the FREE trial version 
now!"

They've got a Windows version. Where's their OS/2 version? You claim that 
things are coming, that "They will." do things, but I failed to find OS/2 
implementations despite MGL and IBM.

 
>> >Well.. the main problem is that not too many new APIs are coming out for
>> >OS/2.  I think the primary reason for this is that programmers have yet
>> >to exploit the current APIs.  The only new API recently released for
>> >OS/2 has been MGL, and I myself can't even get the damn libraries to
>> >build yet.  ;-)
>> 
>> I think that there are other problems. For example, IBM has removed SOM
support
>> from VisualAge.

>To reduce their porting efforts to less capable platforms.

Allow me to offer an alternative suggestion. Most developers don't care about 
SOM. You are a developer. So am I. We both no that their is nothing inherit in 

VisualAge that would force them to even attempt to port SOM to Windows, so it 
is unlikely that their would be any effort.  

SOM is useful only in the context of OS/2, and OS/2 is doing poorly.
Therefore, 
SOM is irrelevent. Conclusion-Drop SOM.

>> Also, since there are clealy fewer programmers for OS/2 you
>> have fewer people advancing program techniques, trying to learn OS/2,
wanting
>> to show OS/2 programming tricks, in addition to the fact that OS/2's API
isn't
>> advancing.

>True, but this is less true today than it used to be last year.
 
Really? How do you figure? Unless you can offer an alternative, I consider
EDM/2 the best OS/2 programming site. 
Certainly, the most well known and definitely a barometer. Given its current 
state and the fact that IBM has stopped supporting what may be its most 
advanced OS/2 software, SOM, and has dropped it from its premiere OS/2 
development tool, I fail to see how "this is less true today than..."

>> Makes for a bleak programming experience.

>Well, it takes a certain "frontiersman" feel to it.  ;-)

I suppose. I guess that I would rather make good software that people enjoy 
using, than showing my stones in masochistic programming displays.<grin>

>> True. But look at why the products vanished. No demand. I reviewed Intercom
>> 3.16. This was an OS/2 only internet phone program. When it was under
>> development, it advance quickly, now, because the market has dried up, it's
>> gone. 
>> The problems is that, for the most part, things are not changing under
OS/2.
>> Back in late 95, things were happening with OS/2. Magazines could write
>> articles, e-zines were plentiful, and there was plenty to write about. This 
is
>> no longer the case.

>It has had a long dead period where people were using it, but no big
>contributions occurred.  That is no longer the case however.  Whether or
>not the initial damage done was enough to finish it off remains to be
>seen, but it has had a late rally of sorts.

The thing came out *monthly* and I read it *monthly*. What long dead periods?

>> >Neither of us know what people want to play, but with 1700+ games,
>> >they've got a good variety to choose from.  I'd think many people could
>> >find something that would amuse them in such a list.
>> 
>> I can check best-seller list and easily find what people want to play. I'll 
be
>> willing to wager that none of those 1700 games are on those lists.

>Best seller lists don't list arcade games.  That doesn't mean people
>don't play them.

Well, if neither you nor I have any means available to use to properly
quantify 
who is playing what, it seems that we've deadlocked on this point.

>> >So let's assume that a generous 10% of the people to visit the site have
>> >no interest in it whatsoever and happened upon it by sheer accident.
>> >The current hit count is approaching 5000, so 4500 hits were from
>> >legitimate interest.
>> 
>> But did those translate to 4500 downloads?

>Likely not, but I still uphold that it represents a lot of interest for
>such a small niche.
 
Okay,but barring even soft numbers, seems to me that it only represents 4500 
hits.

>> >> Indeed. I feel, however, that OS/2 doesn't provide better access to the
>> >> technologies of today, be they hardware or software. Simply put, Windows 
runs
>> >> more applications and supports more current hardware.
>> 
>> >For your use, you're probably right.  For my use, I'm right.
>> 
>> Well, what do you software do you run that doesn't have a Window
equivalent?

>I don't care because I don't want windoze equivalents of software since
>it's not my chosen platform.  I know one piece of software I can't get
>on windoze, however:  the WPS.

Indeed. I agree. In fact, one of the reasons I decided to try WinNT was
because 
when some asked me why I used OS/2, the only compelling reason I could give
was 
the WPS. It proved easy to get along without.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: forgitaboutit@fake.com                            07-Oct-99 17:51:01
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 21:23:27
Subj: (2/2) Re: Time to move on

>> What hardware do you run under OS/2 that Windows doesn't support?

>Again, I don't care.  It's not what windoze doesn't support.  It's how
>well it is utilized.  I'd take OS/2's memory usage, multitasking, and
>memory management over windoze 3D acceleration, etc. any day.
 
I used OS/2 Warp 4 and WinNT 4 on the same box. I disagree that it used more 
memory. Since some OS/2 applications would "disobey" the 1/10th and hold the 
SIQ for a few seconds, and NT didn't do this, and both allowed me to do normal 

things like downloading, printing, etc, I give NT the better multitasking. 
Memory management is definitely better in OS/2. Stability, certainly for me, 
was hands down NT and ditto for robustness. Ditto for task-killing, software, 
and hardware support. And for all this, I STILL get 3d acceleration.

I'll take Windows any day. 

>> >If I needed them fixed, I'd need IBM to fix them.  However my system was
>> >fully functional and usable without such fixes.
>> 
>> If your system was fully functional and usable why did you install any
>> fixpacks.

>Why do you install NT service packs?  Was your system really lacking
>anything before?  The fixpacks have enhanced the environment and made
>things work better, but they were far from unworkable before.

I installed SP3 because when I first tried NT, SP3 was declared a necessity 
based on my research. I installed SP4 for Y2k, switch to Win2k, but I keep an 
NT 4 maint. partition with SP5 for NTFS5 read/write capability.

Unworkable? No. Nor did I claim such. I did claim that you are still dependent 

on IBM and I on MS.

>> I assume that number 12 wasn't the first.

>If it was then it would have been number 1.  ;-P 

I'm not talking about fixpacks. I mean I assumet that Fixpack 12 wasn't the 
first one you installed.

>> >Sure.  I'm reliant on the fixes that make my system work today.  I'm not
>> >reliant on any further fixes at this time, however.
>> 
>> Even so, you still reliant on them, which was my point.

>I don't need any new fixes to keep my current system humming along
>smoothly.  That's the bottom line.
 
You consider a system needing workarounds smooth? I don't. Another difference, 

I guess.

>> >Of course technologies will change and no-one knows if support will be
>> >added or not.  My point is that my current system can continue to
>> >function indefinitely (yes even beyond 1/1/2000 ;-)) in its current
>> >state without any reliance on IBM.  I am not forced to adopt any new
>> >technologies which could cause that to break down.
>> 
>> I never said you were forced. However, you are reliant on IBM and limited
using
>> OS/2 should your needs change.

>If my needs change, and OS/2 no longer supports them, then I will dump
>OS/2.  Simple as that.  I don't forsee that happening any time soon.
 
Fair enough.

>> >> No, it doesn't. If two people purchase the same videocard for the same
price,
>> >> even if one person is expecting less, he is getting less than he paid
for.
>> 
>> >If he assigns any value to these features, then you are right.  If he
>> >does not then he is indifferent to it and will get the best alternative
>> >that suits his needs, regardless of how it is packaged.
>> 
>> I am right, regardless.

>Regardless of how wrong you are?  ;-P

If only that were so. Believe me, I wish one of you could prove me wrong. :-)

>> Back to the G400. Let's say I want OpenGL. You don't.
>> That feature is valuble to me, worthless to you, YET, we still pay the same
>> price. You still get less value because you paid the same.

>If I want the other features of the G400, such as more on-board RAM,
>better performance, and higher refresh rates, I have no problem paying a
>"premium" for these features.  If another card offers the same features
>minus OpenGL, and if it's cheaper, I'll buy it.  We all pay for more
>than we use in nearly all areas of life.
 
But not for what we CANNOT use. That is the point.

>> Let's say neither of us care about OpenGL. Well, we both got screwed. But
we
>> both changed our minds. Well, all of a sudden, I'm happy about the money
spent,
>> but you are still screwed because you picked OS/2?
>> 
>> What were you thinking? :-)

>If I changed my mind, I'd just reboot.  My hard drive is not etched in
>stone.
 
And if I changed mine, I would just use it. I believe my actions would be more 

efficient and less disruptive.

>> >> But it does show that you are dependent on IBM, despite your statement
to the
>> >> contrary.
>> 
>> >So you've never had to work around a problem in Winxx that wasn't
>> >debilitating?  Do you <rely> on Microsoft to fix these problems or do
>> >you just avoid the known problems and otherwise continue computing as
>> >you normally do?
>> 
>> We both rely on the makers of the OS for fixes, only I admit it. A
workaround
>> is not a fix.

>Currently, there's nothing I can't do with OS/2 that it's supposed to be
>able to do.  Hence, I don't need any further fixes to keep my current
>system running.
 
I never claimed you did. I did claim that you are reliant on IBM for fixes.
You 
may or may not need them, but to get time, you look to IBM.

>> >> >So you have switched to OS/2?  I finally got through to you!  ;-)
>> >>
>> >> Sorry, but that would be going backwards. I wouldn't do that.
>> 
>> >Better look at which way your saddle is facing Mr. DoRight.  ;-)
>> 
>> It is safely facing foward.

>Then you'd better turn yourself around.
 
Whatever for? That would only give me a view of OS/2. 

>> >> >Where did I imply that "people use Windows because it is cool", etc.?
>> >> >My point was that people can have the same opinion without necessarily
>> >> >being right.
>> >>
>> >> My point is that have you consider that all those people are right adn
that you
>> >> are mistaken?
>> 
>> >Sure I have.  They might be right for themselves, but for me, they're
>> >dead wrong.
>> 
>> Trust them. Remove the "might." They are right for themselves.

>My mother isn't.  Many others are clueless too.  By the same token, many
>are also right for themselves.
 
And many know what their needs are. For some, it is a P3-450 that sends email, 

but can grow if their needs change and is safely under warranty, than
someone's 
hand-me-down 486 that can play MP3s or scan the pictures of their
grandchildren 
in a timely manner.

>> >"Inability to make a profit" -- is this not also similar to "potential
>> >profitability"?  Let's not play word games.
>> 
>> They are not similar. RealNetworks lost money for years. A few months ago,
they
>> problem even. They are now expect to make a profit. People invested in
>> RealNetworks because they saw a potential for profit.
>> 
>> This is not the same as an inability to make a profit.

>Where's this going David?  My point was that the reason OS/2 is doing so
>poorly is that it likely hasn't has enough return to justify much
>further expenditure on it.  If it were a superior product or an inferior
>one, if it turned a profit, it would be promoted and supported to this
>very day.
 
I wasn't going anywhere. I just wanted to clarify that "Inability to make a 
profit" and ""potential profitability" were not word games.

Well, let's move on... :-)

>> >> >HPFS is quite immune to DOS defraggers.  What did you mean?
>> >>
>> >> That NTFS gives you equal immunity and more ability.
>> 
>> >And was designed how many years later?  Don't compare DOS 5.0 to Win95.
>> >It's just as silly.
>> 
>> There's nothing stopping IBM from improving HPFS.

>They have with HPFS386.  But M$ is "stopping" that.  That's why they've
>moved on to JFS.

But neither were available to OS/2 client, were they? And there are probably 
more clients than servers. NTFS is available to all versions of NT. Heck, even 

the workstation versions support 2 CPUs out of the box.

>> NS is adding quotas and encryption, for example to NTFS.

>Quotas are nice, but encryption is a bloody waste IMHO.  I have no idea
>if JFS supports either of these, but I believe quotas are supported.

Sure. You can search DejaNews and find people saying that journaling is a
waste 
of time, but most changed with JFS was announced. And IMHO, any feature that 
keeps my data secure is a good one.

>> >There's an OS/2 native equivalent of just about everything.  What people
>> >are stuck on is due to their habits and familiarity, not due to
>> >inability of the platform.  No one <has to> rely on WinOS/2 if they
>> >don't want to.  I'm living proof.
>> 
>> Wrong. I use Quicken for many reasons, including Checkfree support. Which
OS/2
>> equivalent has Checkfree support?

>That depends.  What the hell is Checkfree support?  I'm not crying over
>lack of that.

It allows one to pay checks electronical from ones computer using a checkfree 
compliant program, like Quicken. Great feature, efficient, saves on stamps, 
delievers electronically or via a paper check depending on need, and can be
set 
up on-demand of automatically as I see fit. You may not need it, but quite a 
few of your fellows do.

>>Which OS/2 equivalent gives you read/write protection for zipdisk?

>IOMEGA is releasing new drivers.

Indeed. The Windows ones now allow NT to assign drive letters and brings NT up 

to the level of 95/98 support. On the other hand, the last time OS/2 drivers 
came out was last July and they still lack the features I mentioned, not to 
mention the new ones I just listed.

>> Or parallel-port scanner support?

