OS/2 Shareware BBS: 15 Message/15-Message.zip/UU991016.zip/Ua991015.txt

Text File | 1999-10-16 | 887KB | 23,455 lines

                   comp.os.os2.advocacy             (Usenet)

                 Saturday, 09-Oct-1999 to Friday, 15-Oct-1999

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

From: [e-mail]@infi.net                         09-Oct-99 00:21:26
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 04:16:19
Subj: Re: OS/2 and Large Disks

From: [e-mail]@infi.net

In <[e-mail]>, "Gregory L. Marx" <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>
>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
>[e-mail]

Greg & Mike I had the same problem and I found the solution : What was causing
it was one of my scsi devices was not terrminated properly
once i terminated it correctly OS/2 would install Ok.
So Check your devices for correct termination....

Steve
[e-mail]

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               08-Oct-99 20:52:21
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 04:16:19
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

"M.P. van Dobben de Bruijn" wrote:
>
> > [e-mail] (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.

Insane? In fact, it's downright kooky!  Perhaps a new KOTM tally is
called for here..

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         08-Oct-99 14:22:05
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 04:16:19
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: Adrian Suri <[e-mail]>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------53283E7FFF956A543B41E507
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


Funny how a question regarding NS 4.* can get side tacked, for most users the
question is of usability.  4.61 is OK  The problem as I see it is off
stability over features
OS/2 can do without Bloated Windows like software!  However one issue does
need addressing
and that is pluggins, how come the linux community can get their act together
and produce plugins... The plugin pack does need work we need a real audio
etc....

Anyone up to it?

Adrian

--
[e-mail]

http://users.powernet.co.uk/vpub

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.6.2i

mQBtAzfIYMAAAAEDAMV0uyy3X0ndMt1H0xPl4BJOJYYj08HlybF6KcHFXCSc34j4
l8mp4xzOfm8WoBO97d7aiPXVykTTAXLLomha/oESJXY1B9BPmpyn0597VnulZFoq
FpBVrjpbCywOabioRQAFEbQmQWRyaWFuIFN1cmk8YXN1cmlAdnB1Yi5wb3dlcm5l
dC5jby51az4=
=hcQ/
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----


--------------53283E7FFF956A543B41E507
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
 name="asuri.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for Adrian Suri
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename="asuri.vcf"

begin:vcard
n:Suri;Adrian
tel;home:0121 2497283
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
org:Virtual Publications
adr:;;;;;;
version:2.1
email;internet:[e-mail]
fn:Adrian
end:vcard

--------------53283E7FFF956A543B41E507--

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          09-Oct-99 01:18:08
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 04:16:19
Subj: IBM Licenses SciTech Graphics Technology!

From: [e-mail] (Kendall Bennett)

Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 18:18:17 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: SciTech Software, Inc.
X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.11

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

For more information please contact:
Tom Ryan, Director of Marketing
SciTech Software, Inc.
[phone]
[e-mail]



IBM Licenses SciTech Software's Graphics Technology
SciTech's Universal Display Driver to Be Bundled with IBM's E-
Business Solutions

Chico, California - October 11, 1999 -- SciTech Software, Inc. today
announced that IBM has licensed a special version of SciTech Display
Doctor, which will be distributed by IBM as the primary display driver
for
all of IBM's OS/2 Warp based operating systems, including the Warp
Client,
Workspace On Demand and Warp Server for e-business.

This marks the first time that any common PC operating system,
either desktop or server, will include a hardware accelerated,
universal display driver as part of the base operating system. Until now,
operating system vendors have had to rely on overtaxed graphics hardware
vendors to provide software driver support, resulting in inconsistent
driver quality and infrequent or non-existent updates for the installed
base of graphics hardware.

"We're proud to partner with SciTech Software, because they are a
leader in graphics device drivers," said Cheng-Fong Shih, IBM
Business Line Manager for OS/2. "OS/2, with SciTech's universal
display driver technology, will provide our customers with a timely
and stable platform for their mission critical applications,
regardless of the display hardware they choose to use."

SciTech Display Doctor provides true plug and play capability by
detecting the graphics hardware installed and configuring itself
automatically. It is not necessary for a user to determine what type of
graphics hardware they have, locate the correct driver, fumble with
install disks or use configuration utilities - it is all handled
automatically by SciTech Display Doctor. The user can even swap out a
graphics card or monitor and SciTech Display Doctor will dynamically
configure itself for the newly installed hardware. These features make
supporting IBM systems in the field much easier for IBM customers.

"As an IBM customer we are pleased that they are working with
SciTech to provide a universal plug and play solution for graphics
hardware.",  said Andy Finkel, VP of Software at German computer
manufacturer Met@box AG, "It shows that IBM is really supporting
their customers."

As part of this agreement, SciTech and IBM are working together
to improve the OS/2 Warp platform's core "GRADD" display driver
architecture to increase graphics performance and compatibility.
The IBM PC Company, which manufactures IBM's personal
computer hardware, is also closely involved in this effort to ensure
maximum compatibility with IBM branded hardware.

"The SciTech driver technology licensed by IBM is the culmination
of years of work by SciTech. We used all of our experience with
driver development to create an architecture that is fast, scalable, and
extremely compatible," said Kendall Bennett, SciTech's Director of
Engineering.

IBM will offer SciTech Display Doctor/se for OS/2 Warp free of
charge, directly to its customers. It will be available for downloaded
from the IBM's web site and will be bundled with future operating system
updates. SciTech also markets SciTech Display Doctor Professional for
OS/2
Warp as an upgrade for users who need more advanced display features.
Fully functional trial versions of SciTech Display Doctor Professional
for
OS/2 Warp and other SciTech products are available for download at
http://www.scitechsoft.com.  SciTech products are available directly from
SciTech Software by calling [phone] (in the U.S. and Canada) or
[phone].

About SciTech Software, Inc.
SciTech Software, Inc., a privately held firm, is the leading supplier of
PC graphics utilities, drivers, and tools for high-performance graphics
applications, including computer games. SciTech's products help users fix
graphics hardware problems and allow software developers to achieve
maximum performance from PC graphics hardware. SciTech's products include
SciTech Display Doctor, the only universal display driver, SciTech
GLDirect, an OpenGL to Direct3D driver and SciTech MGL, the professional
graphics library used to develop some of today's most popular software
programs.  SciTech products support the Windows, Linux, OS/2 Warp, DOS,
QNX, and SMX operating systems. Many major software companies and
hardware
companies license portions of SciTech's technology for incorporation in
their products.

###

SciTech Display Doctor is a trademark of SciTech Software, Inc.
All other trademarks are property of their respective owners.

--

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
|      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: http://extra.newsguy.com (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               09-Oct-99 08:50:27
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 10:26:28
Subj: Re: IBM Licenses SciTech Graphics Technology!

From: [e-mail] (M.P. van Dobben de Bruijn)

> [e-mail] (Kendall Bennett) wrote:

> IBM Licenses SciTech Software's Graphics Technology
> SciTech's Universal Display Driver to Be Bundled with IBM's E-
> Business Solutions

Congratulations, great news for SCI, IBM and OS/2.

Hate to rain on your party. However, how about returning
the favour of those beta-testers from our community and set
up a real support (immediate answers) system here in the news-
groups this community frequents? So that we can overcome tho-
se pesky install problems a lot of us have experienced (probably
partly because of the GRADD integration <g>).

Modernizing your support is easy I learned to my surprise recently.

When I discussed a driver problem for drives in on of the groups
here I got an email a few days later "Regarding my Deja news post"
pointing me to the page with the drivers they thought that might solve
the problem. Inviting me to contact them if they did not. You will under-
stand that I was pleasantly surprised by this positive attitude and the
clever way they used Deja capabilities to support us. Of course I was
disappointed that it could not be solved, failing real OS/2 solutions <g>
but that expereience was sweetened by their attempt to be of service.

Congratulations once again. Sure hope you make SCI an OS/2-asset!

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: [e-mail]                         09-Oct-99 02:10:23
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 11:03:24
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Jason S. writes:

> Tholen was *twice* nominated for Usenet Kook of the Month -- the first
> time by Roberto Alsina back in 1997,

Alsina is the person who accused me of posting an average of 134 articles
every day, which was ludicrous.  When he pointed to his alleged evidence,
it became obvious that he didn't even bother to check the range of dates.
Even then, he continued to insist that he was right, until others started
getting on his case.  How ironic that he nominated me rather than himself.

> 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

Actually, that's the wake of your notorious attempts to "get a rise" out
of me.  Put the onus where it belongs, Jason:  on you, not me.

> There was no evidence of tampering

Incorrect.  The voting deadline was extended, and I know that at least
one vote wasn't counted.

> Tholen claimed that someone named "Wayne Strang" (who was not even
> nominated)

Incorrect.  Consult deja.com for proof.

> won the election and complained that a vote cast by some unnamed person
> allegedly for me was not counted.

You want actual names, Jason?  Check the people who criticized you for
your "campaigning" in sci.astro.  As for the person who contacted me
privately to say that he voted for you, just what do you think the
word "privately" means?

> Tholen conveniently disregarded the fact that I was not nominated in
> making this complaint.

Doesn't change the fact that you received at least one vote, and quite
possibly more, perhaps even the most.

> The second KOTM title that Dave won

I haven't won any, Jason.

> 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.

Incorrect.  You and Edwin both had thousands of votes that disappeared.

And from Eric Bennett:

] The other poll (csma KOTM) was not well protected against vote fraud.  I
] had an amusing evening playing with their vote counting system to see if I
] could get around their belatedly instituted safeguards (which I did...

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                      09-Oct-99 13:31:00
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 11:03:24
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: [e-mail] (Khairil Yusof)

On Fri, 8 Oct 1999 21:42:14, Cameron <[e-mail]> wrote:

> 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.

Unfortunately no. I played around with it as in 4 days and nights of a holiday

learning/installing it. I still use it often on my friends computer (fixing up

minor problems).

It's not a 1-1 or a superior solution for everything. As a server, it's great
(and cheap) but as a desktop OS for somebody who just wants to sit down and do

work, it has some way to go.

One of the things that annoys me is the multiuser thing (it's great for
servers
and people who have multiple users) but I don't like using us or logging as
root
to install programs or using chmod/chown. And the endless rc and config files.

Superior in everyway does not apply to any OS :) Even dodgy Windows has some
features (actually quite a few) that are superior to Linux.

Try this.. Find a file object, right mouse button, share.
(Easy in Windows and OS/2, OS/2 even lets you edit which users and access
levels
etc. right there and then).

Or.. download a program (when not logged in as root). Double click it and
install it w/o missing updated libs, paths in so.conf etc.. and then run it.