>Does SANE support such things?  I have no idea.

No.

>> Palmpilot syncing with PIMs? 

>There's Java apps for that.

Which do not work with any PIMs, including the WordPro one for OS/2.

>> Animated Gifs?

>Are you joking?

For people making webpages, this is no joking matter. This is what some do for 

a living.

>> CD rippers ala' RealJukebox or Musicmatch? 

>There's at least one.  Don't know what it is because I don't care, but
>I've heard of one.

There are NONE like RealJukebox or Musicmatch. Unless I've missed that one, 
which is possible.

>> Purify?  Boundchecker?

>So we can write sloppy code?

So you can deliver a better product or do you wish to have me believe that
your 
code is perfect. It is not and cannot be. 

>> OpenGL?

>What about it?
 
Hardware support.

>> Sorry, but it is definitely the inability of the platform.

>>Hey... it's not for everyone.  I never said it was.
 
Then whom, by george, is it for? Today. Even its Java support is behind. You 
use it. What for?

>> >> Good 4 you. However, some have different needs and OS/2 does nothing to
address
>> >> them.
>> 
>> >Then I recommend to them that they seek OS/2 native software to meet
>> >their needs or choose another platform.  No one should force something
>> >on themselves if it doesn't fit their needs or function as needed.
>> 
>> Better push the second, because OS/2 has too many gaps.

>Depends on your needs.  It has 0 gaps for me.
 
Fair enough.

>- Marty


-- 
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mitchs@qmacs.com                                  07-Oct-99 23:27:17
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 21:23:27
Subj: OS/2 and Large Disks

From: Mitch Small <mitchs@qmacs.com>

I both want to and need to put OS/2 back on my system. I need to do it
to retreive some files I've archived using an OS/2 back up program. As
with any other software, it may only be read by itself.

I want to go back, because after a year of NT exclusivley, I find I
still can't find a decent graphics display program or e-mail program
that I'm really happy with.

My problem is this: I can't get the install program to properly
recognize my hard drives. All my drives are over 4 Gig. Even after
creating a small partition, the remaining disk space is shown
incorrectly. Can anyone help?

I've been using Warp 4 with the factory install disks and trying to
install on a Pentium 200 system.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: WinStar GoodNet, Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: hunters@thunder.indstate.edu                      07-Oct-99 23:07:21
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 21:23:27
Subj: Re: Opera for OS/2 makes progress

From: hunters@thunder.indstate.edu

In article <MPG.1266cdee75e363a4989a57@news1.mnsinc.com>,
  David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> wrote:

> Great! Two points and what almost two years later, OS/2 is behind the
> Psion and BeOS.

Geeze Dave, you must really get off on this shit, huh?

--
-Steven Hunter               *OS/2 Warp 4 * |Warpstock '99 | Oct 16-17|
hunters@thunder.indstate.edu *AMD K6-2 400* |       Atlanta GA        |


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com                           07-Oct-99 15:58:00
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 21:23:27
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: "Jeffrey S. Kobal" <jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:

> Well, I see no point in dicussing this further. Clearly, you would rather
> redefine such well understood terms like "port" and "late" than have a
rational
> discourse. This has proven to be an interesting window into the mind of an
OS/2
> developer though.

I have provided the definitions I'm using for "port" and "late" quite
clearly, whereas you have not.  I have been stating facts and
describing situations, answering each of your questions directly.
How has any of that not been "rational discourse"?  Or perhaps I
have a different definition of "rational" as well?

Jeffrey S. Kobal
IBM Corporation


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Austin (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: djohnson@isomedia.com                             07-Oct-99 17:00:27
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 21:23:27
Subj: Re: OS/2 and Large Disks

From: "David T. Johnson" <djohnson@isomedia.com>


Mitch Small wrote:
> 
> I both want to and need to put OS/2 back on my system. I need to do it
> to retreive some files I've archived using an OS/2 back up program. As
> with any other software, it may only be read by itself.
> 
> I want to go back, because after a year of NT exclusivley, I find I
> still can't find a decent graphics display program or e-mail program
> that I'm really happy with.
> 
> My problem is this: I can't get the install program to properly
> recognize my hard drives. All my drives are over 4 Gig. Even after
> creating a small partition, the remaining disk space is shown
> incorrectly. Can anyone help?
> 
> I've been using Warp 4 with the factory install disks and trying to
> install on a Pentium 200 system.

You need to update the installation disks to install on a hard disk >
4.3 GB.  Get the updates here:

http://service.software.ibm.com/os2ddpak/html/os_2comp/installa/index.htm

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: thannymeister@spambegone.yahoo.com                07-Oct-99 20:01:12
  To: All                                               07-Oct-99 21:23:27
Subj: Re: OS/2 and Large Disks

From: "Mike Ruskai" <thannymeister@spambegone.yahoo.com>

On Thu, 07 Oct 1999 23:27:34 GMT, Mitch Small wrote:

>I both want to and need to put OS/2 back on my system. I need to do it
>to retreive some files I've archived using an OS/2 back up program. As
>with any other software, it may only be read by itself.
>
>I want to go back, because after a year of NT exclusivley, I find I
>still can't find a decent graphics display program or e-mail program
>that I'm really happy with.
>
>My problem is this: I can't get the install program to properly
>recognize my hard drives. All my drives are over 4 Gig. Even after
>creating a small partition, the remaining disk space is shown
>incorrectly. Can anyone help?
>
>I've been using Warp 4 with the factory install disks and trying to
>install on a Pentium 200 system.

ftp://ftp.software.ibm.com/ps/products/os2/os2ddpak/idedasd.exe

The instructions inside tell you how to modify your boot diskettes (a
backup copy of them, of course).



 - Mike

Remove 'spambegone' to send e-mail.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TLF (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               07-Oct-99 19:43:08
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 04:17:06
Subj: (1/3) Re: Time to move on

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> 
> In article <37FCF610.790D9FF1@stny.rr.com>, mamodeo@stny.rr.com says...
> > In article <37F8186D.42A0E5A@stny.rr.com>, mamodeo@stny.rr.com says...
> > "David H. McCoy" wrote:
> 
> >> The point is that support is important for these companies no matter the
> >> context. A secure OS with no support is something that corps. still look
down
> >> on.
> 
> >And an insecure OS with excellent support is worthless as well in many
> >positions.  Context does matter.
> 
> Not for support. For corporations, security is context driven. Support is
not.

So you're saying that if Linux was well supported and had poor security
that companies would easily embrace and deploy it?  Dubious.
 
> >> >I claimed support wasn't important for <me>.  Are you going to argue
> >> >that point?  I don't need to hold anyone accountable for anything
> >> >because my system works fine and nothing I do is "mission critical".
> >> >Having said that I also trust that all of my data is safe and in "good
> >> >hands" due to past good experience with the product.
> >>
> >> And that is why I said that you are in the minority. Support isn't
important to
> >> you. Fine. It is important to most,  hence, you are in the minority.
> 
> >The minority of what?  Computer users or OS/2 users?  You were
> >generalizing about OS/2 users originally I believe.
> 
> Since OS/2 users are within the domain of computer uses, either will
suffice.

A square is a type of rectangle, but do all rectangles have equal length
sides?  What applies to the subset does not necessarily apply to the
superset.

> However, YOU, Marty, a person who claims to be independent of support,

-- further future support.

> are in a minority, whether that minority is computer users or OS/2 users.

I disagree.

> The overwhelming number of either wants support from the company that makes
the
> OS.

Wanting and requiring and depending on are 2 different things.  Sure, I
<want> OS/2 to be supported in the future and I <want> future fixpacks
and add-ons.  Do I need them?  No.

> >> >It's occurred to me that it's possible, but my experience actually has
> >> >shown otherwise with many people I know.  "Mom, do you really need a
> >> >450MHz machine?  Do you know what that means?" "Yes I need it."
> >>
> >> The problem with that particular brand of reasoning, namely, that your
mother
> >> doesn't need a P3-450 for email is basically irrelevent because as the
CPU
> >> speeds go up, they stop making old ones.
> 
> >She could have bought a bottom-of-the-line system or simply inherited
> >one of my old systems, but she felt she needed a 450MHz processor.
> >Unfortunately, she is not alone in her ignorance.  Far from it, in my
> >experience.
> 
> Did you ask her why?

She is the stereotypical person who "needs" things because they are
newer.  She has no concept of what is faster or what that number means,
but she knows that if the number is higher, it must be better and she
needs it.

> >> But to counterpoint you, my mother-in-law has a 486DX2/66 and, despite P3
> >> commercials, doesn't feel that she needs a new machine.
> 
> >I envy you.  My dad is still using my 486/33 because I told him he
> >doesn't need any more for what he does and he actually listens to me.
> >He's been happy with it for the last 5 years with no complaints.
> 
> See, I didn't tell my mother-in-law anything. I asked her what she wanted to
> do, explained options, mentioned things she may have wanted to do in the
future
> and let her make a educated decision. In my experience, most people are
quite
> capable of doing this.

Precisely what I did, only my advice was ignored.

> >> >Right I pay for lots of things I have no intention of using.  It's part
> >> >of life.  Do you use "Enhanced 911 service" that you get charged for on
> >> >your phone bill every month?  It's all in the packaging.  To get
> >> >something you want, you often have to also get and pay for things you
> >> >don't.
> >>
> >> However, I CAN use enhanced 911. OS/2, in our G400 example, doesn't give
you
> >> the option. I can purchase a G400 like you. I can then decide not to use
the
> >> OpenGL support.
> 
> >So you can "change your mind" and start dialing 911 regularly for its
> >enhanced service?  I've got the option to use the G400's advanced
> >capabilities if I feel like rebooting.  I'm not locked into anything.
> >I'm not pushing exclusive use of anything.
> 
> But I don't have to change my phone, and I don't have to change my operating
> system. You must reboot because your OS has locked you, not in, but out. I
can
> change my mind about OpenGL and just start using it.

Point is that I'm not anticipating changing my mind.  If I had to use
OpenGL 90% of the time, then I wouldn't be using OS/2.  Nothing is
locked anywhere.  If I needed it, I'd switch.  End of story.
 
> No reboot required.

So if you had no OpenGL installed on your system and needed to install
it, you wouldn't have to reboot your system?  :-)

> >> You cannot make such a choice, because your *only* option is that you
cannot
> >> use OpenGL. If I change my mind, under Windows, I can elect to use
OpenGL.
> >>
> >> If you change your mind, under OS/2, you *still* cannot use OpenGL.
> 
> >If I change my mind, I'll just reboot.
> 
> In otherwords, you must change your OS. I don't have to reboot. I can just
use
> it. Whenver, and without disrupting whatever it is I am doing.

Right.  And if I gave a rat's ass about hardware OpenGL, I'd view this
as very annoying.  However I don't.

> >> There is a difference between choosing not to use a thing, and being
unable to
> >> use a thing.
> 
> >Right.  I'd choose not to use such feature if I had it.
> 
> No. Since, when using OS/2, you cannot use it, you have no choice. That
would
> be like someone in prison saying "I am choosing to be here".

Not really.  Using OS/2 is not analogous to loosing your freedom.  It's
like using an old trusted powerful truck for a towing job instead of
using a shiny new sport ute with a CD player.  Sure it's nice to be able
to play CDs, but if you've got to tow a load up a hill, the CD player
isn't all that useful.

> >> >The real problem is not having a choice as to whether they are there or
> >> >not.  If I really wanted to use any of these features, I wouldn't be
> >> >trying to shoe-horn OS/2 onto my system.  I would choose the tool that
> >> >best suits my needs.
> >>
> >> That's w[h]ere we differ. I prefer to use something that increases my
options. I
> >> can then decide, "Hey, let me give that feature a try."
> 
> >Well, I laid all my options in front of me ahead of time, and decided
> >what was more important to me.  3D acceleration and other such things
> >didn't make the cut.
> 
> Ditto. I also decided that perhaps my needs would change and that I wanted
> something that was as "future-proof" as possible. After all, what is not
> important to one today, may be important tomorrow.

Right, but since technologies change far more often then my needs, I
personally feel no need to keep up with them.  When my needs change,
because I've held out so long, I'll wind up with better equipment than I
would have if I tried to buy a system thinking ahead.  In the computer
industry you can never tell which future technologies will take off
because it changes so quickly, so you get what suits your needs at the
time the purchase is made.
 
> >[some snippage]
> 
> >> >Yup, but life sucks like that.
> >>
> >> I disagree. I am hard pressed to think of examples of paying for features 
I
> >> cannot use as opposed to paying for features I just don't use.
> 
> >It's all part of the cost.  To get the good, you get the "bad" or
> >undesired as well.  If it's still worth it for you to get the good at
> >the given price you get it.  Otherwise you seek alternatives.  Surely
> >you don't desire <every> feature of <everything> you own.
> 
> Again, there is a large difference in paying for what you CANNOT use as
opposed
> to what you DO NOT use. When you CANNOT use, choice is removed and options
are
> limited. When you DON NOT use, choice is intact and options are available.

Again, if I wanted to use it, I'd reboot.  I don't, hence I don't.  The
only thing I didn't have a choice in is whether or not the piece of
hardware had the feature that I didn't want.

[snippage]

> >> >> The main issue is despite Scitech, OS/2 support for new video
techologies is
> >> >> still severely lacking.
> >>
> >> >In terms of 3D gingerbread, sure.
> >>
> >> It isn't gingerbread.
> 
> >It is to me, and probably many other OS/2 users.
> 
> But you don't make the cards, so even if that statement is true, your
opinion
> doesn't matter. If things like Direct3d support or say, TV-out(which I don't
> use, and don't have on my card), are included with the card, by definition
they
> are not gingerbread.

To me they are gingerbread.

> They are standard features. For example, the TnT2 costs
> less than the TnT2 Ultra. Why? The Ultra clocks higher. That higher clock
speed
> is gingerbread and it costs extra. But both support D3D. That is standard.

If I want it for the higher clock speed and nothing else, everything
else is extraneous.

> >> These are basic features of the card. Basic. And Scitech
> >> doesn't support them.
> 
> >It will.
> 
> First, you have no evidence of this, so that statement is both useless and
> worthless.

Umm... yes I do.  Deja News.

> Second, you contradict earlier statements. If 3d features are basic,
> but considered "gingerbread" and [un]important to many OS/2 users, why on
Earth
> would Scitech waste time implemented features that are consider useless by
so
> many?

Because their drivers aren't just OS/2 drivers.  They have the same
codebase for <all> of their drivers for <all> platforms.

> >> I find it difficult to be impressed with their software
> >> doesn't support the basic features of these new cards.
> 
> >They're making great strides, but it will take time.  They also
> >mentioned plans for universal sound drivers.
> 
> Great strides don't matter. Plans don't matter. We don't deal in vaporware
> remember? Only what we can use here and now. Here and now, such support
doesn't
> exist and universal sound drivers don't exist.

So if future developments don't matter, why try to "future-proof" your
system?
 
> If you need such items today, you are out of luck.

If you need these items today, then you need a different platform
today.  If you don't, then you don't.

> >> >> As for "minimum of effort" it seems to me that if it
> >> >> were that simple, they would have support for every card Windows
supports.
> >>
> >> >The simplicity comes in them porting their drivers to OS/2 from other
> >> >platforms, not in porting other existing drivers that they didn't
> >> >write.  It's in their interests as a company to support as many cards as
> >> >possible.  Now it's also easy for them to have these cards supported on
> >> >several platforms at the same time, including OS/2.
> >>
> >> Then explain the absence of so many newer cards.
> 
> >Specs have not been released to them as of yet or they are working on
> >the drivers currently.
> 
> No good. The Voodoo has been unchanged for almost 3 years,

And hasn't released their specs to Scitech in this time either.

> the TnT for more than a year. And STILL no support.

I think some forms of the TnT are supported by something in OS/2.  I
don't know because I don't own the card.

> What proof do you have that they are even working on such support?

It's in their own best interests to do so.  People have also made
requests on news.scitechsoft.com and gotten positive responses about
future planned drivers.

> >> Most people don't care if a 5
> >> year old Tseng card is supported.
> 
> >Most people that don't have such cards, sure.  Many people do have 1 or
> >2 year old cards which are supported, however.
> 
> And many people have 1 to 2 year old cards that are not.

Such as?

> >> Their Windows arsenal includes a program that
> >> gives videocards OpenGL support if the card doesn't have such support
natively.
> >>
> >> Does Scitech have OS/2 versions of such software?
> 
> >MGL has its own OpenGL implementation, as well as IBM's released
> >software OpenGL.
> 
> I'm afraid that wasn't what I asked.  Let's try again. This is from
Scitech's
> site
> "What is SciTech GLDirect?
> SciTech GLDirect allows you to run OpenGL-based games and other applications
> using your graphics card's DirectX 6.x drivers. SciTech GLDirect even
supports
> the latest applications that use OpenGL 1.2. Download the FREE trial version
> now!"
> 
> They've got a Windows version. Where's their OS/2 version? You claim that
> things are coming, that "They will." do things, but I failed to find OS/2
> implementations despite MGL and IBM.

From the MGL source code tree:

Directory of I:\gccdev\mgl\src\mgl

 7-07-99  10:50a      2481           0  regogl.c
        1 file(s)       2481 bytes used

Directory of I:\gccdev\mgl\src\mgl\drivers\opengl

 7-07-99  10:50a      9935           0  fsogl16.c
 7-07-99  10:50a      1863           0  fsogl16.h
 7-07-99  10:50a      8188           0  fsogl24.c
 7-07-99  10:50a      1863           0  fsogl24.h
 7-07-99  10:50a      8192           0  fsogl32.c
 7-07-99  10:50a      1863           0  fsogl32.h
 7-07-99  10:50a      8708           0  fsogl8.c
 7-07-99  10:50a      1851           0  fsogl8.h
        8 file(s)      42463 bytes used

These are all compiled into a library when you build the OS/2 version of
the MGL libraries.

> >> >Well.. the main problem is that not too many new APIs are coming out for
> >> >OS/2.  I think the primary reason for this is that programmers have yet
> >> >to exploit the current APIs.  The only new API recently released for
> >> >OS/2 has been MGL, and I myself can't even get the damn libraries to
> >> >build yet.  ;-)
> >>
> >> I think that there are other problems. For example, IBM has removed SOM
support
> >> from VisualAge.
> 
> >To reduce their porting efforts to less capable platforms.
> 
> Allow me to offer an alternative suggestion. Most developers don't care
about
> SOM. You are a developer. So am I. We both no that their is nothing inherit
in
> VisualAge that would force them to even attempt to port SOM to Windows, so
it
> is unlikely that their would be any effort.
> 
> SOM is useful only in the context of OS/2, and OS/2 is doing poorly.
Therefore,

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               07-Oct-99 19:43:08
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 04:17:06
Subj: (2/3) Re: Time to move on

> SOM is irrelevent. Conclusion-Drop SOM.

Right.  Drop SOM because other less capable platforms are more popular.

> >> Also, since there are clealy fewer programmers for OS/2 you
> >> have fewer people advancing program techniques, trying to learn OS/2,
wanting
> >> to show OS/2 programming tricks, in addition to the fact that OS/2's API
isn't
> >> advancing.
> 
> >True, but this is less true today than it used to be last year.
> 
> Really? How do you figure? Unless you can offer an alternative, I consider 
> EDM/2 the best OS/2 programming site.
> Certainly, the most well known and definitely a barometer. Given its current
> state and the fact that IBM has stopped supporting what may be its most
> advanced OS/2 software, SOM, and has dropped it from its premiere OS/2
> development tool, I fail to see how "this is less true today than..."

Read Warpcast and tell me that nothing has happened on the OS/2
development front.  Every 3 days or so, there a new version of
such-and-such being released, ported, or updated.  That's my barometer.

> >> Makes for a bleak programming experience.
> 
> >Well, it takes a certain "frontiersman" feel to it.  ;-)
> 
> I suppose. I guess that I would rather make good software that people enjoy
> using, than showing my stones in masochistic programming displays.<grin>

You can do both in OS/2.

> >> True. But look at why the products vanished. No demand. I reviewed
Intercom
> >> 3.16. This was an OS/2 only internet phone program. When it was under
> >> development, it advance quickly, now, because the market has dried up,
it's
> >> gone.
> >> The problems is that, for the most part, things are not changing under
OS/2.
> >> Back in late 95, things were happening with OS/2. Magazines could write
> >> articles, e-zines were plentiful, and there was plenty to write about.
This is
> >> no longer the case.
> 
> >It has had a long dead period where people were using it, but no big
> >contributions occurred.  That is no longer the case however.  Whether or
> >not the initial damage done was enough to finish it off remains to be
> >seen, but it has had a late rally of sorts.
> 
> The thing came out *monthly* and I read it *monthly*. What long dead
periods?

I'm referring to the OS/2 scene in general.

> >> >Neither of us know what people want to play, but with 1700+ games,
> >> >they've got a good variety to choose from.  I'd think many people could
> >> >find something that would amuse them in such a list.
> >>
> >> I can check best-seller list and easily find what people want to play.
I'll be
> >> willing to wager that none of those 1700 games are on those lists.
> 
> >Best seller lists don't list arcade games.  That doesn't mean people
> >don't play them.
> 
> Well, if neither you nor I have any means available to use to properly
quantify
> who is playing what, it seems that we've deadlocked on this point.

Agreed.  [might as well end on a decisive note]  ;-)

> >> >So let's assume that a generous 10% of the people to visit the site have
> >> >no interest in it whatsoever and happened upon it by sheer accident.
> >> >The current hit count is approaching 5000, so 4500 hits were from
> >> >legitimate interest.
> >>
> >> But did those translate to 4500 downloads?
> 
> >Likely not, but I still uphold that it represents a lot of interest for
> >such a small niche.
> 
> Okay,but barring even soft numbers, seems to me that it only represents 4500
> hits.

Since the end of August, right.

> >> >> Indeed. I feel, however, that OS/2 doesn't provide better access to
the
> >> >> technologies of today, be they hardware or software. Simply put,
Windows runs
> >> >> more applications and supports more current hardware.
> >>
> >> >For your use, you're probably right.  For my use, I'm right.
> >>
> >> Well, what do you software do you run that doesn't have a Window
equivalent?
> 
> >I don't care because I don't want windoze equivalents of software since
> >it's not my chosen platform.  I know one piece of software I can't get
> >on windoze, however:  the WPS.
> 
> Indeed. I agree. In fact, one of the reasons I decided to try WinNT was
because
> when some asked me why I used OS/2, the only compelling reason I could give
was
> the WPS. It proved easy to get along without.

I honestly gave NT a try (both 3.5 and 4.0) several times, but felt like
I was fighting my own machine for everything I wanted to do.  It wasn't
a tool helping me, it was just getting in the way of my work.  YMMV.

> >> What hardware do you run under OS/2 that Windows doesn't support?
> 
> >Again, I don't care.  It's not what windoze doesn't support.  It's how
> >well it is utilized.  I'd take OS/2's memory usage, multitasking, and
> >memory management over windoze 3D acceleration, etc. any day.
> 
> I used OS/2 Warp 4 and WinNT 4 on the same box. I disagree that it used more
> memory. Since some OS/2 applications would "disobey" the 1/10th and hold the
> SIQ for a few seconds, and NT didn't do this, and both allowed me to do
normal
> things like downloading, printing, etc, I give NT the better multitasking.
> Memory management is definitely better in OS/2. Stability, certainly for me,
> was hands down NT and ditto for robustness. Ditto for task-killing,
software,
> and hardware support. And for all this, I STILL get 3d acceleration.
> 
> I'll take Windows any day.

YMMV.

> >> >If I needed them fixed, I'd need IBM to fix them.  However my system was
> >> >fully functional and usable without such fixes.
> >>
> >> If your system was fully functional and usable why did you install any
> >> fixpacks.
> 
> >Why do you install NT service packs?  Was your system really lacking
> >anything before?  The fixpacks have enhanced the environment and made
> >things work better, but they were far from unworkable before.
> 
> I installed SP3 because when I first tried NT, SP3 was declared a necessity
> based on my research. I installed SP4 for Y2k, switch to Win2k, but I keep
an
> NT 4 maint. partition with SP5 for NTFS5 read/write capability.
> 
> Unworkable? No. Nor did I claim such. I did claim that you are still
dependent
> on IBM and I on MS.

For the last time:  If I don't touch another piece of hardware or change
my system at all, how am I dependent on IBM?  Explain that to me.

> >> I assume that number 12 wasn't the first.
> 
> >If it was then it would have been number 1.  ;-P
> 
> I'm not talking about fixpacks. I mean I assumet that Fixpack 12 wasn't the
> first one you installed.
> 
> >> >Sure.  I'm reliant on the fixes that make my system work today.  I'm not
> >> >reliant on any further fixes at this time, however.
> >>
> >> Even so, you still reliant on them, which was my point.
> 
> >I don't need any new fixes to keep my current system humming along
> >smoothly.  That's the bottom line.
> 
> You consider a system needing workarounds smooth? I don't. Another
difference,
> I guess.

Every system needs some workarounds.  Nothing is perfect.  With
workarounds like, "Don't jump up and down on your left foot while
whistling the national anthem backwards and double clicking this icon
while pressing CTRL-ALT-DEL," I'd say my system is operating smoothly. 
In other words, it takes a good deal of effort for me to make any
problems occur.