I'm not saying it's bad, just that some of us don't want to tinker with
everything. If there was an OS that was superior in everything, I'd be using
it
now. Unfortunately even DOS has it's advantages :)

Well.. since I'm running Gnome and Enlightenment 0.16 pre-release 3 already
under Xfree86/2 and the first beta drop of Everblue is out...

why not have 2 interfaces.. make that 3 and add seamless Win 3.1 too :)
Win 3.1 is still very useful.. Ventura Publisher 5.0, Corel Draw 5 and some
other useful apps worked great and I'm still using it now unless I need more
advanced features. Well for some even Linux doesn't have Pagemaker 6.5 does
it?
:)


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                   08-Oct-99 23:35:03
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 11:03:24
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: [e-mail] (Eric Bennett)

In article <7tm877$rvi$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:


> > Tholen claimed that someone named "Wayne Strang" (who was not even
> > nominated)
>
> Incorrect.  Consult deja.com for proof.

How ironic, given that deja.com proves you are incorrect.

Your claim that "Wayne Strang" won:
http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=421373722&fmt=text

The actual ballot and results:
http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=349118236&fmt=text


> And from Eric Bennett:
>
> ] The other poll (csma KOTM) was not well protected against vote fraud.  I
> ] had an amusing evening playing with their vote counting system to see if I
> ] could get around their belatedly instituted safeguards (which I did...

You fail to note, however, that I also said I didn't register any votes
for you.  I voted for Nathan Hughes.  You may have a strong claim on the
Kook title over here in cooa but certainly not in csma.

--
Eric Bennett ( http://www.pobox.com/~ericb/ )
Cornell University / Chemistry & Chemical Biology

Drawing on my fine command of the language, I said nothing.
-Robert Benchley

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Ho You Kong Fan Club (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                         09-Oct-99 04:07:09
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 11:03:25
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Eric Bennett writes:

>> Jason S. wrote:

>>> Tholen claimed that someone named "Wayne Strang" (who was not even
>>> nominated)

>> Incorrect.  Consult deja.com for proof.

> How ironic, given that deja.com proves you are incorrect.

Impossible, given that deja.com does prove that I am correct.

> Your claim that "Wayne Strang" won:
> http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=421373722&fmt=text
>
> The actual ballot and results:
> http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=349118236&fmt=text

That's not the "actual ballot".  You're ignoring the ballot that
contains Wayne Strang.  Gee, more than one ballot???  Obviously
these people can't even get their own acts together.

>> And from Eric Bennett:
>>
>> ] The other poll (csma KOTM) was not well protected against vote fraud.  I

>> ] had an amusing evening playing with their vote counting system to see if
I
>> ] could get around their belatedly instituted safeguards (which I did...

> You fail to note, however, that I also said I didn't register any votes
> for you.

Irrelevant.  It suffices to note that the poll was not protected against
fraud.  Note that thousands of votes for Jason S. and Edwin disappeared.

> You may have a strong claim on the Kook title over here in cooa

Incorrect.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                     08-Oct-99 21:48:01
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 11:03:25
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


William Sonna wrote:

> On Thu, 7 Oct 1999 23:43:16, Marty <[e-mail]> 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.

I use the web site for my credit union for bill payments.    On OS/2 I still
run Quicken
6.0 under Win 3.1 to keep track of my finances.  I haven't looked into
incharge but I am
growing more intolerant of Quicken on Windows.  Why?  I'm relying less on
Win3.1 and more
on OS/2 apps like Netscape/2, Smartsuite/2 and StarOffice/2.

Ideally finances should be a service on the web. something important like
financial data
should not be kept on the PC.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         09-Oct-99 05:03:02
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 11:03:25
Subj: Re: IBM Licenses SciTech Graphics Technology!

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Kendall Bennett writes:

> IBM Licenses SciTech Software's Graphics Technology
> SciTech's Universal Display Driver to Be Bundled with IBM's E-
> Business Solutions
>
> Chico, California - October 11, 1999 -- SciTech Software, Inc. today
> announced that IBM has licensed a special version of SciTech Display
> Doctor, which will be distributed by IBM as the primary display driver
> for all of IBM's OS/2 Warp based operating systems, including the Warp
> Client, Workspace On Demand and Warp Server for e-business.

Good news.  I just wanted to note that "today" is not yet October 11.

Tachyons?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               09-Oct-99 02:14:20
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 11:03:25
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: "Kelly Robinson" <[e-mail]>

Gotta respond to each one individually:

Drestin Black <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:epHK3.5139$[e-mail]...
>
> Mikael Ahlgren <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> news:7tep0r$uch$[e-mail]...
> > I just read this articel and I found it really amusing. To me it seems
> like
> > Microsoft is now taking the Linux "threat" seriously.
>
> Sure, why not. After a while, insects bites can make you sick too.

Good one!!

> >As usual they cannot
> > admit someone else is better in any way. They do everything to wipe out
> the
> > competition and all the dirty tricks is allowed.
>
> Such as?

Are you really that ignorant?  Who needs direct evidence?  America is a
capitalism money-before-all-else country.  Microsoft ain't alone in the biz
of screwing everybody to make an extra buck.

> >And bringing up Windows 2000 makes no sense at all. Where
> > can I buy that OS? And would a sane person even consider buying  a
Windows
> > OS before the first dozen Service Packs are released?
>
> Well, NT4 has had only had 5 and it was stable and useful after the 3rd
and
> damned good since the 4th. But, NT4 did not ever have the time, effort and
> length of beta period that W2K has. W2K is now at the point where NT4 was
at
> SP3. It'll be ready immediately, I believe.

Yeah, OS/2 Warp 3 has over 24 such fixpaks and OS/2 Warp 4 has 10, the last
I heard.  And their lot piss on NT because of bugs...  and even though I
gained enough sense to drop OS/2 back when its fifth fixpak came out (which
was little more than a kiss-up to Lotus' win32 convert office suite which
isn't that good in the first place), I'm more than certain most of the
issues I tried to get IBM to listen about still exist.  (how can they not
listen when I can reproduce the same problem on over 30 different machines?!
Typical IBM...  The OS/2 userbase is far worse in attitude because, for some
illogical reason they think they'ev a better OS when in reality, they have
cow dung...)

> >
> > They may be right about some things like it takes a little more from the
> > user to manage a Unix system but what about Windows shortcomings?
Nothing
> > at all ? Yea right!
>
> No one says NT has no shortcomings - where do you make up these things
from?

He's being sarcastic.  Can't blame him, you did make your post sound very
much like a typical Microsoft advert, complete with excessive buzzword
adjectives.  (see very bottom of this message for that sales pitch)

> >If it was
> > entirely up to me to decide what OS to use at work Windows wouldn't be
> > among the alternatives.
>
> Nice to see that you have blinders on and make decisions without all the
> alternatives to choose from. When I choose between things i like to
actually
> have more than one choice first eh?

Aren't we entitled to our opinions?  :-)  The problem isn't OS choice, it's
application choice.  Quite frankly, the good stuff is on Windows.  Port it
all to BeOS and I'd be using it.  Duh.  Software vendors, and I've been
saying this for years, won't try non-windows platforms because it means they
have to do more work - and that means less profit, do remember this *is*
America - land of the $.  (yet we bitch at microsoft who isn't the problem
at all when it comes to consumer choice!)

> >Well I love Word and Excel but the way the company puts
> > out half ready products and using dirty tactics to outmanouver their
> > competitors make me sick.
>
> Tell us again, what sort of dirty tactics did they use to outmanouver
Lotus
> and Corel to have our company choose MS Office again and again and again?
I
> don't remember MS making secret deposits to our Swiss accounts or when
they
> were threatening me with a lead pipe. Enlighten us?

Hmm, that bloke should realize that many companies, software and otherwise,
including IBM with that OS/2 product of theirs (John W Thompson, dipshit PSP
president of the time, said they wanted OS/2 v4 out on the shelves because a
visible product was more important than a bugless product... I have the
article from OS/2 Magazine, Oct 1996 (?) and I should really frame it up
because that guy is a jackass and the sooner Symantec or whoever he left IBM
for (and his reasons for leaving IBM doubly prove his sheer incompetence)...
anyway, ever hear of car recalls?  They do it all the time.  Because the car
needs to be visible for people to buy.  The whole economy is based on
throw-away trash, hence bugs are allowed and can be accepted readily.
Examples of this are nearly infinite.

You don't recall MS history; for example their playing second-rate god by
forcing hardware makers/vendors to pay a fee for every computer they make -
even if MS software won't be loaded on it.  Like drug dealers and insurance
agencies, MS sits back and reaps money regardless while someone else risks
everything.  THAT IS OBVIOUSLY A DIRTY TRICK!!!

MS had a tantrum with IE as well.  Dunno why, having used Netscape on
multiple platforms and getting sick of its instability, I tried IE.  Quite
frankly, IE is infinitely superior (despite the security issues, I know) and
MS didn't need to coerce Compaq or others to forcibly tie it in with Windows
as part of licence agreements...

> >
> >
> > Drestin Black <[e-mail]> skrev i
> >
diskussionsgruppsmeddelandet:5EzK3.5071$[e-mail]...
> > > Do I agree with everything written. No. All companies engage in
> marketing
> > > and marketing sometimes exagerates. But, I believe there is some
> substance
> > > herein.
> > >
> > > http://www.microsoft.com/ntserver/nts/news/msnw/LinuxMyths.asp
> > >
> > > Myth: Linux performs better than Windows NT
> > > Reality: Windows NT 4.0 Outperforms Linux On Common Customer Workloads
> > >
> > > Myth: Linux is more reliable than Windows NT
> > > Reality: Linux Needs Real World Proof Points Rather than Anecdotal
> Stories
> > >
> > > Myth: Linux is Free
> > > Reality: Free Operating System Does Not Mean Low Total Cost of
Ownership
> > >
> > > Myth: Linux is more secure than Windows NT
> > > Reality: Linux Security Model Is Weak
> > >
> > > Myth: Linux can replace Windows on the desktop
> > > Reality: Linux Makes No Sense at the Desktop
> > >
> > > Summary
> > > The Linux operating system is not suitable for mainstream usage by
> > business
> > > or home users. Today with Windows NT 4.0, customers can be confident
in
> > > delivering applications that are scalable, secure, and reliable--yet
> cost
> > > effective to deploy and manage. Linux clearly has a long way to go to
be
> > > competitive with Windows NT 4.0. With the release of the Windows 2000
> > > operating system, Microsoft extends the technical superiority of the
> > > platform even further ensuring that customers can deliver the next
> > > generation applications to solve their business challenges.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                  09-Oct-99 09:59:22
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 14:41:27
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: "Joe Malloy" <[e-mail]>

Gee, Something claiming to be a <[e-mail]> tholened
incessantly:

He'js still at it, folks, trying to claim that he was not properly elected
Kook of the Month for March, 1998.  He's even invented some "strang(e)"
person who wasn't even nominated!  What a kook Tholen is!