[snip]

> >> >> No, it doesn't. If two people purchase the same videocard for the same 
price,
> >> >> even if one person is expecting less, he is getting less than he paid
for.
> >>
> >> >If he assigns any value to these features, then you are right.  If he
> >> >does not then he is indifferent to it and will get the best alternative
> >> >that suits his needs, regardless of how it is packaged.
> >>
> >> I am right, regardless.
> 
> >Regardless of how wrong you are?  ;-P
> 
> If only that were so. Believe me, I wish one of you could prove me wrong.
:-)
> 
> >> Back to the G400. Let's say I want OpenGL. You don't.
> >> That feature is valuble to me, worthless to you, YET, we still pay the
same
> >> price. You still get less value because you paid the same.
> 
> >If I want the other features of the G400, such as more on-board RAM,
> >better performance, and higher refresh rates, I have no problem paying a
> >"premium" for these features.  If another card offers the same features
> >minus OpenGL, and if it's cheaper, I'll buy it.  We all pay for more
> >than we use in nearly all areas of life.
> 
> But not for what we CANNOT use. That is the point.

There's nothing I cannot use if I keep an open mind to dumping OS/2 and
picking the right tool for the right job.  So far nothing has pushed me
to the point of saying it was worth giving up what I already have to
have these "other" features.
 
> >> Let's say neither of us care about OpenGL. Well, we both got screwed. But 
we
> >> both changed our minds. Well, all of a sudden, I'm happy about the money
spent,
> >> but you are still screwed because you picked OS/2?
> >>
> >> What were you thinking? :-)
> 
> >If I changed my mind, I'd just reboot.  My hard drive is not etched in
> >stone.
> 
> And if I changed mine, I would just use it. I believe my actions would be
more
> efficient and less disruptive.

Right, but there's no trade-off for you.  It's a neutral->win
situation.  For me it would be a loss to change.  What I would be giving
up (in my opinion) would far outweigh what I would be getting.

> >> >> But it does show that you are dependent on IBM, despite your statement 
to the
> >> >> contrary.
> >>
> >> >So you've never had to work around a problem in Winxx that wasn't
> >> >debilitating?  Do you <rely> on Microsoft to fix these problems or do
> >> >you just avoid the known problems and otherwise continue computing as
> >> >you normally do?
> >>
> >> We both rely on the makers of the OS for fixes, only I admit it. A
workaround
> >> is not a fix.
> 
> >Currently, there's nothing I can't do with OS/2 that it's supposed to be
> >able to do.  Hence, I don't need any further fixes to keep my current
> >system running.
> 
> I never claimed you did. I did claim that you are reliant on IBM for fixes.
You
> may or may not need them, but to get time, you look to IBM.

When I get them, I get them from IBM.  Right.  Umm... so what?

Do I rely on IBM?  Only when I need another Fixpack.  Do I need another
fixpack?  No.

> >> >> >So you have switched to OS/2?  I finally got through to you!  ;-)
> >> >>
> >> >> Sorry, but that would be going backwards. I wouldn't do that.
> >>
> >> >Better look at which way your saddle is facing Mr. DoRight.  ;-)
> >>
> >> It is safely facing foward.
> 
> >Then you'd better turn yourself around.
> 
> Whatever for? That would only give me a view of OS/2.

Better than staring at the horse's ass like you are now.  ;-)

> >> >> >Where did I imply that "people use Windows because it is cool", etc.?
> >> >> >My point was that people can have the same opinion without
necessarily
> >> >> >being right.
> >> >>
> >> >> My point is that have you consider that all those people are right adn 
that you
> >> >> are mistaken?
> >>
> >> >Sure I have.  They might be right for themselves, but for me, they're
> >> >dead wrong.
> >>
> >> Trust them. Remove the "might." They are right for themselves.
> 
> >My mother isn't.  Many others are clueless too.  By the same token, many
> >are also right for themselves.
> 
> And many know what their needs are. For some, it is a P3-450 that sends
email,
> but can grow if their needs change and is safely under warranty, than
someone's
> hand-me-down 486 that can play MP3s or scan the pictures of their
grandchildren
> in a timely manner.

Ok, so where is this going?

If the 486 was a free hand-me-down, what cost was it to use it?  It was
used for some time, while technology continued to improve and by the
time it is outgrown, a better system can ultimately be purchased,
probably for less money.  This system will invariably be better than the
one that could have been purchased at the time the 486 was put back into
service.  You're always better off meeting your present needs in the
computer industry.

> >> >"Inability to make a profit" -- is this not also similar to "potential
> >> >profitability"?  Let's not play word games.
> >>
> >> They are not similar. RealNetworks lost money for years. A few months
ago, they
> >> problem even. They are now expect to make a profit. People invested in
> >> RealNetworks because they saw a potential for profit.
> >>
> >> This is not the same as an inability to make a profit.
> 
> >Where's this going David?  My point was that the reason OS/2 is doing so
> >poorly is that it likely hasn't has enough return to justify much
> >further expenditure on it.  If it were a superior product or an inferior
> >one, if it turned a profit, it would be promoted and supported to this
> >very day.
> 
> I wasn't going anywhere. I just wanted to clarify that "Inability to make a
> profit" and ""potential profitability" were not word games.
> 
> Well, let's move on... :-)

Ok.

> >> >> >HPFS is quite immune to DOS defraggers.  What did you mean?
> >> >>
> >> >> That NTFS gives you equal immunity and more ability.
> >>
> >> >And was designed how many years later?  Don't compare DOS 5.0 to Win95.
> >> >It's just as silly.
> >>
> >> There's nothing stopping IBM from improving HPFS.
> 
> >They have with HPFS386.  But M$ is "stopping" that.  That's why they've
> >moved on to JFS.
> 
> But neither were available to OS/2 client, were they? And there are probably
> more clients than servers. NTFS is available to all versions of NT. Heck,
even
> the workstation versions support 2 CPUs out of the box.

And the client version of NT is quite a bit more expensive than client
versions of OS/2.

> >> NS is adding quotas and encryption, for example to NTFS.
> 
> >Quotas are nice, but encryption is a bloody waste IMHO.  I have no idea
> >if JFS supports either of these, but I believe quotas are supported.
> 
> Sure. You can search DejaNews and find people saying that journaling is a
waste
> of time, but most changed with JFS was announced. And IMHO, any feature that
> keeps my data secure is a good one.

Personally I'd prefer not to take a speed hit for the sake of
undoubtedly paltry encryption.  Also, I imagine it would make file
recovery quite a bit more difficult.

> >> >There's an OS/2 native equivalent of just about everything.  What people
> >> >are stuck on is due to their habits and familiarity, not due to
> >> >inability of the platform.  No one <has to> rely on WinOS/2 if they

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               07-Oct-99 19:43:08
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 04:17:06
Subj: (3/3) Re: Time to move on

> >> >don't want to.  I'm living proof.
> >>
> >> Wrong. I use Quicken for many reasons, including Checkfree support. Which 
OS/2
> >> equivalent has Checkfree support?
> 
> >That depends.  What the hell is Checkfree support?  I'm not crying over
> >lack of that.
> 
> It allows one to pay checks electronical from ones computer using a
checkfree
> compliant program, like Quicken. Great feature, efficient, saves on stamps,
> delievers electronically or via a paper check depending on need, and can be
set
> up on-demand of automatically as I see fit. You may not need it, but quite a
> few of your fellows do.

Do they need it or want it?  Last time I looked, my gas company, etc.
still accepted physical checks.

> >>Which OS/2 equivalent gives you read/write protection for zipdisk?
> 
> >IOMEGA is releasing new drivers.
> 
> Indeed. The Windows ones now allow NT to assign drive letters and brings NT
up
> to the level of 95/98 support. On the other hand, the last time OS/2 drivers
> came out was last July and they still lack the features I mentioned, not to
> mention the new ones I just listed.

Zip disks in OS/2 can be formatted HPFS and can have protection bits
associated with the filesystem.  Drive letters can be reserved in OS/2
to move the Zip drive wherever you want it.

> >> Or parallel-port scanner support?
> 
> >Does SANE support such things?  I have no idea.
> 
> No.

Then the alternative is to get a faster performing SCSI scanner.

> >> Palmpilot syncing with PIMs?
> 
> >There's Java apps for that.
> 
> Which do not work with any PIMs, including the WordPro one for OS/2.

Wouldn't know.  I'm not important enough to have a Palmpilot.  ;-P

> >> Animated Gifs?
> 
> >Are you joking?
> 
> For people making webpages, this is no joking matter. This is what some do
for
> a living.

What kind of version do you want, PM, command line, or X11?  Take your
pick.  I prefer the command line one myself.

> >> CD rippers ala' RealJukebox or Musicmatch?
> 
> >There's at least one.  Don't know what it is because I don't care, but
> >I've heard of one.
> 
> There are NONE like RealJukebox or Musicmatch. Unless I've missed that one,
> which is possible.

Wouldn't know.  I don't pay too much attention to things I don't care
about.  I remember hearing something mentioned.

> >> Purify?  Boundchecker?
> 
> >So we can write sloppy code?
> 
> So you can deliver a better product or do you wish to have me believe that
your
> code is perfect. It is not and cannot be.

There are simple methods that can be employed to detect and insure
against memory leaks.  Memory overwrites are taken care of quite well
with GPFs.

> >> OpenGL?
> 
> >What about it?
> 
> Hardware support.

On the way.  Software support is already there.

> >> Sorry, but it is definitely the inability of the platform.
> 
> >>Hey... it's not for everyone.  I never said it was.
> 
> Then whom, by george, is it for?

People who aren't name David McCoy, among others.

> Today. Even its Java support is behind. 

Which features are OS/2 users forced to live without in their Java
implementation?  My current version of Java is implemented well enough
to support the Java versions of ICQ, AIM, and Corel Office.  What am I
giving up by not having the latest version?

> You use it. What for?

Internet browsing, development, word processing, games, communicating,
...

I like keeping my system running 24/7 so I can access it from work,
throw some files back and forth, host a web page, etc., while it's
crackin away at RC5 keys (5% faster than NT does ;-P).  Everything
except the web server and RC5 client are available right out of the box
with Warp 4 client:  telnetd, ftpd, sendmail, rshd, ...

[snip]

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: forgitaboutit@fake.com                            07-Oct-99 20:18:12
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 04:17:06
Subj: Re: Opera for OS/2 makes progress

From: David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com>

In article <37fd171b@oit.umass.edu>, malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu says...
>David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> wrote:
>: In article <37fc2b24@oit.umass.edu>, malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu says...
>:>Dispite the naysayers, Opera for OS/2 is making progress it would seem.  
>:>We've moved up two points on the scale!  We still have a long ways to go, 
>:>but I'm glad things are looking up.
>:>
>:>http://www.opera.com/alt_os.html
>:>
>:>-Jason
>:>
>
>: Great! Two points and what almost two years later, OS/2 is behind the Psion 
and 
>: BeOS.
>
>I'm sorry Dave, you are wrong.  The current Opera for OS/2 project is 
>only a couple months old.  Perhaps you should find a newsgroup where 
>you'd me more useful?
>
>-Jason
>

Don't be sorry. This is what, the third group trying to port this thing.
Either 
your are ignorant or delusional.

Perhaps you need to study your history.

-- 
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: hunters@thunder.indstate.edu                      08-Oct-99 00:56:04
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 04:17:06
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: hunters@thunder.indstate.edu

In article <37FD0958.49737DB@NOSPAMus.ibm.com>,
  "Jeffrey S. Kobal" <jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com> wrote:

> I have provided the definitions I'm using for "port" and "late" quite
> clearly, whereas you have not.  I have been stating facts and
> describing situations, answering each of your questions directly.
> How has any of that not been "rational discourse"?  Or perhaps I
> have a different definition of "rational" as well?

Yep, he does. For Dave, in order to be rational you must agree with
him. Think about this: Dave stopped using OS/2 just about 2 years ago,
and yet here he is, yammering away in the OS/2 groups. Ironically
enough Dave's biggest beef while using OS/2 (He went by the moniker
John Ominor then, FYI.) was... Windows users hanging around the OS/2
newsgroups!! Go figure, eh?

--
-Steven Hunter               *OS/2 Warp 4 * |Warpstock '99 | Oct 16-17|
hunters@thunder.indstate.edu *AMD K6-2 400* |       Atlanta GA        |


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: forgitaboutit@fake.com                            07-Oct-99 23:21:01
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 04:17:06
Subj: Re: Opera for OS/2 makes progress

From: David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com>

In article <7tj93l$fu0$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, hunters@thunder.indstate.edu says...
>In article <MPG.1266cdee75e363a4989a57@news1.mnsinc.com>,
>  David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> wrote:
>
>> Great! Two points and what almost two years later, OS/2 is behind the
>> Psion and BeOS.
>
>Geeze Dave, you must really get off on this shit, huh?
>
>--
>-Steven Hunter               *OS/2 Warp 4 * |Warpstock '99 | Oct 16-17|
>hunters@thunder.indstate.edu *AMD K6-2 400* |       Atlanta GA        |
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
>

Geez, Steven, can't you express yourself in any other way or has OS/2 totally 
rotted your brain?

-- 
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: skidmarx@att.net                                  07-Oct-99 23:38:24
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 04:17:06
Subj: Re: OS/2 and Large Disks

From: "Gregory L. Marx" <skidmarx@att.net>


Mike Ruskai wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 07 Oct 1999 23:27:34 GMT, Mitch Small wrote:
> 
> >I both want to and need to put OS/2 back on my system. I need to do it
> >to retreive some files I've archived using an OS/2 back up program. As
> >with any other software, it may only be read by itself.
> >
> >I want to go back, because after a year of NT exclusivley, I find I
> >still can't find a decent graphics display program or e-mail program
> >that I'm really happy with.
> >
> >My problem is this: I can't get the install program to properly
> >recognize my hard drives. All my drives are over 4 Gig. Even after
> >creating a small partition, the remaining disk space is shown
> >incorrectly. Can anyone help?
> >
> >I've been using Warp 4 with the factory install disks and trying to
> >install on a Pentium 200 system.
> 
> ftp://ftp.software.ibm.com/ps/products/os2/os2ddpak/idedasd.exe
> 
> The instructions inside tell you how to modify your boot diskettes (a
> backup copy of them, of course).
> 
>  - Mike
> 
> Remove 'spambegone' to send e-mail.

Mike,

I've done this myself and I STILL can't get Warp to see the drive.

It's weird:

~ Boot with the install disk ...
~ Replace with Disk One when prompted ...
~ After a few seconds the floppy drive flips out making a strange
noise.  Like it's constantly being hit with a data access request. But
it still prompts for the second disk ...
~ As soon as I press enter on the second disk a constant stream of text
paints up the screen until it finally stops with a error message of
"OS/2 is unable to operate your hard disk or your floppy disk ..."

The really strange thing is I can boot with the ORIGINAL floppy disks
and it follows thru as expected. Of course, the drive parameters are all
wrong when I manually run FDISK so I can't add a bootmanager partition. 
It's a 13gig Maxtor drive.  But because it does boot up and ask for the
cdrom I figure it must be the ide driver that is causing the problem.

I've tried the /w switch to no affect ...
I'm at a loss on what to do next :=(

Config as follows:

FIC VA-503+ motherboard w/AMD K62-400 cpu and 64 megs SIMM memory.
Drive setup:
Master 1 ~ 13gig Maxtor set with 4gig NT boot NTFS primary partition.
8gig NTFS extended partition. 10meg free for OS/2 BM.
Second 1 ~ 2gig unpartitioned Seagate I want to install Warp onto.
Master 2 ~ Memorex CD-RW IDE drive
Second 2 ~ 2.5gig HPFS Fujitsu drive - single partition.

Any ideas, please email ...

Gregory L. Marx
skidmarx@att.net

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: AT&T WorldNet Services (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     07-Oct-99 21:40:06
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 04:17:06
Subj: Re: Opera for OS/2 makes progress

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


"David H. McCoy" wrote:

> In article <7tj93l$fu0$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, hunters@thunder.indstate.edu
says...
> >In article <MPG.1266cdee75e363a4989a57@news1.mnsinc.com>,
> >  David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Great! Two points and what almost two years later, OS/2 is behind the
> >> Psion and BeOS.
> >
> >Geeze Dave, you must really get off on this shit, huh?
> >
> >--
> >-Steven Hunter               *OS/2 Warp 4 * |Warpstock '99 | Oct 16-17|
> >hunters@thunder.indstate.edu *AMD K6-2 400* |       Atlanta GA        |
> >
> >
> >Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> >Before you buy.
> >
>
> Geez, Steven, can't you express yourself in any other way or has OS/2
totally
> rotted your brain?

Yeah his brain is rotten which is why you're on COOA arguing over Opera for
OS/2.





--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     07-Oct-99 21:53:13
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 04:17:06
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Kim Cheung wrote:

> On 7 Oct 1999 15:04:25 GMT, pcguido@attglobal.net wrote:
>
> >In <LoEFmgJJ9ecw-pn2-xFxTZJ7uttYL@agave.bitranch.com>, esther@bitranch.com
(Esther Schindler) writes:
> >|On Sun, 3 Oct 1999 18:53:24, pcguido@attglobal.net wrote:
> >|
> >|| Is Jeff Glatt right, you would all band together to beat a $100/yr fee?
> >|| And IBM is supposed to pay for Netscape & Java support for OS/2 how?
> >|
> >|Taking a valid discount for a product one values is part of the
> >|American way of life. Or do you typically spend more than you need to?
> >|
> >|--Esther
> >
> >Think bigger, Esther. Maybe you could get _every_ OS/2 user to join up
> >with you, eh? Then IBM could save time by just sending _you_ the updates!
> >
> >I'll take any discount validly obtained; and, it's my opinion that your
> >little plan is not such a discount. Why don't you run that idea by your
> >contacts at IBM and then let us know what you've discovered...
> >
>
> The focus is not necessarily the cost factor.   It should be focused in
> obtaining an equivalent level of survice from IBM.    Certain people at IBM
> has a funny way of thinking about the world: if you don't work for a global
> 50 company, in their little mind, you shouldn't be using OS/2 in the first
> place and so why would you need this and that.   So, as time go along, they
> will most likely fight you every inch of the way to say: the individual
> subscriber shouldn't have this, shouldn't have that and so forth.

I'd love to see these same IBM individuals get togehter with the briantrust at 
MS and AT&T to form a new
company dedicated to serving big companies.  They can fly around the world to
have visiopns and smooze.
They'll decide what is and isn't correct.

There are workers and technologists at IBM who are driving LINUX with
dedicated personnel (F.T.E.).  That
community wil not face the problems OS/2 supporters faced since IBM is not in
control.  They can eventualy
put the other group out of business.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: hunters@thunder.indstate.edu                      08-Oct-99 05:34:23
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 04:17:06
Subj: Re: Opera for OS/2 makes progress

From: hunters@thunder.indstate.edu

In article <MPG.12672d2b2755a367989a5d@news1.mnsinc.com>,
  David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> wrote:

> Geez, Steven, can't you express yourself in any other way or has OS/2
> totally rotted your brain?

Well golly, Dave, can't you get off the damn OS/2 groups, or has NT
ruined your news server?

--
-Steven Hunter               *OS/2 Warp 4 * |Warpstock '99 | Oct 16-17|
hunters@thunder.indstate.edu *AMD K6-2 400* |       Atlanta GA        |


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu                      08-Oct-99 01:59:07
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 04:17:06
Subj: Re: Opera for OS/2 makes progress

From: Jason <malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu>

David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> wrote:
: In article <37fd171b@oit.umass.edu>, malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu says...
:>David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> wrote:
:>: In article <37fc2b24@oit.umass.edu>, malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu
says...
:>:>Dispite the naysayers, Opera for OS/2 is making progress it would seem.  
:>:>We've moved up two points on the scale!  We still have a long ways to go, 
:>:>but I'm glad things are looking up.
:>:>
:>:>http://www.opera.com/alt_os.html
:>:>
:>:>-Jason
:>:>
:>
:>: Great! Two points and what almost two years later, OS/2 is behind the
Psion and 
:>: BeOS.
:>
:>I'm sorry Dave, you are wrong.  The current Opera for OS/2 project is 
:>only a couple months old.  Perhaps you should find a newsgroup where 
:>you'd me more useful?
:>
:>-Jason
:>

: Don't be sorry. This is what, the third group trying to port this thing.
Either 
: your are ignorant or delusional.

: Perhaps you need to study your history.

What the *bleep* are you talking about?  Please name three groups who tried 
to port Opera to OS/2.  Then we can see who is ignorant and delusional.  

Perhaps you need to find something better to do then making a fool of 
yourself in this group, like feeding starving children.

-Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: horseman@ibm.net                                  07-Oct-99 18:05:18
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 05:11:22
Subj: Re: FP12:  A Piece Of Cake!

From: Tony Wright <horseman@ibm.net>

Bill wrote:

> On 3 Oct 1999 18:49:50 GMT, pcguido@attglobal.net wrote:
>
> >In <37F67653.9344D6EE@adan.kingston.net>, "Mark L. Kahnt"
<kahnt@adan.kingston.net> writes:
> >|Jim Stuyck wrote:
> >||
> >|| "Mark L. Kahnt" wrote:
> >||
> >|| > Frank McKenney wrote:
> >|| > >
> >|| > > In <37F4306B.4315DA13@adan.kingston.net>, "Mark L. Kahnt"
<kahnt@adan.kingston.net> writes:
> >|| > > >Frank McKenney wrote:
> >|| >
> >|| > [***SNIP!!!***]
> >|| >
> >|| > >
> >|| > > Well, now that you mention it...
> >|| > >
> >|| > > Back in the mid-70s a professor at Princeton developed a method for
> >|| > > reproducing semi-photograph-quality graphic output from a 1403 line
> >|| > > printer (for the younger readers, that's one of those heavy-duty
boxes
> >|| > > attached to an IBM mainframe that will, on occasion, suck up and
spit
> >|| > > out a full box of 14"-wide paper in seconds (;-)).
> >
> >Oh Yeah! Wasn't that a hoot to see & hear? When the little brushes that
> >read the carriage control tape would get too dirty... whoosh! If you
> >didn't have a stacker, the paper would stand up off the top of the
> >printer and go straight across the room.
> >
> >I was actually lucky enough to see this happen twice. Thanks for the
> >memory! :)
> >

Almost as fascinating as raising the acoustic hood and watching it
disgorge a whole box of fanfold while it's chain hammers accurately
rendered a very musical "Anchors Away" or "Rule Brittania" from the
deck of cards you had diligently spent hours punching just to amuse the
kids on IBM's Open Day!
"Ooo Daddy I didn't know those big 'fings could play music"?

> I prefer the stories from the card days of 2nd and 3rd shift
> operators lifting floor panels, looking for their beer stash,
> and dropping the panel on a fire sensor and dumping the halon.
> And being buried under a cards.

You mean just the most geriatric deaf Ops  persons that could'nt get to
the door in time within the 30sec exit delay?
Personally I preferred my lager cooled by taping it inside the lagging
on the CW intake on the Frame 15 CDU.......also  nice and safe for
keeping my floor tile "sucker" and EPO reset key that otherwise seemed
to get "borrowed"!  <g>

> Bill

 --
Rgds Tony W   Email: horseman@ibm.net

"humanum est errare: To err is human
.... and to fail is to be a Project Manager...
...but to foul things up completely needs a computer!"


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Equi-Tek CompCon (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: wayne@SPAM.tkb.att.ne.jp                          08-Oct-99 15:23:07
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 05:11:22
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: "Wayne Bickell" <wayne@SPAM.tkb.att.ne.jp>

Sorry, Kim. Sometimes these low-life trollers with nothing better to do
than to put down a group of people who choose to do things their own
way get my goat. I was looking for something stronger :-)

Cheers

Wayne


On 04 Oct 1999 19:48:02 PDT, Kim Cheung wrote:

:>On Tue, 05 Oct 1999 09:58:23 +0800, Wayne Bickell wrote:
:>
:>>Fuck off
:>
:>That's not exactly a response you would expect from an "average" OS/2
:>neither.
:>
:>
:>

******************************************************
Wayne Bickell
Tokyo, Japan
wayne@tkb.att.ne.jp
******************************************************
           Posted with PMINews 2 for OS/2
  Running on OS/2 Warp 4 (UK)  + FixPak 9
******************************************************



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: AT&T Internet Service (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: theqcc@hotmail.com                                08-Oct-99 08:59:11
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 05:11:22
Subj: Re: Opera for OS/2 makes progress

From: "Quake Cheaters Clan" <theqcc@hotmail.com>

Hehehe

Nice one David

Overdose on OS/2 leads to paranoia, dillusions and feelings of false
euphoria...

the
QCC

David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.12672d2b2755a367989a5d@news1.mnsinc.com...
> In article <7tj93l$fu0$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, hunters@thunder.indstate.edu
says...
> >In article <MPG.1266cdee75e363a4989a57@news1.mnsinc.com>,
> >  David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Great! Two points and what almost two years later, OS/2 is behind the
> >> Psion and BeOS.
> >
> >Geeze Dave, you must really get off on this shit, huh?
> >
> >--
> >-Steven Hunter               *OS/2 Warp 4 * |Warpstock '99 | Oct 16-17|
> >hunters@thunder.indstate.edu *AMD K6-2 400* |       Atlanta GA        |
> >
> >
> >Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> >Before you buy.
> >
>
> Geez, Steven, can't you express yourself in any other way or has OS/2
totally
> rotted your brain?
>
> --
> ---------------------------------------
> David H. McCoy
> dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
> ---------------------------------------


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Customer of Planet Online (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: theqcc@hotmail.com                                08-Oct-99 09:17:15
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 11:55:23
Subj: There is a future for OS/2

From: "Quake Cheaters Clan" <theqcc@hotmail.com>

Yeah,

A future for OS/2.

At the moment there is an appetite for all things old and retro in style...
silver stereos a'la 1970's.... 60's & 70's pop groups... even the original
star trek series is going to get a make over....

So, say in 20 years time, in the same manner as people want to emulate a
TRS80, maybe OS/2 will fill someones spare space in their storage medium..
.
OS/2 is a curiosity - an interesting albiet brief peek into a time when
there were fewer alternatives than there are now.