> > How ironic, given that deja.com proves you are incorrect.
>
> Impossible, given that deja.com does prove that I am correct.
>
> > Your claim that "Wayne Strang" won:
> > http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=421373722&fmt=text
> >
> > The actual ballot and results:
> > http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=349118236&fmt=text
>
> You're ignoring the ballot that contains Wayne Strang.

Prove it, if you think you can, Tholen, otherwise you're the Kook of the
Month for said month and year.

> Gee, more than one ballot???

I didn't see "more than one ballot," and in fact you're the only one I know
who has claimed that there were "more than one ballot[s]..."  So, my
challenge to you: prove it, if you think you can, Tholen, otherwise you're
claptrap is so much hot air -- as usual.

> Obviously these people can't even get their own acts together.

Obviously you will do anything to try and deflect the fact that you were
properly chosen Kook of the Month, Tholen, but too bad you can't get your
own act together.



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

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

From: [e-mail]                               09-Oct-99 12:16:26
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 16:32:21
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Cameron Hughes <[e-mail]>

Khairil Yusof wrote:
>
> On Fri, 8 Oct 1999 21:42:14, Cameron <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> > 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.
>
> Unfortunately no. I played around with it as in 4 days and nights of a
holiday
> learning/installing it. I still use it often on my friends computer (fixing
up
> minor problems).
>
> It's not a 1-1 or a superior solution for everything. As a server, it's
great
> (and cheap) but as a desktop OS for somebody who just wants to sit down and
do
> work, it has some way to go.
>
> One of the things that annoys me is the multiuser thing (it's great for
servers
> and people who have multiple users) but I don't like using us or logging as
root
> to install programs or using chmod/chown. And the endless rc and config
files.
>
> Superior in everyway does not apply to any OS :) Even dodgy Windows has some
> features (actually quite a few) that are superior to Linux.
>
> Try this.. Find a file object, right mouse button, share.
> (Easy in Windows and OS/2, OS/2 even lets you edit which users and access
levels
> etc. right there and then).
>
> Or.. download a program (when not logged in as root). Double click it and
> install it w/o missing updated libs, paths in so.conf etc.. and then run it.
>
> I'm not saying it's bad, just that some of us don't want to tinker with
> everything. If there was an OS that was superior in everything, I'd be using
it
> now. Unfortunately even DOS has it's advantages :)
>
> Well.. since I'm running Gnome and Enlightenment 0.16 pre-release 3 already
> under Xfree86/2 and the first beta drop of Everblue is out...
>
> why not have 2 interfaces.. make that 3 and add seamless Win 3.1 too :)
> Win 3.1 is still very useful.. Ventura Publisher 5.0, Corel Draw 5 and some
> other useful apps worked great and I'm still using it now unless I need more
> advanced features. Well for some even Linux doesn't have Pagemaker 6.5 does
it?
> :)


With Vmware under Linux you can have all the Windows 32bit/16bit and Dos
that you want.
You don't have to choose between Linux and Windoze.  When I say
superior, I mean that it gives
you everything that OS/2 gives you and more. Since VMWARE can run
Win2000 and below and Linux
runs VMWARE you can bring the entire Windows world into a Xwindows
window. This cannot be done with OS/2.
Linux has more Native applications than does OS/2.  I realize from a
user's perspective that
Linux is a bit rough (Corel and IBM are fixing that right now!) but from
a programmers or software
engineer's perspective Linux rules.

Support Open Source
Join the Penguin Stampede
Install a Linux Distribution Today
Take Control Of Your operating System

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

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

From: [e-mail]                              09-Oct-99 09:55:04
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 16:32:21
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: Dennis Peterson <[e-mail]>

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?
>
> the
> QCC

What is it about OS/2 the makes you feel so threatened you have to write
this silly crap? Are you a sissy girly windows boy?

--
dp -- BS#3, LF#27, AH#95

                 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: [e-mail]                              09-Oct-99 10:20:05
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 16:32:21
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Dennis Peterson <[e-mail]>

Cameron wrote:
>

[snipped a woeful tale of desertion and treachery]

>
> The only logical alternative is
>
>                                     Linux , and Open Source.

Wrong. Solaris for Intel with the Linux support package. Why? Because
you will develop useful skills you can actually use in a
career-enhancing way. Linux, the anointed only child of the God of
Computing, is not ready for major league purposes. No company would ever
use it to run on an important Sun E4000. Nobody would think to rip out
HP-UX on an 800 to run Linux. Nobody is ready to toss out the
vendor-supplied OS on any significant piece of hardware in favor of
Linux. In fact the only area where Linux is growing is as an alternative
to NT on Intel systems and who the hell wants to go through life working
on Intel crap? You are never thought of as anything but a PC tech no
matter what OS you run.

Point being, if you want to work towards being a professional Unix SA,
anything you learn about Solaris X86 can be applied on Solaris running
on the top of the line Sun E10000. Don't piss away your time learning
yet another niche OS - it isn't necessary anymore because Linux is no
longer the only free Unix on the block. Oh, and Linux is not Unix, cute
as it might be.

I do a lot of hiring and one thing I've learned is that Linux users tend
to have as little discipline as NT admins in terms of work ethic because
they tend to be self-taught in Linux after coming from a self-taught
Windows environment. This works against them. They are also a dime a
dozen and so if that is all an employer is looking for there is a lot of
people competing for low-end jobs. Folks who have chosen Solaris for
Intel have already made an important decision and tend to follow along
disciplined lines to develop their careers in Unix.

Of course, if all you want is a cute OS to replace OS/2 that is also not
NT then Linux will do.

--
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: [e-mail]                               09-Oct-99 15:26:24
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 19:56:25
Subj: Re: IBM Licenses SciTech Graphics Technology!

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

"M.P. van Dobben de Bruijn" wrote:
>
> > [e-mail] (Kendall Bennett) wrote:
>
> > IBM Licenses SciTech Software's Graphics Technology
> > SciTech's Universal Display Driver to Be Bundled with IBM's E-
> > Business Solutions
>
> Congratulations, great news for SCI, IBM and OS/2.
>
> Hate to rain on your party. However, how about returning
> the favour of those beta-testers from our community and set
> up a real support (immediate answers) system here in the news-
> groups this community frequents? So that we can overcome tho-
> se pesky install problems a lot of us have experienced (probably
> partly because of the GRADD integration <g>).

Just go to their NNTP server: news.scitechsoft.com.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                    09-Oct-99 19:28:01
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 19:56:25
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: [e-mail] (John Hong)

Cameron Hughes ([e-mail]) wrote:

: With Vmware under Linux you can have all the Windows 32bit/16bit and Dos
: that you want.

    At $299 a pop.

: You don't have to choose between Linux and Windoze.  When I say
: superior, I mean that it gives you everything that OS/2 gives you and
: more. Since VMWARE can run Win2000 and below and Linux
: runs VMWARE you can bring the entire Windows world into a Xwindows
: window. This cannot be done with OS/2.

    Still, at $299 a pop.

: Linux has more Native applications than does OS/2.  I realize from a
: user's perspective that Linux is a bit rough (Corel and IBM are fixing
: that right now!) but from a programmers or software engineer's
: perspective Linux rules.

    I'm curious, Camaron...why bother?  Do you really think most of
us haven't *already* tried Linux or BeOS or something else?  I looked
into Linux back in 1998, and it wasn't ready for me then.  I tried it again
this year, and it's still no go.
    In a few months time, you probably won't care anymore since the
"Golly gee everyone, look what I found" attitude will be long gone.  It's
been out of my system since late 1998.  The sad thing is, I'm still
*waiting* on it.  Sigh.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: St. John's InfoNET (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                  09-Oct-99 15:31:09
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 19:56:25
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: "Joe Malloy" <[e-mail]>

He's still at it!  Something claiming to be a <[e-mail]>
tholened incessantly:

> You want actual names, Jason?  Check the people who criticized you for
> your "campaigning" in sci.astro.  As for the person who contacted me
> privately to say that he voted for you, just what do you think the
> word "privately" means?

When you use the word "privately," Tholen, it means "made up."  Prove you
actually have that private message.  You can't and won't.  That's a typical
Kook of the Month sort of thing that you do.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                     09-Oct-99 12:39:06
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 19:56:25
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


Kelly Robinson wrote:

> > >As usual they cannot
> > > admit someone else is better in any way. They do everything to wipe out
> > the
> > > competition and all the dirty tricks is allowed.
> >
> > Such as?
>
> Are you really that ignorant?  Who needs direct evidence?  America is a
> capitalism money-before-all-else country.  Microsoft ain't alone in the biz
> of screwing everybody to make an extra buck.

You lack perspective.

Who else besides MS is stupid enough to push the limits so far that the went
to
trial under anti-trust law?



> > Well, NT4 has had only had 5 and it was stable and useful after the 3rd
> and
> > damned good since the 4th. But, NT4 did not ever have the time, effort and
> > length of beta period that W2K has. W2K is now at the point where NT4 was
> at
> > SP3. It'll be ready immediately, I believe.
>
> Yeah, OS/2 Warp 3 has over 24 such fixpaks and OS/2 Warp 4 has 10, the last
> I heard.  And their lot piss on NT because of bugs...

"Piss on NT"  that is baby talk

Most all of the complaints about NT bugs come from the NT user community.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                     09-Oct-99 13:00:26
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 19:56:25
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>

Dennis Peterson wrote:
>
> Cameron wrote:
> >
>
> [snipped a woeful tale of desertion and treachery]
>
> >
> > The only logical alternative is
> >
> >                                     Linux , and Open Source.
>
> Wrong. Solaris for Intel with the Linux support package. Why? Because
> you will develop useful skills you can actually use in a
> career-enhancing way. Linux, the anointed only child of the God of
> Computing, is not ready for major league purposes. No company would ever
> use it to run on an important Sun E4000. Nobody would think to rip out
> HP-UX on an 800 to run Linux. Nobody is ready to toss out the
> vendor-supplied OS on any significant piece of hardware in favor of
> Linux. In fact the only area where Linux is growing is as an alternative
> to NT on Intel systems and who the hell wants to go through life working
> on Intel crap? You are never thought of as anything but a PC tech no
> matter what OS you run.
>
> Point being, if you want to work towards being a professional Unix SA,
> anything you learn about Solaris X86 can be applied on Solaris running
> on the top of the line Sun E10000. Don't piss away your time learning
> yet another niche OS - it isn't necessary anymore because Linux is no
> longer the only free Unix on the block. Oh, and Linux is not Unix, cute
> as it might be.
>
> I do a lot of hiring and one thing I've learned is that Linux users tend
> to have as little discipline as NT admins in terms of work ethic because
> they tend to be self-taught in Linux after coming from a self-taught
> Windows environment. This works against them. They are also a dime a
> dozen and so if that is all an employer is looking for there is a lot of
> people competing for low-end jobs. Folks who have chosen Solaris for
> Intel have already made an important decision and tend to follow along
> disciplined lines to develop their careers in Unix.
>
> Of course, if all you want is a cute OS to replace OS/2 that is also not
> NT then Linux will do.