Because as a curiosity OS/2 will win and triumph... yes OS/2 will be STRONG
and WILL BREAKTHROUGH these days of darkness....yay, the hour cometh when
OS/2 will be reborn..<rant rant rant> (turned into Esther then)

OS/2 - where did you want to go yesterday?


the
QCC


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Customer of Planet Online (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: davegemini@aol.com                                08-Oct-99 10:09:20
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 11:55:23
Subj: Re: IBM is NOT quadzillion times larger than MS

From: davegemini@aol.com (David Frank)

In article <37F89CF6.C73E2595@dgraph.com>, Kris Kadela <kris@dgraph.com>
writes:

> >
>> >Compare them by either profit margin, or by revenue per employee.  Those
>are
>> >probably more relevant to how well a company is doing.
>> 
>> Only if you're goal is cooking books.
>> 
>> Percentages mean nothing without an actual value.  IBM makes more profit
>> in one quarter than Microsoft does in the entire year.  Comparing that
>> profit to the gross, or dividing it by the number of employees, isn't even
>> interesting, much less relevant.
>>

Methinks IBM'ers here need to wake up and smell the coffee,  
below clip from CNET news this morning, points out how IBM is facing yet
another re-trenchment in PC market.

<<
 In its last fiscal year, the company lost close to a billion dollars because
of personal computers sales. As with other major PC makers, IBM is actually
selling more PCs than ever before, but netting much lower returns because of
price cuts. 

The consumer group is responsible for the Aptiva home PC line. Under the
reorganization, the group will become part of IBM's Personal Systems Group and
be known by the personal name "individual segment," sources said. 

It is uncertain whether layoffs will occur, but some sources termed them
inevitable. IBM could not be reached for comment. 

Analysts and observers have debated the question whether IBM will eventually
exit the PC market.
>>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: AOL http://www.aol.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: windowssucks@hotmail.com                          08-Oct-99 12:05:10
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 11:55:24
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: "The MicroSoft Down Da Drain Corp." <windowssucks@hotmail.com>

On Fri, 8 Oct 1999 09:17:30 +0100, Quake Cheaters Clan wrote:

>
>OS/2 - where did you want to go yesterday?

Where are you today? I went the right way ;-)



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The MicroSoft Down Da Drain Corp. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  08-Oct-99 06:53:14
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 11:55:24
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

> >OS/2 - where did you want to go yesterday?
>
> Where are you today? I went the right way ;-)

You mean: you went the right way *for you.*  I certainly was glad to leave
OS/2.  Everybody's needs are different, doesn't it make sense that everyone
chooses from among a panoply of OSs?



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: windowssucks@hotmail.com                          08-Oct-99 13:53:29
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 11:55:24
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: "The MicroSoft Down Da Drain Corp." <windowssucks@hotmail.com>

On Fri, 8 Oct 1999 06:53:28 -0400, Joe Malloy wrote:

>> >OS/2 - where did you want to go yesterday?
>>
>> Where are you today? I went the right way ;-)
>
>You mean: you went the right way *for you.*  I certainly was glad to leave
>OS/2.  Everybody's needs are different, doesn't it make sense that everyone
>chooses from among a panoply of OSs?

Sure, let's turn this into a *serious* discussion... You're right of course
;-)

Oh, and yes, i do boot into Win9x for Need For Speed IV (the game that is)


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The MicroSoft Down Da Drain Corp. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: wsonna@ibm.net                                    08-Oct-99 12:11:18
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 11:55:24
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: wsonna@ibm.net (William Sonna)

On Thu, 7 Oct 1999 23:43:16, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:

[big snip]

> > >> >There's an OS/2 native equivalent of just about everything.  What
people
> > >> >are stuck on is due to their habits and familiarity, not due to
> > >> >inability of the platform.  No one <has to> rely on WinOS/2 if they
> > >> >don't want to.  I'm living proof.
> > >>
> > >> Wrong. I use Quicken for many reasons, including Checkfree support.
Which OS/2
> > >> equivalent has Checkfree support?
> > 
> > >That depends.  What the hell is Checkfree support?  I'm not crying over
> > >lack of that.
> > 
> > It allows one to pay checks electronical from ones computer using a
checkfree
> > compliant program, like Quicken. Great feature, efficient, saves on
stamps,
> > delievers electronically or via a paper check depending on need, and can
be set
> > up on-demand of automatically as I see fit. You may not need it, but quite 
a
> > few of your fellows do.
> 
> Do they need it or want it?  Last time I looked, my gas company, etc.
> still accepted physical checks.
> 

They also accept automatic debits from your checking account, which is
hands-down the most convenient and least expensive way to pay - and 
handled quite well by Quicken and most such programs.

He neglects to mention that check-free ain't free, and in my 
experience its cheaper to just use stamps.

But if you've really got to have check-free, InCharge (which is 
superior to Quicken for my needs, and I've used both) comes in both 
Windows and OS/2 versions and supports check-free.  

But of course McCoy wouldn't know that.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@ifa.hawaii.edu                     08-Oct-99 13:17:04
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 11:55:24
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: tholenAntiSpam@ifa.hawaii.edu

Joe Malloy writes:

> I certainly was glad to leave OS/2.

You haven't left the OS/2 newsgroups, obviously.  Interesting, no?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: esther@bitranch.com                               08-Oct-99 14:05:24
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 15:24:09
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler)

Quake,

You didn't listen the last time. Do you think that repeating the same 
"arguments" will have a different effect, this time? As a troll, 
you're a wholly ineffective one.

Damn. Ya can't get good help nowadays.

--Esther

On Fri, 8 Oct 1999 08:17:30, "Quake Cheaters Clan" 
<theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:

| Yeah,
| 
| A future for OS/2.
| 
| At the moment there is an appetite for all things old and retro in style...
| silver stereos a'la 1970's.... 60's & 70's pop groups... even the original
| star trek series is going to get a make over....
| 
| So, say in 20 years time, in the same manner as people want to emulate a
| TRS80, maybe OS/2 will fill someones spare space in their storage medium..
| ..
| OS/2 is a curiosity - an interesting albiet brief peek into a time when
| there were fewer alternatives than there are now.
| 
| Because as a curiosity OS/2 will win and triumph... yes OS/2 will be STRONG
| and WILL BREAKTHROUGH these days of darkness....yay, the hour cometh when
| OS/2 will be reborn..<rant rant rant> (turned into Esther then)
| 
| OS/2 - where did you want to go yesterday?
| 
| 
| the
| QCC
| 
| 


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: theqcc@hotmail.com                                08-Oct-99 15:26:20
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 15:24:09
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: "Quake Cheaters Clan" <theqcc@hotmail.com>

Ethel, or Lucifer....oh, Esther, thats it...

Take A CLOSE LOOK, its a different posting...

Its not a question....

its not the same...

You must either change your rhetoric tape or learn to read more slowly and
with increased accuracy.

Quake


Esther Schindler <esther@bitranch.com> wrote in message
news:LoEFmgJJ9ecw-pn2-je2JMt5GmtC7@agave.bitranch.com...
> Quake,
>
> You didn't listen the last time. Do you think that repeating the same
> "arguments" will have a different effect, this time? As a troll,
> you're a wholly ineffective one.
>
> Damn. Ya can't get good help nowadays.
>
> --Esther
>
> On Fri, 8 Oct 1999 08:17:30, "Quake Cheaters Clan"
> <theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> | Yeah,
> |
> | A future for OS/2.
> |
> | At the moment there is an appetite for all things old and retro in
style...
> | silver stereos a'la 1970's.... 60's & 70's pop groups... even the
original
> | star trek series is going to get a make over....
> |
> | So, say in 20 years time, in the same manner as people want to emulate a
> | TRS80, maybe OS/2 will fill someones spare space in their storage
medium..
> | ..
> | OS/2 is a curiosity - an interesting albiet brief peek into a time when
> | there were fewer alternatives than there are now.
> |
> | Because as a curiosity OS/2 will win and triumph... yes OS/2 will be
STRONG
> | and WILL BREAKTHROUGH these days of darkness....yay, the hour cometh
when
> | OS/2 will be reborn..<rant rant rant> (turned into Esther then)
> |
> | OS/2 - where did you want to go yesterday?
> |
> |
> | the
> | QCC
> |
> |
>
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Customer of Planet Online (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: pcguido@attglobal.net                             08-Oct-99 14:40:19
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 15:24:09
Subj: Re: IBM and Sledgehammer...OS/2 Death?

From: pcguido@attglobal.net

In <7tdvn8$u5r$1@coranto.ucs.mun.ca>, jdc0014@InfoNET.st-johns.nf.ca (John
Hong) writes:
|Adrian Gschwend (nospam_ktk@netlabs.org) wrote:
|
|: Forget all the processors as long as they are not available. Merced is dead
|: IMHO, not OS/2.
|
|	Dunno about dead, but Merced has certainly been a flop.  Even
|Hewlett-Packard, who are co-developing Merced with Intel are in fact
|telling their customers to not buy it.

HP is telling it's customers that the latest version of HP's PA-Risc
product is as strong as the first release of Merced will be; so, you
don't _have_ to migrate quite yet...

Not good news for Intel as they were counting on the built in starter
market for Merced being all those tasty HP upgrades.

Guido

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: djohnson@isomedia.com                             08-Oct-99 08:31:05
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 15:24:09
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: "David T. Johnson" <djohnson@isomedia.com>

Quake Cheaters Clan wrote:
> 
> Yeah,
> 
> A future for OS/2.
> 
> At the moment there is an appetite for all things old and retro in style...
> silver stereos a'la 1970's.... 60's & 70's pop groups... even the original
> star trek series is going to get a make over....
> 
> So, say in 20 years time, in the same manner as people want to emulate a
> TRS80, maybe OS/2 will fill someones spare space in their storage medium..
> .
> OS/2 is a curiosity - an interesting albiet brief peek into a time when
> there were fewer alternatives than there are now.
> 
> Because as a curiosity OS/2 will win and triumph... yes OS/2 will be STRONG
> and WILL BREAKTHROUGH these days of darkness....yay, the hour cometh when
> OS/2 will be reborn..<rant rant rant> (turned into Esther then)
> 
> OS/2 - where did you want to go yesterday?
> 
Hey, this is one of the best trolls that COOA has gotten this month. 
Things are looking up!!

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu                    08-Oct-99 11:32:11
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 15:24:09
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: Jason <malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu>

Look Quack, all your posts are the same, they are worthless trolls.

-Jason

Quake Cheaters Clan <theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:
: Ethel, or Lucifer....oh, Esther, thats it...

: Take A CLOSE LOOK, its a different posting...

: Its not a question....

: its not the same...

: You must either change your rhetoric tape or learn to read more slowly and
: with increased accuracy.

: Quake


: Esther Schindler <esther@bitranch.com> wrote in message
: news:LoEFmgJJ9ecw-pn2-je2JMt5GmtC7@agave.bitranch.com...
:> Quake,
:>
:> You didn't listen the last time. Do you think that repeating the same
:> "arguments" will have a different effect, this time? As a troll,
:> you're a wholly ineffective one.
:>
:> Damn. Ya can't get good help nowadays.
:>
:> --Esther
:>
:> On Fri, 8 Oct 1999 08:17:30, "Quake Cheaters Clan"
:> <theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:
:>
:> | Yeah,
:> |
:> | A future for OS/2.
:> |
:> | At the moment there is an appetite for all things old and retro in
: style...
:> | silver stereos a'la 1970's.... 60's & 70's pop groups... even the
: original
:> | star trek series is going to get a make over....
:> |
:> | So, say in 20 years time, in the same manner as people want to emulate a
:> | TRS80, maybe OS/2 will fill someones spare space in their storage
: medium..
:> | ..
:> | OS/2 is a curiosity - an interesting albiet brief peek into a time when
:> | there were fewer alternatives than there are now.
:> |
:> | Because as a curiosity OS/2 will win and triumph... yes OS/2 will be
: STRONG
:> | and WILL BREAKTHROUGH these days of darkness....yay, the hour cometh
: when
:> | OS/2 will be reborn..<rant rant rant> (turned into Esther then)
:> |
:> | OS/2 - where did you want to go yesterday?
:> |
:> |

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu                    08-Oct-99 11:29:05
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 15:24:09
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: Jason <malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu>

Can you please leave this newsgroup?  You obviously don't have the 
ability to contribute anything of value, or else we would have seen it by 
now.  Thank you.

-Jason

Quake Cheaters Clan <theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:
: Yeah,

: A future for OS/2.

: At the moment there is an appetite for all things old and retro in style...
: silver stereos a'la 1970's.... 60's & 70's pop groups... even the original
: star trek series is going to get a make over....

: So, say in 20 years time, in the same manner as people want to emulate a
: TRS80, maybe OS/2 will fill someones spare space in their storage medium..
: .
: OS/2 is a curiosity - an interesting albiet brief peek into a time when
: there were fewer alternatives than there are now.