What do you think about the BSDs?  FreeBSD and NetBSD.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                              09-Oct-99 14:59:05
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 19:56:25
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Dennis Peterson <[e-mail]>

"[e-mail]" wrote:
>
> Dennis Peterson wrote:
> >

> >
> > Of course, if all you want is a cute OS to replace OS/2 that is also not
> > NT then Linux will do.
>
> What do you think about the BSDs?  FreeBSD and NetBSD.

Are they cute? I like the BSD Unixes -- I learned Unix on a BSD Unix at
Berkeley, in fact. I wouldn't use one at work, though.

--
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: [e-mail]                                   09-Oct-99 18:22:22
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 21:21:27
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: [e-mail] (Eric Bennett)

In article <7tmf1m$45b$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:


> That's not the "actual ballot".  You're ignoring the ballot that
> contains Wayne Strang.  Gee, more than one ballot???  Obviously
> these people can't even get their own acts together.

Illogical.  I could create a second ballot for the 2000 U.S. Presidential
election but that would not mean that the real election organizers "can't
even get their own acts together".

> >> And from Eric Bennett:
> >>
> >> ] The other poll (csma KOTM) was not well protected against vote
fraud.  I
> >> ] had an amusing evening playing with their vote counting system to
see if I
> >> ] could get around their belatedly instituted safeguards (which I did...
>
> > You fail to note, however, that I also said I didn't register any votes
> > for you.
>
> Irrelevant.  It suffices to note that the poll was not protected against
> fraud.

But it also leaves a slight implication that I ran up votes for you.

> > You may have a strong claim on the Kook title over here in cooa
>
> Incorrect.

Incorrect.  You may.

--
Eric Bennett ( http://www.pobox.com/~ericb/ )
Cornell University / Chemistry & Chemical Biology

Drawing on my fine command of the language, I said nothing.
-Robert Benchley

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Ho You Kong Fan Club (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               09-Oct-99 18:07:29
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 21:21:27
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: Hobbyist <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy, Joseph posted :

> > Yeah, OS/2 Warp 3 has over 24 such fixpaks and OS/2 Warp 4 has 10, the
last
> > I heard.  And their lot piss on NT because of bugs...
>
> "Piss on NT"  that is baby talk
>
> Most all of the complaints about NT bugs come from the NT user community.

You miss the point. Many OS/2 advocates speak badly of NT putting bugs
as it's main problem yet Warp has so many *fix*-packs.

He was not saying anything about who reports NT bugs.

--
-=Ali=-

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               09-Oct-99 18:43:09
  To: All                                               09-Oct-99 21:21:27
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: "Christian Gustafson" <[e-mail]>

Dennis Peterson <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
> "[e-mail]" wrote:
> >
> > Dennis Peterson wrote:
> > >
>
> > >
> > > Of course, if all you want is a cute OS to replace OS/2 that is also
not
> > > NT then Linux will do.
> >
> > What do you think about the BSDs?  FreeBSD and NetBSD.
>
> Are they cute? I like the BSD Unixes -- I learned Unix on a BSD Unix at
> Berkeley, in fact. I wouldn't use one at work, though.
>
> --
> dp --

Explain something for me, please.

I understand that you work on big UNIX systems for a famous airplane company
in western Washington, and that you have a special appreciation for the
power and sophistication of these big systems.  Even over the lesser UNIXes.

That's fine.

But why do you ride a Harley instead of a BMW?

cg


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

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

From: [e-mail]                         10-Oct-99 00:28:05
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 03:23:18
Subj: Re: Warpstock '99 Atlanta, GA USA

From: "Gordon T. Roland" <[e-mail]>

--------------E2529B2BB8ED8D88A0A3755F
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

My tickets aren't refundable either.  But I'm looking forward to ISP's
showing new versions of their OS/2 applications, IBM talking about the
success of Warp Server for e-Business -- success which exceeded even
IBM's expectations -- and presentations from experienced OS/2 users and
professionals who continue to find more than enough reason to stick it
out until something better comes along.

For the youngsters in this group just a few reminders:


   * Some of us can remember when there was no such thing as a PC
     Computing platforms come and computing platforms go; the sun also
     rises.
   * When I was a boy (we walked 20 miles to school every morning and had
     to shovel coal for an hour before we could fire up     the steam
     powered computers) We used to talk about the day when everyone would
     be able to have a S/370 in their     basement and a terminal in
     every room of the house -- we were serious -- thank God the world
     changed faster than we     could even imagine.
   * Operating Systems are just one model for controlling computers.  The
     first computer I worked on (in high school), a 1401donated by IBM,
     had no operating system at all and we managed to get it to do a
     whole series of stupid computer tricks including playing Christmas
     carolls on the band printer.  The day will come when ALL operating
     systems will be an     interesting footnote in the history of
     computers, and I think most of us will live to see that day.

All of the above is MHO, of course.  See you in Atlanta next weekend.

- GTR -

Gordon Roland,
Event Chair, Warpstock '99 Atlanta


"Richard R. Klemmer" wrote:

> On Wed, 6 Oct 1999 00:51:49, [e-mail] wrote:
>
> > In article <7tdplf$6nq$[e-mail]>,
> >   "Sam Brown" <[e-mail]> 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
> [e-mail]
> http://www.webtrek.com
> -----------------------------

--------------E2529B2BB8ED8D88A0A3755F
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
My tickets aren't refundable either.  But I'm looking forward to ISP's
showing new versions of their OS/2 applications, IBM talking about the
success of Warp Server for e-Business -- success which exceeded even IBM's
expectations -- and presentations from experienced OS/2 users and
professionals
who continue to find more than enough reason to stick it out until something
better comes along.
<p>For the youngsters in this group just a few reminders:
<br>
<ul>
<li>
Some of us can remember when there was no such thing as a PC Computing
platforms come and computing platforms go; the sun also rises.</li>

<li>
When I was a boy (we walked 20 miles to school every morning and had to
shovel coal for an hour before we could fire up
the steam powered computers) We used to talk about the day when everyone
would be able to have a S/370 in their     basement
and a terminal in every room of the house -- we were serious -- thank God
the world changed faster than we     could even
imagine.</li>

<li>
Operating Systems are just one model for controlling computers.  The
first computer I worked on (in high school), a 1401donated by IBM, had
no operating system at all and we managed to get it to do a whole series
of stupid computer tricks including playing Christmas carolls on the band
printer.  The day will come when ALL operating systems will be
an
interesting footnote in the history of computers, and I think most of us
will live to see that day.</li>
</ul>

<p><br>All of the above is MHO, of course.  See you in Atlanta next
weekend.
<p>- GTR -
<p>Gordon Roland,
<br>Event Chair, Warpstock '99 Atlanta
<br>
<p>"Richard R. Klemmer" wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>On Wed, 6 Oct 1999 00:51:49,
[e-mail]
wrote:
<p>> In article <7tdplf$6nq$[e-mail]>,
<br>>   "Sam Brown" <[e-mail]> wrote:
<br>>
<br>> > shit wake up nobody uses os/2 any more??
<br>>
<br>> They don't?? Then why the hell are we having a user conference in
<br>> Atlanta!? :) I hope these plane tickets are refundable!
<br>>
<p>Well, my plane tickets aren't refundable, so there'd better damn well
<br>be a conference. :-)
<p>-----------------------------
<br>Richard R. Klemmer
<br>[e-mail]
<br><a href="http://www.webtrek.com">http://www.webtrek.com</a>
<br>-----------------------------</blockquote>
</html>

--------------E2529B2BB8ED8D88A0A3755F--

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         10-Oct-99 00:30:24
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 03:23:18
Subj: Re: FP12:  A Piece Of Cake!

From: "Gordon T. Roland" <[e-mail]>

In my younger days I could get a 1403 to spit a whole box of paper 20 feet
across the RJE room,
you just put in an unpunched carriage control tape so it couldn't find TOF. :o

- GTR -

Frank McKenney wrote:

> In <[e-mail]>, "Mark L. Kahnt"
<[e-mail]> writes:
> >Frank McKenney wrote:
> >>
> >
> >[***SNIP!!!***]
> >
> >> Gawd... just had a truly horrible thought. Is anyone out there using a
> >> 2400 Baud modem?   <grin... I _hope_!>
> --snip--
> >Eeek!!! Reminds me of the days of using a teletype terminal on a 110
> >baud modem back in university!
> >
> >Can you imagine even browsing the web that way?
>
> 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 (;-)).
>
> The professor's technique had a one-character-sized pixel (not square,
> obviously (;-)) and used various letters/symbols with some overprinting
> to achieve appropriate greyscale levels.  In order to provide a
> sufficient number of pixels the image was printed in "strips" and then
> joined.  Anyone remember the 6' by 8' StarTrek images?
>
> Anyway, we could use a similar approach to display 'web graphics on your
> teletype and 110-baud modem.  A bit slow, though...  and hard-copy only.
> Do I hear any volunteers for the Beta testing? (;-)
>
> Frank McKenney, McKenney Associates
> Richmond, Virginia / [phone]
> E-mail: [e-mail]

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         10-Oct-99 00:35:10
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 03:23:18
Subj: Re: FP12:  A Piece Of Cake!

From: "Gordon T. Roland" <[e-mail]>

I used RSU for the first time since FP1 (or maybe it was 2) and I have to
concur
it has definitely improved.  BTW, using ADSL (which works flawlessly with OS/2
regardless of what anyone tries to tell you) This has got to be the easiest OS
update path available for any platform.  Fast, uneventful and plenty of
progress
information to let you know what it's doing to your computer.

- GTR -

"fmiller1"@[e-mail] wrote:

> A very informative post.  Very well done.
>
> Thank you
>
> In <[e-mail]>, Tim Martin <[e-mail]>
writes:
> >Using the RSU methid, the installation of IBM's latest
> >FixPack release (FP12) was a piece of cake this morning.
> >It is a little different than previous installations.  With
> >this procedure I received a message that my system needed
> >further updating and I was instruced to bring up the
> >Window List (Control-Escape) and select (or run actually)
> >a new update program.
> >
> >This took me into a full blank screen that went into a
> >procedure much the same way Warp is originally
> >installed.
> >
> >When it was over I was asked if I wanted to delete the
> >unneeded files (said yes) and to then reboot.
> >
> >I'm back online and raring to go!  Here's my syslevel
> >information:
> >
> >J:\OS2\INSTALL\SYSLEVEL.FPK
> >                           OS/2 Warp 4 Service Level
> >Version 1.00     Component ID 566933010
> >Type Fixpak
> >Current CSD level: XR0M012
> >Prior   CSD level: XR0M012
> >
> >As you can see, I'm not at FP12 level.  I DID NOT install the
> >Device Driver FixPak1 (Yet) but may do so later today.
> >
> >I just want to assure all you OS/2 folks that the RSU method
> >does work (now, it was not working late last night) and it
> >appears IBM has now got this software update procedure
> >working well.
> >
> >If YOU want to upgrade to FP12 go here:
> >
> >http://ps.boulder.ibm.com/softupd.html
> >
> >If they wanted to offer an upgrade to Warp 5 this way it
> >would be very easy to do.
> >
> >Tim Martin
> >The OS/2 Guy
> >Warp City
> >http://warpcity.com
> >"E-ride the wild surf to Warp City.
> >

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

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

From: [e-mail]                      10-Oct-99 11:24:05
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 03:23:18
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: [e-mail] (Khairil Yusof)

On Sat, 9 Oct 1999 16:16:53, Cameron Hughes <[e-mail]> wrote:

> With Vmware under Linux you can have all the Windows 32bit/16bit and Dos
> that you want.