: Because as a curiosity OS/2 will win and triumph... yes OS/2 will be STRONG
: and WILL BREAKTHROUGH these days of darkness....yay, the hour cometh when
: OS/2 will be reborn..<rant rant rant> (turned into Esther then)

: OS/2 - where did you want to go yesterday?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu                    08-Oct-99 11:34:29
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 15:24:09
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: Jason <malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu>

Joe Malloy <jmalloy@borg.com> wrote:
:> >OS/2 - where did you want to go yesterday?
:>
:> Where are you today? I went the right way ;-)

: You mean: you went the right way *for you.*  I certainly was glad to leave
: OS/2.  Everybody's needs are different, doesn't it make sense that everyone
: chooses from among a panoply of OSs?

What, your throwing a logical arguement to a smart ass reply to a troll?  
How dare you ;-)

-Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: richard@NOSPAMwebtrek.com                         08-Oct-99 16:04:22
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 15:24:09
Subj: Re: Warpstock '99 Atlanta, GA USA

From: richard@NOSPAMwebtrek.com (Richard R. Klemmer)

On Wed, 6 Oct 1999 00:51:49, hunters@thunder.indstate.edu wrote:

> In article <7tdplf$6nq$1@nntp3.atl.mindspring.net>,
>   "Sam Brown" <rigor@mindspring.com> wrote:
> 
> > shit wake up nobody uses os/2 any more??
> 
> They don't?? Then why the hell are we having a user conference in
> Atlanta!? :) I hope these plane tickets are refundable!
> 

Well, my plane tickets aren't refundable, so there'd better damn well 
be a conference. :-)

-----------------------------
Richard R. Klemmer
richard@webtrek.com
http://www.webtrek.com
-----------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: WebTrek L.L.C. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mdk@agad.purdue.edu                               08-Oct-99 11:35:18
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 15:24:09
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: Mark Kelley <mdk@agad.purdue.edu>

Different words, same immature argument.

Quake Cheaters Clan wrote:

> Ethel, or Lucifer....oh, Esther, thats it...
>
> Take A CLOSE LOOK, its a different posting...
>
> Its not a question....
>
> its not the same...
>
> You must either change your rhetoric tape or learn to read more slowly and
> with increased accuracy.
>
> Quake
>
> Esther Schindler <esther@bitranch.com> wrote in message
> news:LoEFmgJJ9ecw-pn2-je2JMt5GmtC7@agave.bitranch.com...
> > Quake,
> >
> > You didn't listen the last time. Do you think that repeating the same
> > "arguments" will have a different effect, this time? As a troll,
> > you're a wholly ineffective one.
> >
> > Damn. Ya can't get good help nowadays.
> >
> > --Esther
> >
> > On Fri, 8 Oct 1999 08:17:30, "Quake Cheaters Clan"
> > <theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > | Yeah,
> > |
> > | A future for OS/2.
> > |
> > | At the moment there is an appetite for all things old and retro in
> style...
> > | silver stereos a'la 1970's.... 60's & 70's pop groups... even the
> original
> > | star trek series is going to get a make over....
> > |
> > | So, say in 20 years time, in the same manner as people want to emulate a
> > | TRS80, maybe OS/2 will fill someones spare space in their storage
> medium..
> > | ..
> > | OS/2 is a curiosity - an interesting albiet brief peek into a time when
> > | there were fewer alternatives than there are now.
> > |
> > | Because as a curiosity OS/2 will win and triumph... yes OS/2 will be
> STRONG
> > | and WILL BREAKTHROUGH these days of darkness....yay, the hour cometh
> when
> > | OS/2 will be reborn..<rant rant rant> (turned into Esther then)
> > |
> > | OS/2 - where did you want to go yesterday?
> > |
> > |
> > | the
> > | QCC
> > |
> > |
> >
> >

--
Mark Kelley
Agriculture Information Systems
Purdue University


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Purdue University (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               08-Oct-99 12:55:00
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 15:24:09
Subj: Re: Opera for OS/2 makes progress

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Quaker Oats Clan wrote:
> 
> Hehehe
> 
> Nice one David
> 
> Overdose on OS/2 leads to paranoia, dillusions and feelings of false
> euphoria...

So what's your excuse for paranoia, dillusions, and feelings of false
euphoria then?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               08-Oct-99 13:16:13
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 15:24:09
Subj: There is a future for winvocates that like beating dead horses

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Actually, there isn't.  Nevermind.

So what do you want out of us, something-cheater-something?  Do you want
us all to convert to your way of thinking and drop OS/2?  Fine.  Done. 
Your brilliant and thoughtful arguments have convinced me that I've
wasted my time using OS/2.  In the light of the incontrovertible
evidence you've presented I'm sure others will follow suit.  Your
mission is accomplished.

Now leave.

Hints for the future:
* If you're trying to get a point across, you may want to make one
rather than shoddily attempting to insult the intelligence of your
adversaries.  Successfully insulting the intelligence of one's
adversaries requires far more wit than you've been able to demonstrate,
so that's a dead-end path for you.

* If you're not trying to get a point across, then you have far too much
spare time on your hands.  Take up a hobby.  Perhaps even get a job,
like a paper route.  It builds character.

* Have enough courage to have a real identity.  It does wonders for
credibility.

* Don't discuss a topic you know nothing about.

* Try to have a logical stance (or at least one that is founded in
common sense).  If you believe your claim that OS/2 is dead, then why
beat a dead horse?


Hope you appreciated the constructive criticism.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             08-Oct-99 17:28:29
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 15:24:09
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <MPG.1265b6bd513476ee989a55@news1.mnsinc.com>,
  David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> wrote:
> In article <37FB892C.46B62F4C@NOSPAMus.ibm.com>,
>      jkobal@NOSPAMus.ibm.com says...

-- snip --

> > But they are NOT ports.  They are all part of the initial
> > development of the browser.... there is no "existing application"
> > until all of those versions are complete, since the development of
> > them is all done at the same time from the same code base.
>
> Are you kidding? Really, are you?

What would he be "kidding" about?  Do you understand the concept of a
common code base? Or using compiler directives to target a specific
platform from said common codebase?

-- snip --

> >The invalid premise is that the platforms on which Netscape
> >ships their product are all ports as well, when it is really just
> >three packages of one single product.  Unless Netscape and
> >IBM decide to add OS/2 to the single development effort
> >that Netscape has for the other three platforms, the OS/2
> >version will always have to be ported, and will always be a
> >little behind.  We put a lot of effort to have 4.61 for OS/2
> >ship while 4.61 was still the "current" version, but that
> >obviously couldn't last for long.
> >
> >Jeffrey S. Kobal
> >IBM Corporation
> >
> >
>
> Boy, you are a master of redefinition and rationalization.

Actually, you are a master of not listening and denying.


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  08-Oct-99 13:38:13
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 15:24:09
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

> >> >OS/2 - where did you want to go yesterday?
> >>
> >> Where are you today? I went the right way ;-)
> >
> >You mean: you went the right way *for you.*  I certainly was glad to
leave
> >OS/2.  Everybody's needs are different, doesn't it make sense that
everyone
> >chooses from among a panoply of OSs?
>
> Sure, let's turn this into a *serious* discussion... You're right of
course
> ;-)
>
> Oh, and yes, i do boot into Win9x for Need For Speed IV (the game that is)

Oops, I sorta thought you were serious!  Sorry!

- Joe


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  08-Oct-99 13:37:07
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 15:24:09
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

Yack!  Something claiming to be a <tholenAntiSpam@ifa.hawaii.edu> tholened
once again:

> > I certainly was glad to leave OS/2.
>
> You haven't left the OS/2 newsgroups, obviously.  Interesting, no?

Uh, no, but I can't say what's interesting for you, Tholen.  But since you
don't advocate OS/2, what are you doing here, eh?  Interesting, no?



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             08-Oct-99 17:52:17
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 15:24:09
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <7tk9bh$okt$1@newsreader2.core.theplanet.net>,
  "Quake Cheaters Clan" <theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:

-- snip --

> Because as a curiosity OS/2 will win and triumph... yes OS/2 will be
> STRONG and WILL BREAKTHROUGH these days of darkness....yay, the hour
> cometh when OS/2 will be reborn..<rant rant rant>

(Ahem) Didn't I just tell you to sit down, relax, and take a deep
breath?  You don't mind very well, do you?

I see that you have gone off the deep end, but you were already perched
precariously close to the precipice from the get-go.

> OS/2 - where did you want to go yesterday?

Good question. We all went to where the Windows Contigent are *starting*
to arrive *today.*


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             08-Oct-99 18:05:10
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 19:57:06
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <7tkuvj$4p$1@newsreader3.core.theplanet.net>,
  "Quake Cheaters Clan" <theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Ethel, or Lucifer....oh, Esther, thats it...

Twisting someone's name while hiding behind a handle is a sign of a true
twit.

> Take A CLOSE LOOK, its a different posting...

Ms. Schindler never claimed otherwise.

> Its not a question....

Again, she never claimed otherwise.

> its not the same...

Actually, it is the same, just couched in different rhetoric, that's
all.

> You must either change your rhetoric tape or learn to read more slowly
> and with increased accuracy.

It appears to those of us with an IQ higher than our shoe size (which
explains why it *doesn't* appear as such to you) that Ms. Schindler's
reading comprehension is fine. Yours, OTOH . . .

You need to take a bonehead English course at your local JC.

> Quake
>
> Esther Schindler <esther@bitranch.com> wrote in message
> news:LoEFmgJJ9ecw-pn2-je2JMt5GmtC7@agave.bitranch.com...
> > Quake,
> >
> > You didn't listen the last time. Do you think that repeating the
> > same "arguments" will have a different effect, this time? As a
> > troll, you're a wholly ineffective one.

Again, no sign of a "question."  No claim that the thread is the same.
Yes, there is the claim that the "arguments" (such as they are, which
is why they're quoted) are the same.

Which they are.

I guess the only satisfaction losers can seek is the ad nauseum
repetition of the same mindless pap, but at least you have something
resembling imagination; your verbal diarrhea does wax nostalgic, to a
degree.

And yes, I like Star Trek, and although TOS is getting a bit tired, it
still entertains, albeit on a somewhat different level.


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: theqcc@hotmail.com                                08-Oct-99 19:27:08
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 19:57:06
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: "Quake Cheaters Clan" <theqcc@hotmail.com>

Jason <malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu> wrote in message
news:37fe0dc6@oit.umass.edu...
>
> Can you please leave this newsgroup?  You obviously don't have the
> ability to contribute anything of value, or else we would have seen it by
> now.  Thank you.
>
> -Jason

Well, at least I have increased mail flow into this group..... hmm... a few
more postings and you'll be up to the level of comp.os.vapourware.advocacy

QCC


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Customer of Planet Online (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cahughes@cc.ysu.edu                               08-Oct-99 14:42:07
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 19:57:06
Subj: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Cameron <cahughes@cc.ysu.edu>

Most OS/2 users selected it because it was the smart and superior
alternative to Windoze.  It was a power user's play ground. Many
engineers and programmers found it aesthetically nicer to program under
Workplace shell and Presentation Manager. Stability and legitimate
multithreading and multitasking made OS/2 the choice.  I have been a
OS/2 user from the beginning.  But now my friends the time has come to
jump ship.  IBM has dogged us for perfectly legitimate financial reasons
but dogged us nonetheless.  In reward for the OS/2 user's loyalty IBM
has flipped us the bird....

Now the time has come to make another OS selection.  I've been
thoroughly evaluating Linux for 3 years.  Folks it is superior in every
way.  Linux + KDE + Vmware beats the socks off OS/2.

       KDE and KOM(corba) are superior to Presentation Manager & Som
       The XWindows environments and the Windows managers:
                                        Motif,
                                        Open Look
                                        Macintosh Like window Manager
                                        KVM
                                        After Step
                                        Black Box
                                        Enlightment
                                       Gnome
            are superior to  OS/2's GPI / Open 32 presentation manager.

            The linux shells including Rexx for linux are superior to
OS/2's
            Rexx.

            The internet capabilities of  Linux are far superior to OS/2

            The security features of Linux are far superior to OS/2

            Linux has more compatibility for new hardware.  What will
OS/2 users do
            when IA-64 becomes the average desktop?

             Linux + Vmware now supports

                          Win95, 98, 2000, Windows NT
                          Windows 3.1, Dos

             Linux has more native applications than OS/2

             Linux is multiuser!


Most importantly Linux is open source. There is no company to jerk you
around.  You can keep Linux as up-to-date at you feel like.  If there is
something the kernel dosen't do, add it.

The installation of SUSE 6.1 and above, and Red Hat 6.0 and above is
easier than
OS/2's installation.   Updates to the Linux via RPMs are easier than
installing or uninstalling OS/2 patches.

Since IBM has added all of the Open32 stuff.  Linux is considerably more
reliable than OS/2.