Isn't that commercial? Also can I also say that with Xfree86/OS2 I can run any

linux program (off my friend's computer) that I want? He hates that fact that
I
always load Netscape on his computer and not mine :)

> you everything that OS/2 gives you and more. Since VMWARE can run
> Win2000 and below and Linux
> runs VMWARE you can bring the entire Windows world into a Xwindows
> window. This cannot be done with OS/2.

Again.. isn't VMWare a virtual window manager, you need a Windows machine
don't
you running? Well the G4 Imac's with 256mbs of RAM, a short cycle way at the
labs at uni will do fine for my DTP/Graphics work :) Also since OS/2 has
Xfree86/OS2 and can run Linux programs (display them at least) can Linux run
OS/2 programs? :)

> Linux has more Native applications than does OS/2.  I realize from a
> user's perspective that

But are they better? There's like 20 different email clients, and none as good

as PMMail. There were only a few newsreaders and none as good as ProNews/2.

OS/2 users aren't exactly unknowledgeble people who don't try out
alternatives.
I wouldn't be using OS/2 if there was a better alternative for me now. For me
BeOS would be the next best thing, except for the fact that it has no X server

support and is missing a good Office suite. And it's desktop would be the
closest to the WPS. Gnome & KDE desktops (not window managers) are very rough
from my point of view. Reminds me of Windows but more aesthetically pleasing.

If linux becomes a better alternative FOR ME, then I'll switch. If BeOS
becomes
a better alternative FOR ME, I'll switch to that to. If (however unlikely)
Windows becomes a better alternative, I'll switch to that to. And until that
time comes, no amount of advocacy will make me switch from OS/2 :) It would
just
be a thread on the merits of each OS...


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

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

From: [e-mail]                      09-Oct-99 22:28:16
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 03:23:18
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: Jason <[e-mail]>

In comp.os.os2.advocacy Hobbyist <[e-mail]> wrote:
: On comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy, Joseph posted :

:> > Yeah, OS/2 Warp 3 has over 24 such fixpaks and OS/2 Warp 4 has 10, the
last
:> > I heard.  And their lot piss on NT because of bugs...
:>
:> "Piss on NT"  that is baby talk
:>
:> Most all of the complaints about NT bugs come from the NT user community.
:
: You miss the point. Many OS/2 advocates speak badly of NT putting bugs
: as it's main problem yet Warp has so many *fix*-packs.

: He was not saying anything about who reports NT bugs.

Of course his point was particularly bad since it's only been relatively
recently that IBM released all the fixpacks to the generally public.  It
used to be that IBM only released the fixpacks that would help the
general public.  All the other fixpacks were made for specific problems
for customers and to add specific features for them also.  They then
decided that they let anyone download all the fixpacks.  So NT service
packs do not equal OS/2 fixpacks.

-Jason

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

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

From: [e-mail]                      09-Oct-99 22:41:02
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 03:23:18
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: Jason <[e-mail]>

Esther Schindler <[e-mail]> wrote:
: On Fri, 8 Oct 1999 21:23:26, Mark Kelley <[e-mail]> 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.

No, I don't think so.  Quack maybe a sock puppet, but FREESPEECH was a
sock puppet on a different hand.

-Jason

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               09-Oct-99 22:15:12
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 03:23:18
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: Hobbyist <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy, Jason posted :

> Of course his point was particularly bad since it's only been relatively
> recently that IBM released all the fixpacks to the generally public.  It
> used to be that IBM only released the fixpacks that would help the
> general public.  All the other fixpacks were made for specific problems
> for customers and to add specific features for them also.  They then
> decided that they let anyone download all the fixpacks.  So NT service
> packs do not equal OS/2 fixpacks.

NT service paks are just like OS/2 fixpaks. They enhance already present
features to better suit customers needs and fix other minor problems.
Can you tell me exactly what SP4 for NT comprised or are you just
speaking off your head?

--
-=Ali=-

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                              09-Oct-99 21:34:09
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 03:23:18
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Dennis Peterson <[e-mail]>

Christian Gustafson wrote:
>
> Dennis Peterson <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> news:[e-mail]...
> > "[e-mail]" wrote:
> > >
> > > Dennis Peterson wrote:
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> > > > Of course, if all you want is a cute OS to replace OS/2 that is also
> not
> > > > NT then Linux will do.
> > >
> > > What do you think about the BSDs?  FreeBSD and NetBSD.
> >
> > Are they cute? I like the BSD Unixes -- I learned Unix on a BSD Unix at
> > Berkeley, in fact. I wouldn't use one at work, though.
> >
> > --
> > dp --
>
> Explain something for me, please.
>
> I understand that you work on big UNIX systems for a famous airplane company
> in western Washington, and that you have a special appreciation for the
> power and sophistication of these big systems.  Even over the lesser UNIXes.
>
> That's fine.
>
> But why do you ride a Harley instead of a BMW?
>
> cg

I'm guessing that beneath your question you are attempting to make a
point here regarding motorcycle brands. Perhaps there is some parallel
between motorcycles and operating systems that opens the door for
comparison that I am missing but I'll play along.

Here is why I ride a Harley: I like them. I like the turn of the century
technology. I like the noise and the vibration. I like the company I
find myself in with other Harley riders - and even BMW riders. I like
the history of the company and products. I like the fact that they have
been true to their roots and turn out wonderful motorcycles of
questionable reliability. I like the way the resale prices go up rather
than down as for all other makes. I have no cares for what others might
choose to ride although there is much friendly banter between riders of
various makes.

None of this is a slight against BMW who make excellent motorcycles and
who also do a lot of engineering work for Harley. This past summer I
went on a 4500 mile X-C tour with several other bikers including one BMW
rider. He alone suffered no problems on the road with his machine while
the rest of us required some little fix ups along the way. There would
possibly be no Harleys were it not for German engineering helping out
with engine designs for H-D in recent years. It is very difficult to
make an air-cooled engine run well and still comply with California's
emission regulations (which is why two-stroke engines of all kinds are
disappearing despite their less expensive manufacture and repair costs).

As for drawing a comparison between these machines and OS's, there is
none in the context of the current conversation. My preference for a
Harley does not preclude my being proficient on a BMW for one thing, and
for another, I have no career interest with motorcycles and will suffer
nothing for my choice of machines other that the ridicule of twits who
cannot accept the worth of a two-wheeled dinosaur. Interestingly, H-D
outsells the rest of the world for machines in their class. I don't
understand it either given they cost far too much.

As for the power and sophistication of big systems, it is of course a
true inference but that has nothing to do with what I was talking about
nor is it elitism as you are also seem to be inferring. I was suggesting
that if your career interest is in professional Unix administration this
is a good time to move away from Linux and I cited the reason for this
advice as being that no serious businesses run Linux on the top-end
(read that as top-paying) systems and Solaris for Intel is available and
now runs Linux programs as an affordable learning platform. If you or
others are content working on lower-end (read that as lower paying)
systems, Linux would be fine, but then so is NT. Oddly, the time
investment to learn big systems is not remarkably longer than for
learning small systems. That's just how it works. I define serious
businesses as those who have a multi-million dollar IS group and would
include MCI, Boeing, GM, GE, Amazon.Com as examples. Even mighty MSFT
has a significant number of Unix systems running and so far as I know,
do not depend on Linux for business purposes beyond researching the
technology (probing for weaknesses'd be my best guess).

Oh, and the big airplane company recently rejected Linux as being
inadequate for their purposes. We're not to install it. NT is still the
preferred OS for Intel systems not including Sequent boxes (which are
far from typical Intel platforms) neither of which I have to deal with.

In summary: If I were to tell my college aged children to skip over
Linux and go with Solaris because it will make them more valuable and
competitive in the Unix SA job market he would laugh and tell me Linux
is cool and everyone uses it at school to which I would say - thank you
for helping me make my point. This actually happened recently - and he
also landed his first Unix SA job with a *huge* phone company after
being passed over repeatedly for NT SA work despite his ubiquitous MCSE.
24 years old, $50,000/year as a Solaris admin and he doesn't have to go
back to get recertified for Window$ 2000. Not bad - I just wish he knew
vi better. Oh, he never did listen to me about learning Solaris until it
was almost too late - I hate to think what he'd be earning if he had.

--
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: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 01:57:12
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 05:08:21
Subj: Re: Opera for OS/2 makes progress

From: "Kelly Robinson" <[e-mail]>

Nice pitch,  but Opera ain't singing on OS/2 yet.


Adrian Gschwend <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
> 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
> [e-mail]
> -------
> The OS/2 OpenSource Project:
> http://www.netlabs.org
>
>


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 01:58:15
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 05:08:22
Subj: Re: Opera for OS/2 makes progress

From: "Kelly Robinson" <[e-mail]>

So when will it finally be released for OS/2, in 2003 - long after IE 9.0
and Netscape 20.51 are released?

Why bother?  You have several alternatives for your platform.  Go get your
$35 back from these thieves as they've not given you anything for it yet.

Jason <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
> 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: http://extra.newsguy.com (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 02:01:02
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 05:08:22
Subj: Re: There is a future for winvocates that like beating dead horses

From: "Kelly Robinson" <[e-mail]>

No, we merely want to point out certain realities to you.  But don't expect
us to remain quiet whenever one of your own bitches about a drawback that
only OS/2 or IBM can provide.  Then we'll be rolling in like oranges,
especially if it's about IBM.  :-)  I should know...

But I do see your point about taking up hobbies.  I just started model
ship/airplane building so I won't be hanging around here as long as I have
in the past.

Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
> 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: http://extra.newsguy.com (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 04:17:13
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 05:08:22
Subj: Re: There is a future for winvocates that like beating dead horses

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Kelly Robinson wrote:
>
> No, we merely want to point out certain realities to you.  But don't expect
> us to remain quiet whenever one of your own bitches about a drawback that
> only OS/2 or IBM can provide.  Then we'll be rolling in like oranges,
> especially if it's about IBM.  :-)  I should know...