It was painful for me to arrive at this conclusion.  I have been an OS/2
diehard  since 1991.  However Linux is now the smart and superior
alternative to OS/2 and Windows 2000.  Furthermore, you have complete
control over the OS.

                 There are more development tools for Linux than there
are for OS/2

                 Linux has a plug n play look and feel. Console mode for
those command
                 line junkies, and a bout 10 good GUI's for the point N
click group.


Give IBM a black eye. Remove OS/2, pack up the software and books, put
it away for
review on sentimental occasions.  Obtain either SuSe, Redhat, or Corel
Linux and never look back.

Support Open Source!

Dedicate some of the energy that is expended in this news group to
adding new capabilities to Linux.

Join the Linux Stampede!

It will be painful at first.  But it is the most logical and intelligent
OS choice that a power user, software engineer,  computer programmer,
or hacker can make.

                                 Open source is the future
                                 Linux is open source

OS/2 is obsolete. In 5 years it probably won't even run on current
machines. The device drivers available will be far behind the technology
curve.  Most new storage devices and display devices in 5 years will not
be recognized by OS/2.  Make the shift now.
My friends it has become a liability.  IBM has engaged in date rape and
we are the victims.

Abandon ship!!!!!!!!


The only logical alternative is


                                    Linux , and Open Source.














--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Youngstown State University (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: see.sig@bottom.of.note                            08-Oct-99 14:54:27
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 19:57:07
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: "Don Young" <see.sig@bottom.of.note>

On Fri, 8 Oct 1999 19:27:17 +0100, Quake Cheaters Clan wrote:
>
>Jason <malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu> wrote in message
>news:37fe0dc6@oit.umass.edu...
>>
>> Can you please leave this newsgroup?  You obviously don't have the
>> ability to contribute anything of value, or else we would have seen it by
>> now.  Thank you.
>>
>> -Jason
>
>Well, at least I have increased mail flow into this group..... hmm... a few
>more postings and you'll be up to the level of comp.os.vapourware.advocacy
>

Wow, Windows 2000 already has a newsgroup.


-----------------------------------------------------------------
Don Young    donyoung AT ccsi.com    All opinions above are mine,
http://www.ccsi.com/~donyoung/            and you can't have 'em.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
They can't break you if you don't have a spine. - Wally (Dilbert)
-----------------------------------------------------------------


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: None (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: News@The-Net-4U.com                               08-Oct-99 17:09:01
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 19:57:07
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: News@The-Net-4U.com (M.P. van Dobben de Bruijn)

> esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler) wrote:
 
> You didn't listen the last time. Do you think that repeating the
> same "arguments" will have a different effect, this time? As a troll, 
> you're a wholly ineffective one.
> 
> Damn. Ya can't get good help nowadays.

Neat double-sense this last line <g>.

In regard to the first part: as someone in the dutch newsgroups (at
that time speaking about installing) put it so succintly recently <g>:
"Repeating exactly the same and expecting a different outcome is
bordering on behaving like an insane". Quake might match that.

Regards from Leeuwarden
Peter van Dobben de Bruijn
---
usethenet.at.the-net-4u.com (at becomes @)
----

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TeleKabel (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bs976@freenet.toronto.on.ca                       08-Oct-99 20:57:25
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 19:57:07
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: bs976@freenet.toronto.on.ca

In <7tld2m$foh$1@newsreader1.core.theplanet.net>, "Quake Cheaters Clan"
<theqcc@hotmail.com> writes:

Alas your posts will enter my killfile from here.  Need to reduce the amount
of 
posts coming in.  This will clean it up quit a bit.

Michael

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: netINS, Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             08-Oct-99 20:52:02
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 19:57:07
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <7tld2m$foh$1@newsreader1.core.theplanet.net>,
  "Quake Cheaters Clan" <theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:

-- snip --

> Well, at least I have increased mail flow into this group.....

The only thing you've increased is the level of legendary status in your
own mind.

Such as it is.

-- snip --


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            08-Oct-99 21:25:11
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 19:57:07
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Fri, 8 Oct 1999 21:42:14, Cameron <cahughes@cc.ysu.edu> wrote:

> Most OS/2 users selected it because it was the smart and superior
> alternative to Windoze.  It was a power user's play ground. Many
> engineers and programmers found it aesthetically nicer to program under
> Workplace shell and Presentation Manager. Stability and legitimate
> multithreading and multitasking made OS/2 the choice.  I have been a
> OS/2 user from the beginning.  But now my friends the time has come to
> jump ship.  IBM has dogged us for perfectly legitimate financial reasons
> but dogged us nonetheless.  In reward for the OS/2 user's loyalty IBM
> has flipped us the bird....
> 
> Now the time has come to make another OS selection.  I've been
> thoroughly evaluating Linux for 3 years.  Folks it is superior in every
> way.  Linux + KDE + Vmware beats the socks off OS/2.
> 
I've played around with KDE. I found it looked nice, but was a system 
hog and really more on par with the Windows desktop (which it tries to
mimick) than the WPS environment. I'm now using Xfce as my window 
manager in Linux (is much nicer towards RAM), but I'm still in OS/2 
most of the time.

GNOME is even worse than KDE.

YMMV, of course.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net
=======================================================
If we could have our cake _and_ eat it,
people would start whining about seconds.
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mdk@agad.purdue.edu                               08-Oct-99 16:23:13
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 19:57:07
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: Mark Kelley <mdk@agad.purdue.edu>

Doesn't he sort of remind you of the "legendary" FREESPEECH?  Could it be
that someone has found a new sock?

cbass2112@my-deja.com wrote:

> In article <7tld2m$foh$1@newsreader1.core.theplanet.net>,
>   "Quake Cheaters Clan" <theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> -- snip --
>
> > Well, at least I have increased mail flow into this group.....
>
> The only thing you've increased is the level of legendary status in your
> own mind.
>
> Such as it is.
>
> -- snip --
>
> Curtis
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.

--
Mark Kelley
Agriculture Information Systems
Purdue University


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Purdue University (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: philbike@my-deja.com                              08-Oct-99 21:42:04
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 19:57:07
Subj: Re: pinball.sys BROKEN by SP5??

From: philbike@my-deja.com

In article <7tfmp9$vvp@enews1.newsguy.com>,
> When I ditched OS/2 for NT, the very first thing
about NT that I noticed was
> how infinitely faster it was compared to OS/2.
Hmmmm.  I've been running OS/2 since 2.0 and NT since
3.51.  I've never noticed that NT was faster.  Guess
that's just me.

Oh, and NTFS is a piece of s**t IMO.  It fragments
like nobody's business and gets sssllloooowww.

-Phil



Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: philbike@my-deja.com                              08-Oct-99 21:42:21
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 19:57:07
Subj: Re: pinball.sys BROKEN by SP5??

From: philbike@my-deja.com

In article <7tfmp9$vvp@enews1.newsguy.com>,
> When I ditched OS/2 for NT, the very first thing
about NT that I noticed was
> how infinitely faster it was compared to OS/2.
Hmmmm.  I've been running OS/2 since 2.0 and NT since
3.51.  I've never noticed that NT was faster.  Guess
that's just me.

Oh, and NTFS is a piece of s**t IMO.  It fragments
like nobody's business and gets sssllloooowww.

-Phil



Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@sea.monterey.edu                            08-Oct-99 15:47:20
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 21:25:14
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: josco <josco@sea.monterey.edu>

On Fri, 8 Oct 1999, Quake Cheaters Clan wrote:

> Yeah,
> 
> A future for OS/2.
> 
> At the moment there is an appetite for all things old and retro in style...
> silver stereos a'la 1970's.... 60's & 70's pop groups... even the original
> star trek series is going to get a make over....

So is Windows -- first promised in 1982 and shipped in 1985.  NT is based
on VMS, a 70's OS and runs on the PC, a computer designed in the late 70's
and first sold in 1980-81. 

When people laugh at the 20th Century and the invention we call the PC
they'll laugh at the software that runs on it -- the BeOS, Quake and
Windows2000 will be in that display along with OS/2. 

Why argue over which horse carriage is best for the 21st century?  None of
them are. 


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: CSUnet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: esther@bitranch.com                               08-Oct-99 22:38:25
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 21:25:14
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler)

On Fri, 8 Oct 1999 21:23:26, Mark Kelley <mdk@agad.purdue.edu> wrote:

| Doesn't he sort of remind you of the "legendary" FREESPEECH?  Could it be
| that someone has found a new sock?

It could be.

I don't mind a hearty debate with someone who feels differently than I
do. However, I expect my opponent to have an argument he can back up. 
This one, like FREESPEECH, seems to lack one entirely.

--Esther 


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco1@my-deja.com                                08-Oct-99 22:44:27
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 21:25:14
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: joseph <josco1@my-deja.com>

In article <37FE6536.88B02A98@cc.ysu.edu>,
  Cameron <cahughes@cc.ysu.edu> wrote:

> OS/2 is obsolete. In 5 years it probably won't even run on current
> machines. The device drivers available will be far behind the
technology
> curve.  Most new storage devices and display devices in 5 years will
not
> be recognized by OS/2.  Make the shift now.
> My friends it has become a liability.  IBM has engaged in date rape
and
> we are the victims.
>
> Abandon ship!!!!!!!!
>
> The only logical alternative is
>
>                                     Linux , and Open Source.

Hey, the PC is obsolete.  In 5 years Os/2 will be history and so will
the best PC you can buy today.  It will be worthless.   Why argue over
which brand of OS is best for the outdated PC?  None of them make sense.
 None.

I'm sticking with OS/2 as a means to access the web and run productivity
applications. It works well, has a free modern suite, and is very stable
with 4 & FP11.

I'm getting (when I can find one in stock) a DreamCast game console.
These simple, static and multimedia enabled devices are more reliable,
powerful and far more affordable and easy to use.  We are in the
early stages of a shift off the PC.

As for open source, Liberate's technology is based on NetBSD.

--

-- joseph


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             08-Oct-99 22:57:05
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 21:25:14
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <7tk9bh$okt$1@newsreader2.core.theplanet.net>,
  "Quake Cheaters Clan" <theqcc@hotmail.com> wrote:

-- [a bunch of nonsense] --


Yo! Quake! Where's your buddy, Quisp?


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jhsterne@mindspring.com.NOSPAM                    08-Oct-99 19:24:04
  To: All                                               08-Oct-99 21:25:14
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: jhsterne@mindspring.com.NOSPAM (Jason S.)

rj friedman posted the following misleading and deceptive first-level quoted 
material to comp.os.os2.advocacy:

>There is no consensus that Tholen - or anyone else - is a 
>kook.

>The poll that you keep referring to as evidence, as you very
>well know, was a juvenile prank played by one of Dave's long
>term harassers - in which he rigged the whole thing - 
>including the bogus list of people - which most definitely 
>was not in the hundreds.

I suppose that you are talking about me.

>The guy even outright admitted it was a prank, and that he 
>did it for the fun of it (this has also been pointed out to 
>you on more than one occasion).

>The fact that you insist on offering this as evidence of 
>anything other than the juvenile prank it was, shows that 
>either you have absolutely no sense of judgement, or that 
>you are deliberately misrepresenting this in order to 
>discredit Dave.

>Then, again, the tarbrush seems to be your primary line of 
>defense when it comes to cooa debate.

Bite your tongue.

Tholen was *twice* nominated for Usenet Kook of the Month -- the first
time by Roberto Alsina back in 1997, and the second time by me, for
what turned out to be the February/March 1998 KOTM contest (don't ask --
I don't know why). This second nomination came in the wake of Tholen's
notorious "kook and a queer" comment and was prompted by a regular poster
to the alt.usenet.kooks group, who dubbed Tholen "The Next Bill Palmer"
or somesuch. I duly nominated Dave and Steven Den Beste (in the immortal
words of Tim Martin, "AKA Mr. Brocoli") seconded the nomination. A vote
was handled by Robbie Honerkamp, a person whom I do not know and who does
not frequent this newsgroup, and Tholen won. There was no evidence of
tampering -- see Gerben Bergman's posts on this subject. Tholen claimed
that someone named "Wayne Strang" (who was not even nominated) won the
election and complained that a vote cast by some unnamed person allegedly
for me was not counted. Tholen conveniently disregarded the fact that I was
not nominated in making this complaint. I had nothing to do with counting
the votes so it can hardly be said with a straight face that I "rigged"
this contest.

The second KOTM title that Dave won was started by someone calling himself
"ZnU" who frequents comp.sys.mac.advocacy. This person set up a CSMA
Kook poll on one of those polling websites that will run impromptu polls
for anyone. There were about 15 candidates (chosen arbitrarily by "ZnU")
and Tholen won the vote. I had nothing to do with counting the votes so
it can hardly be said with a straight face that I "rigged" this poll.

-- 
Check out the comp.sys.mac.advocacy FAQ
http://www.pobox.com/~ericb/csmafaq/ 

muahahahahahahaha!!!snap!snap!!snap!!photoshop!!
  -- Ho You Kong

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: MindSpring Enterprises (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

+============================================================================+