I have no problems with making points of any kind.  Condescention and
the "we're right and you're wrong" stuff (coming from both sides of the
fence) is ludicrous however, which is all that QCC seems to be about.

> But I do see your point about taking up hobbies.  I just started model
> ship/airplane building so I won't be hanging around here as long as I have
> in the past.

Good for you.  It's difficult work that takes a steady hand, but a well
made model speaks for itself.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                    10-Oct-99 13:54:26
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 14:35:09
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: [e-mail] (William Sonna)

On Sat, 9 Oct 1999 01:48:03, Joseph <[e-mail]> wrote:

>
>
> William Sonna wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 7 Oct 1999 23:43:16, Marty <[e-mail]> 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.
>
> I use the web site for my credit union for bill payments.    On OS/2 I still
run Quicken
> 6.0 under Win 3.1 to keep track of my finances.  I haven't looked into
incharge but I am
> growing more intolerant of Quicken on Windows.  Why?  I'm relying less on
Win3.1 and more
> on OS/2 apps like Netscape/2, Smartsuite/2 and StarOffice/2.
>

I agree totally.  WinOS2 is NOT getting better with age, and I'd love
to get it off my machine.  Unfortunately, I'm still must use a certain
release of a certain program to make money, and until that changes,
eliminating it is simply not an option.

Ironically, that same release of the same program blows up on both Win
'98 and NT, so I'm here for the long haul, IBM's wishes not
withstanding.  And you know what - this ain't a bad place to be stuck.

Regarding InCharge vs Quicken, I think the biggest hurdle is accepting
that InCharge is not a Quicken clone, and reconciling both the
advantages and disadvantages InCharge's approach to things.  The
learing curve is not particularly steep, but is not trivial, either.
It requires both study and practice on the part of the user.  Figure
about two to three months to learn it.

In a nutshell: InCharge uses budgets, rather than accounts, as its
primary modeling tool.

> Ideally finances should be a service on the web. something important like
financial data
> should not be kept on the PC.
>

I'm not sure I would be interested in balancing my check book or doing
my taxes on the web.  The web is too public a place.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                    10-Oct-99 14:13:13
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 14:35:09
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: [e-mail] (William Sonna)

On Fri, 8 Oct 1999 21:42:14, Cameron <[e-mail]> 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.

Isn't three years an awfully long time to be "evaluating" something?

[snip]

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            10-Oct-99 11:55:13
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 14:35:09
Subj: (1/3) Re: Time to move on

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> > In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> > "David H. McCoy" wrote:
>>
>> >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.

What planet are you from? Dos and Windows 9x have little or no security and
have been heartily embraced. OS/2 has no security, but according to some, it
has a halfway corporation presence.

>> >> 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.

A droplet is not a river but both are still wet. Are do you feel that there
are
some OS/2 users that ARE NOT computer users?

>> However, YOU, Marty, a person who claims to be independent of support,

>-- further future support.

Until the next fixpack.

>> are in a minority, whether that minority is computer users or OS/2 users.

>I disagree.

Your choice. It is the right of every man to be wrong(and stubborn) despite
overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Of course, you also think an unsecure,
support operating system cannot make corporate headway despite the existence
of
DOS and Win9x.

>> 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.

Then you would not have installed any fixpacks, would you? Your statements are

at odds with your actions, Marty.

>
>> >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.

You don't like to answer questions. Did you ask her why? Did you TRY to
explain
or did you just tell her in a condescending manner> My in-law was absolutely
computer illiterate, yet had no problems making a decision. I'll bet your
mother could do the same.

>> >> 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.

I wonder. I've yet to run into any computer illiterate person who couldn't
make
a wise decision based on a good explanation.  EVERY person who was a computer
newbie who asked my advice took my advice 100% of the time. I asked a couple
of
friends and they had the same hit ratio.
Now, why would a mother ignore the advice of her son let alone someone more
knowledgable than herself and presumably, someone she trusts?

I suspect that your advice was ignored for reasons other than your mother's
"cluelessness".  Perhaps you noticed that you were using OS/2 decided your
advice was...questionable? :-)

>> >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.

Okay.  I wonder how many people anticipated the Internet or this IT job
market?

>> 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?  :-)

Installs with the driver! :-)

>> >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.

Fine. This was just one example to show an overall problem.

>> >> 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.

Indeed. But the truck that can tow that load and play that CD is even better,
isn't it?

>> >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.

Once can indeed always wait for 6 months "it" will be faster and cheaper.
However, eventually the plunge will be made and even you, Marty, will try to
pick the most flexible solution available. It has nothing to do with trying to

keep up. It has everything to do with finding the most bang for the buck.

>> >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.

And you feel that rebooting to use a single features is more efficient than
using the tool that gives you all under a single umbrella?


>> >> >> 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.

Again, it is your right to go into a car dealership and tell someone that the
AC is optional no matter how many times they tell you that it is standard. It
doesn't make you right. Just difficult.

>> 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.

But yet, they are features that CAN be used. What you consider necessary isn't

relevent in this context. What is relevent is that you are forced to pay for
features you CANNOT use.

>> >> 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.

Well, let's see it.

>> 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.

Without looking at a line of their code I can guarantee you that if they
support those advance features, they will not be the same codebase.

That is not possible. Either they will bring all their other drivers down to
the lowest common denominator, all they will be forced to have different code
for the myriad of advanced features that OS/2 doesn't support.

>> >> 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?

Because in the hear and now, I may want to use something in the future that I
don't use today. It can already exist and not be installed on my machine.

>> 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.

And that is why OS/2's user base is shrinking.

>> >> >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.

Then Scitech is pretty useless unless you wish to use two year old cards or
the
S4.

>> 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.

You would be refering to Nvidia's Gradd drivers. These are the same ones that
force OS/2 users to run at 640x480 and 60mhz.

>> 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.

How do you figure? With hoards of people like yourself(no offense) who don't
plan on using any new cards, how is it in their best interest to support them?

>> >> 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?

Maybe the millions of people who've purchased new machines less than one year
ago.

>> 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:
>[deleted]

And what exactly does that have to do with the fact that SciTech doesn't have
an OS/2 version of GLDirect dispite your proclaimations of once and future
OS/2
support?


>> >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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            10-Oct-99 11:55:13
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 14:35:09
Subj: (2/3) Re: Time to move on

>> 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.

> Right.  Drop SOM because other less capable platforms are more popular.

Half right. Drop some because OS/2 is less popular and show the world the
state
of OS/2 development.

>> >> 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.

I've read Warpcast. Now, we've gone from EDM/2 making a comeback to
irrelevent.
Interesting. And your statement still doesn't address what I said about OS/2
development, namely that it is falling off. Amiga has some developers, but no
one believes that it is a hotbed of software development. In OS/2, there just
isn't much happening on the development front.

> >> 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.

You HAVE to in OS/2. And all the while, programming advancements will pass you

by.

>> >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.

Well, what rally?

>> >> 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.

I'm not disputing that. It just seems that we don't know what it means.

>> 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.

Indeed for clearly mine did. You would not have found a harder sell than I. NT

won me over by working better than OS/2 did, for me, on the same hardware.
Even
the first week, when I changed drive letters and OS/2 failed to boot with a
"can't find country.sys" and NT boot successfully. For me, it simply
outperformed OS/2.

>> 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 don't think you are being realistic, that is how. I think that you will do
something. For example, did you anticipate installing fixpack 12? Did you
install earlier fixpacks?

> >> >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.

I had such thing while using OS/2. For example, until Warp 4, I couldn't play
AVIs and move the mouse without locking the system. Easy to avoid? You bet.
Would I consider that smooth? No, after all, I couldn't move the mouse.

Currently, I don't have any "Patient: My left arm hurts when I move it.
Doctor:Don't move it." problems. Now, this is not the same as problem-free.
For
example, I just installed an Acer 4x4x32 CD-RW. When I started using DirectCD,

Win2k would crash. That's the price of mixing bleeding edge and low level
software,but Adaptec is on the ball by having a patch fixes that problem. Now,

to me, a workaround, would clearly be not using DirectCD, but I wouldn't
considered that a smoothly running system.

BTW, can OS/2 use DirectCD?

[snip]

>> >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.

But we are talking about one's options when using OS/2. It would seem to me
that one shouldn't have to dump and OS, to do such a thing. A more optimal
solution would be an OS that allowed you to do as much as possible.

>> >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.

Of course. But if you needed that feature and it forced you to reboot, that
would be annoying, wouldn't it?


>> >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.

How many fixpacks have you installed? When you installed any, did you
anticipate needing another?

>> >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.  ;-)

I'd rather view a live horse's ass than beat a dead horse. Like you. :-)

>> >> 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.

Well, my mistake for one. That "486 than can" should be "486 that CANNOT".
Also, my point is that people in this group seem to feel that using OS/2
proves
they are knowledgable and using Windows proves someone else is not. My point
is
that smart people choose fast machines and Windows and deny OS/2.

>> >> 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.

Depends on where you buy it. I purchased the OS/2 Warp 4 upgrade for $129. The

full blown is $189. I've seen NT for as much as $249. I purchased the full-
blown for $72. If you don't shop around, your statement would be correct.

>> >> 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.

First, I've got a fast machine, so a small speed hit is irrelevent. Second,
like compression, you can encrypt individual files or folders. For example,
you
can easily make a directory and an files in it would be encrypted. No need to
encrypt programs, just your data. Third, since you don't know that the
encryption is paltry, why make such a comment? Why not instead, make one that
you can back up? Finally, there is the option create a recovery key if you so
wish, but of course, a recovery key is a security risk.

Any thing else you wish to add?

>> >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.

You seem to feel that people can't make decisions. All of my static payments
go
out electronically with no intervention on my part. This saves time and effort

and makes tracking payments easier. Time is money. Some companies even give
you
a discount for electronic payments. Again, however, you show that OS/2 user
characteristic of condemning what you don't have and "attacking" your fellows
that do want such a feature.

>> >>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.

First, HPFS Zip drive support on the PP version is iffy at best. Second,
protection bits is not even in the same universe as a disk that can have
read/write/password protection. I cannot believe that you would even offer
that
as a substitute. Third, under OS/2, the zip drive takes the next available,
lowest available drive letter. What this means is that the zip drive will
change if you change partitions. Under Windows, I made my CDROM Z: and my
ZipDrive Y. No matter what, they don't change.

You cannot do this under OS/2.

>> >> 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.

Not an alternative to people who want cheaper PP and don't have SCSI cards.
You, the "take my hand-me-down 486" want people do drop $100 on a SCSI card,
$250 on a SCSI scanner instead of spending $70 on a PP 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

Well, my personal was only $170 when I bought it. Very useful.

>> >> 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.

I suspect that someone making animated gifs wouldn't want to do so on the
command-line.

>> >> 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.
>>

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            10-Oct-99 11:55:13
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 14:35:09
Subj: (3/3) Re: Time to move on

>> 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.

Of course. Let me help. The answer would be no.

>> >> 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.

Simple methods sometimes provide simple results. Purify is an Unix and Windows

standard, but I understand how OS/2 forces one to make do.

>> >> OpenGL?
>>
>> >What about it?
>>
>> Hardware support.

>On the way.  Software support is already there.

"On the way". That would be NO.

>> >> 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.

Indeed, people who want the widest array of software and hardware possible.

>> 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?

Corel Office? Right. A dog that was dropped. You are probably the only man in
America using Corel Office. I suspect that you use it to say you can, instead
of for real work. As for the features, new Java developing is moving towards
Java2. If you want to be a Java developer who is behind practically every
other
OS and thus be non-competitive while making inferior Java products, by all
means, stick to OS/2.

>> 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


Truly, a rich use Marty, and similar to my own. I just have more fun. :-)

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 11:04:14
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 14:35:09
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: Hobbyist <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, [e-mail] posted :

> But, until someone comes along with a GUI shell that's as elegant as the
> WPS, there will be those who stick with OS/2, if only for that one
> aspect alone (i.e., the Work Place Shell).

It's nice, but far from indispensable. It's really the only thing left
to hang on to where OS/2 advocacy is concerned. What can the OS/2 WPS do
that the windows explorer can't that's indispensable?

> Sure, Linux (for example) is solid under the hood, but, for many,
> neither KDE nor GNOME/Enlightenment nor GNOME/WindowMaker compare to
> the WPS (SIQ issues notwithstanding).


--
-=Ali=-

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 11:15:03
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 16:28:09
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Hobbyist <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, John Hong posted :

> I'm curious, Camaron...why bother?  Do you really think most of
> us haven't *already* tried Linux or BeOS or something else?

If I may interject here. In this day and age I'd say that I think that
most of you really have not tried anything else apart from win9x.

--
-=Ali=-

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 11:37:10
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 16:28:09
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Hobbyist <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Khairil Yusof posted :

> Again.. isn't VMWare a virtual window manager, you need a Windows machine
don't
> you running?

VMWare is a virtual machine manager. You can install another OS so that
it runs in a window on the host OS which at present is either NT or
Linux. The developers seem to plan to support OS/2 being installable as
a 'guest' OS.

> Well the G4 Imac's with 256mbs of RAM, a short cycle way at the labs
> at uni will do fine for my DTP/Graphics work :) Also since OS/2 has
> Xfree86/OS2 and can run Linux programs (display them at least) can
                                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
                                       you're joking right?
> Linux run OS/2 programs?  :)

Linux doesn't need to run OS/2 programs. The only people who need to run
OS/2 programs are OS/2 users.

> > Linux has more Native applications than does OS/2.  I realize from a
> > user's perspective that
>
> But are they better? There's like 20 different email clients, and none as
good
> as PMMail. There were only a few newsreaders and none as good as ProNews/2.

Now this is where windows comes in. OS/2 is left in a cloud of smoke
where application support is concerned. There's always better on the
windows side. This OS/2 apps is better than any other OS's anthem is as
outdated as hell.

Combine the reliability and stability of NT with windows application
base and you have a combo there that's hard to beat and certainly not by
a long shot by OS/2.

> OS/2 users aren't exactly unknowledgeble people who don't try out
> alternatives.

<rant> They are however largely closed minded and stubbornly loyal to
their obsolete cause. </end rant> That's a generalisation of course.

> I wouldn't be using OS/2 if there was a better alternative for me now.
> For me BeOS would be the next best thing, except for the fact that it
> has no X server support and is missing a good Office suite.

If those are the reasons, why even consider BeOS? Somehow I sense a
severe lack of pragmatism here.

> And it's desktop would be the closest to the WPS.  Gnome & KDE
> desktops (not window managers) are very rough from my point of view.
> Reminds me of Windows but more aesthetically pleasing.

Remember that your primary reason for using an OS is to run apps in a
stable, reliable, robust environment. What's with the obsession with the
WPS vs Linux window managers vs Windows explorer?

> If linux becomes a better alternative FOR ME, then I'll switch.  If
> BeOS becomes a better alternative FOR ME, I'll switch to that to.

What will make it a better alternative?

Application and hardware support.
Usability
Stability and robustness. Right?

Have you looked at NT and really used it?
Have you really tried one of the recent Linux distros or just glanced at
one?

> If (however unlikely) Windows becomes a better alternative, I'll
> switch to that to.

NT costs about the same as OS/2 and makes for a great alternative.
Linux makes a great alternative as well. OS/2 is really in the dumps
unless you're using it in an enterprise setting where Warp server for
e-businness is deployed. You sound to me, however, like a SOHO user.

> And until that time comes, no amount of advocacy will make me switch
> from OS/2 :) It would just be a thread on the merits of each OS...


--
-=Ali=-

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            10-Oct-99 17:13:11
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 16:28:09
Subj: Re: There is a future for winvocates that like beating dead horses

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Sun, 10 Oct 1999 07:01:05, "Kelly Robinson" <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> But I do see your point about taking up hobbies.  I just started model
> ship/airplane building so I won't be hanging around here as long as I have
> in the past.
>

Yay!!!

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net

|---------------------------------------------------|
| Windows NT has detected that there were no errors |
| for the past 10 minutes. The system will now try  |
| to restart or crash. Click the OK button to       |
| continue.                                         |
|                      < Ok >                       |
|---------------------------------------------------|

(sigline nicked from Jayan M on comp.os.linux.misc)

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             10-Oct-99 17:08:10
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 16:28:09
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: [e-mail]

How come this kind of post always seems to originate from an .edu domain?

Cameron,

Grow up, and warmest regards on your new OS choice. Let us know when you
actually begin to pay your own way, OK?

Now, go away.

Guido

In <[e-mail]>, Cameron <[e-mail]> writes:
|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: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                             10-Oct-99 17:11:03
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 16:28:09
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: [e-mail]

In <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-nPpU9vdPhxnZ@localhost>, jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel
Jansens) writes:
|On Fri, 8 Oct 1999 21:42:14, Cameron <[e-mail]> 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

KDE is OK; but, like most of Linux, very immature.

Bottom line, Linux doesn't even have _one_ decent editor - 15 year old
Kedit still beats 'em all!

Guido

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             10-Oct-99 17:01:10
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 16:28:09
Subj: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (David
Frank) writes:
|In article <[e-mail]>, Kris Kadela <[e-mail]>
|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.
|||

In the last 6-7 yrs, the IBM PC Co has lost billions for IBM by pursuing
a 'Microsoft' first strategy - their demise is overdue.

Guido

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             10-Oct-99 17:27:24
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 16:28:09
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: [e-mail]

In <ZMb=N7j530l=[e-mail]>, Hobbyist <[e-mail]>
writes:
|On comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy, Joseph posted :
|
|| > Yeah, OS/2 Warp 3 has over 24 such fixpaks and OS/2 Warp 4 has 10, the
last
|| > I heard.  And their lot piss on NT because of bugs...
||
|| "Piss on NT"  that is baby talk
||
|| Most all of the complaints about NT bugs come from the NT user community.
|
|You miss the point. Many OS/2 advocates speak badly of NT putting bugs
|as it's main problem yet Warp has so many *fix*-packs.
|
|He was not saying anything about who reports NT bugs.
|
|--
|-=Ali=-

You miss the point (hobbyists often do): OS/2 has numerous fixpacks for
two major reasons:

1) IBM does not force OS/2 users thru the annual upgrade blood-letting
2) IBM actually _fixes_ the bugs in OS/2

regards,

Guido

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             10-Oct-99 17:15:12
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 16:28:09
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Esther Schindler) writes:
|On Fri, 8 Oct 1999 21:23:26, Mark Kelley <[e-mail]> 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

QCC reminds me of a sign on a former co-worker's wall. She was/is a
brilliant SNA specialist, another dinosaur technology, just like OS/2.

The sign on her wall read:

"I refuse to become involved in a battle of wits with an unarmed man."

Seems quite applicable here...

Guido

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

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            10-Oct-99 17:13:10
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 16:28:09
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Sun, 10 Oct 1999 16:37:20, Hobbyist <[e-mail]> wrote:

[snip]

> Remember that your primary reason for using an OS is to run apps in a
> stable, reliable, robust environment. What's with the obsession with the
> WPS vs Linux window managers vs Windows explorer?
>
This is actually a bit hard to explain to a Windows user. You see, we
OS/2 users have become accustomed to stability and robustness, so
we're looking at secundary features like ease of use. In that area,
the WPS is aeons ahead of the rest. (those who consider the WPS
unstable really should look at the kind of beating it will take before
it will start complaining)

Linux users of course know about stability, but they have yet a long
way to go in the field of usability.

Windows (pick any flavour of the day) really has neither, but it's
users *think* it has everything. This will one day in the future
become the archetypal example of twentieth century mass-psychosis.
Don't you feel proud you're part of history already?

[snip]

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net

|---------------------------------------------------|
| Windows NT has detected that there were no errors |
| for the past 10 minutes. The system will now try  |
| to restart or crash. Click the OK button to       |
| continue.                                         |
|                      < Ok >                       |
|---------------------------------------------------|

(sigline nicked from Jayan M on comp.os.linux.misc)

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

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            10-Oct-99 17:20:22
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 16:28:09
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Sun, 10 Oct 1999 17:11:06, [e-mail] wrote:

> In <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-nPpU9vdPhxnZ@localhost>, jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel
Jansens) writes:
> |On Fri, 8 Oct 1999 21:42:14, Cameron <[e-mail]> 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
>
> KDE is OK; but, like most of Linux, very immature.
>
> Bottom line, Linux doesn't even have _one_ decent editor - 15 year old
> Kedit still beats 'em all!
>

I thought Kedit was part of the KDE-package.

It ain't half nice, though. I only wish I could find a character mode
editor a la DOS "edit" (I'm a CUA-junk; <CTRL>+<KEY> sequences tend to
unleash homicidal fits for me). The Pine editor is sort of okay, but
still not it. I'm now mainly doing mcedit (the editor in Midnight
Commander).

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net

|---------------------------------------------------|
| Windows NT has detected that there were no errors |
| for the past 10 minutes. The system will now try  |
| to restart or crash. Click the OK button to       |
| continue.                                         |
|                      < Ok >                       |
|---------------------------------------------------|

(sigline nicked from Jayan M on comp.os.linux.misc)

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             10-Oct-99 17:32:06
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 16:28:09
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]>, Hobbyist <[e-mail]>
writes:
|On comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy, Jason posted :
|
|| Of course his point was particularly bad since it's only been relatively
|| recently that IBM released all the fixpacks to the generally public.  It
|| used to be that IBM only released the fixpacks that would help the
|| general public.    All the other fixpacks were made for specific problems
|| for customers and to add specific features for them also.  They then
|| decided that they let anyone download all the fixpacks.    So NT service
|| packs do not equal OS/2 fixpacks.
|
|NT service paks are just like OS/2 fixpaks. They enhance already present
|features to better suit customers needs and fix other minor problems.
|Can you tell me exactly what SP4 for NT comprised or are you just
|speaking off your head?
|
|--
|-=Ali=-

NT service packs are more about new feature support than anything else;
and, they are a _long_ time in-between. If MS would actually start to
release quality software (I know, Balmer's working on it), then the
state of their service packs wouldn't be such an issue.


Guido

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             10-Oct-99 17:44:27
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 19:56:29
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: [e-mail]

Hobbyist,

Take it to LINUX advocacy, OK? If that's where you want to go today,
go there. I use Linux often enough to know that it is: not a panacea,
not a very good replacement for OS/2 and quite useful.

However, Linux is woefully lacking in the productivity tools that
we all need to do our jobs. That's changing; but, for now, that's
where it's at. Your claim that Linux has more apps is total lunacy,
are you counting every bit of freeware available anywhere, or what?

Linux certainly poses a major problem for MS in the NT server space;
it's cheaper, faster and more reliable. On the desktop front, even
Linus himself admits that Linux has at least two years to go before
it will be ready to compete with established, more mature OS's.

BTW, VMware ain't soup yet either. The strategy of keeping the NT
image in the Linux file system is nuts, and _very_ inflexible.
Moreover, this strategy makes the VMware NT fragile and easily damaged,
requiring frequent re-installs - not a place to keep your important
data, email, etc.

Guido

In <[e-mail]>, Hobbyist <[e-mail]>
writes:
|On comp.os.os2.advocacy, [e-mail] posted :
|
|| But, until someone comes along with a GUI shell that's as elegant as the
|| WPS, there will be those who stick with OS/2, if only for that one
|| aspect alone (i.e., the Work Place Shell).
|
|It's nice, but far from indispensable. It's really the only thing left
|to hang on to where OS/2 advocacy is concerned. What can the OS/2 WPS do
|that the windows explorer can't that's indispensable?
|
|| Sure, Linux (for example) is solid under the hood, but, for many,
|| neither KDE nor GNOME/Enlightenment nor GNOME/WindowMaker compare to
|| the WPS (SIQ issues notwithstanding).
|
|
|--
|-=Ali=-



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

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

From: [e-mail]                                   10-Oct-99 18:08:07
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 19:56:29
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: [e-mail] (Mike Trettel)

On Sun, 10 Oct 1999 11:15:07 -0500, Hobbyist <[e-mail]> wrote:
>On comp.os.os2.advocacy, John Hong posted :
>
>> I'm curious, Camaron...why bother?  Do you really think most of
>> us haven't *already* tried Linux or BeOS or something else?
>
>If I may interject here. In this day and age I'd say that I think that
>most of you really have not tried anything else apart from win9x.
>
>--
>-=Ali=-

Really?  That's a fairly amazing (and arrogant) presumption on your
part.  I've tried and/or used the following list over the past 6-7
years:

MS-DOS 4.*, 5.0, 6.2
DR-DOS 5.0, 6.0, 7.0. 7.02,7.03
Win 3.1, 3.11 on top of the previous dosen
Win95
Win NT 3.5, 3.51, 4
OS/2 2.1, 2.11, 3.*, 4.*
WSEB beta
Linux 0.99, 1.*, 1.2*, 2.* (Slackware, Debian, Red Hat, SUSE, Caldera,
and others)
FreeBSD 2.2, 3.2
OpenBSD for m68k
Mac OS 7.1, 7.6.1
SCO Unix for x86

I would like to try out Solaris for x86 and BEOS for x86, but haven't
gotten around to it.  The only OS I've run consistently over the past 5
years has been OS/2, going from 2.1=> 4.* over that time period.  Linux
has managed to stay on my hard drive fairly consistently for the past
three years too, with more time being spent lately running SUSE 6.2.  I
have Win95 running on the basement PC, but that's for the kids to play
with.  I have to deal with NT at work, and really find it unintuitive
and kludgy, being blessed with the ever so wonderful Win95 interface.
Excellent stability and process control along with wonderful apps are
it's strong points-the interface is crap as far as I'm concerned. The
really damning thing is that in two years the OSS movement has created
two excellent GUIs in KDE and Gnome, while MS has essentially stood
still.  I don't think I'm alone in thinking that pop riviting Internet
Explorer in place of a desktop GUI is "progress"-KDE and Gnome are
proof of that.  The scary thing is that (of course) the KDE and Gnome
teams are not going to stand still.

PLease don't make assumptions about the knowledge of the people in this
newsgroup-not everyone is a narrow minded idealogue and/or is familiar
with a one or two OS's.

--
===========
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: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 15:06:01
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 19:56:29
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:
>
> In <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-nPpU9vdPhxnZ@localhost>, jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel
Jansens) writes:
> |On Fri, 8 Oct 1999 21:42:14, Cameron <[e-mail]> 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
>
> KDE is OK; but, like most of Linux, very immature.
>
> Bottom line, Linux doesn't even have _one_ decent editor - 15 year old
> Kedit still beats 'em all!

You obviously haven't used JOE (Joe's Own Editor).  It has key bindings
for Word Star, Word Perfect, and about 10 other apps.  It has online
help, macros you can define and play on-the-fly, spell checking,
compiler interface which can jump to line numbers of errors, built in
shell capability, and a clever acronym for a name.  ;-)

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                      10-Oct-99 14:58:23
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 19:56:29
Subj: Re: Opera for OS/2 makes progress

From: Jason <[e-mail]>

Kelly Robinson <[e-mail]> wrote:
: So when will it finally be released for OS/2, in 2003 - long after IE 9.0
: and Netscape 20.51 are released?

When they finish it.  They only got the source code very recently.  And
seeing as they got it compiling, I think things are moving along nicely.

: Why bother?  You have several alternatives for your platform.

Because Opera is the best web browser on any platform.

: Go get your
: $35 back from these thieves as they've not given you anything for it yet.

Again you are showing you ignorance, ignorance we have repeatedly tried
to cure you of, but you are hopeless.  We *never* paid Opera or any other
company even one penny for an Opera web browser.  We offered but they
declined.  No payments will be made, til they have a shipping product.
This is Opera on OS/2 101, and you have failed again.

: Jason <[e-mail]> wrote in message
: news:[e-mail]...
:> 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: [e-mail]                      10-Oct-99 14:52:20
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 19:56:29
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: Jason <[e-mail]>

In comp.os.os2.advocacy Hobbyist <[e-mail]> wrote:
: On comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy, Jason posted :

:> Of course his point was particularly bad since it's only been relatively
:> recently that IBM released all the fixpacks to the generally public.  It
:> used to be that IBM only released the fixpacks that would help the
:> general public.  All the other fixpacks were made for specific problems
:> for customers and to add specific features for them also.  They then
:> decided that they let anyone download all the fixpacks.  So NT service
:> packs do not equal OS/2 fixpacks.

: NT service paks are just like OS/2 fixpaks. They enhance already present
: features to better suit customers needs and fix other minor problems.
: Can you tell me exactly what SP4 for NT comprised or are you just
: speaking off your head?

And if you read my post carefully, you would see what I was talking
about.  OS/2 Fixpacks are generally created by IBM to solve a specific
client specific problems with reqards to OS/2, and only rarely are to fix
problems for the generally OS/2 population.  This used to be reflected by
the fact about only one out of every 7 of so fixpacks would be released to
the public.  NT service packs are to fix issues for the generally
public.  So trying to compare NT's 5 service packs with OS/2 Warp4's 12
Fixpacks, or OS/2 Warp3's 30 or so fixpacks doesn't hold water.

And personally I haven't encountered any good reasons to upgrade my NT
system from SP3, except maybe it would fix the damn video which is messed
up.  I have to boot into OS/2 or Win9X for that to work.

-Jason

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 15:14:12
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 19:56:29
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Hobbyist wrote:
>
> Now this is where windows comes in. OS/2 is left in a cloud of smoke
> where application support is concerned. There's always better on the
> windows side. This OS/2 apps is better than any other OS's anthem is as
> outdated as hell.

That's a remarkably close-minded and completely unsupportable statement.

> > OS/2 users aren't exactly unknowledgeble people who don't try out
> > alternatives.
>
> <rant> They are however largely closed minded and stubbornly loyal to
> their obsolete cause. </end rant> That's a generalisation of course.

Remove obsolete and now you have a "generalization" of the windoze
advocate.  Is it a correct one?

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 14:14:24
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 19:56:29
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: Hobbyist <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy, [e-mail] posted :


> NT service packs are more about new feature support than anything else;
> and, they are a _long_ time in-between. If MS would actually start to
> release quality software (I know, Balmer's working on it), then the
> state of their service packs wouldn't be such an issue.

NT SP4, 5 were released this year and SP6 is very soon to be released.
In a couple weeks I have been made to understand. The cry for more
frequent servicing has been heard and addressed.

--
-=Ali=-

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 15:21:27
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 19:56:29
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:
>
> In <ZMb=N7j530l=[e-mail]>, Hobbyist <[e-mail]>
writes:
> |On comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy, Joseph posted :
> |
> || > Yeah, OS/2 Warp 3 has over 24 such fixpaks and OS/2 Warp 4 has 10, the
last
> || > I heard.  And their lot piss on NT because of bugs...
> ||
> || "Piss on NT"  that is baby talk
> ||
> || Most all of the complaints about NT bugs come from the NT user community.
> |
> |You miss the point. Many OS/2 advocates speak badly of NT putting bugs
> |as it's main problem yet Warp has so many *fix*-packs.
> |
> |He was not saying anything about who reports NT bugs.
> |
> |--
> |-=Ali=-
>
> You miss the point (hobbyists often do): OS/2 has numerous fixpacks for
> two major reasons:
>
> 1) IBM does not force OS/2 users thru the annual upgrade blood-letting
> 2) IBM actually _fixes_ the bugs in OS/2

You also forgot:
3) IBM releases fixes more often than NT service packs are released.

I'm curious about the number of bugs/number of fixpacks ratio between NT
and OS/2.  I imagine OS/2's fixpacks fix fewer bugs, but are released
more often.  Anyone actually know if this is true?

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 14:18:15
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 19:56:29
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: Hobbyist <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy, [e-mail] posted :

> You miss the point (hobbyists often do): OS/2 has numerous fixpacks for
> two major reasons:
>
> 1) IBM does not force OS/2 users thru the annual upgrade blood-letting

What annual upgrade blood-letting? Please stop exaggerating. When was
NT4 released. Is it's next major upgrade yet released. Win98 was
released 3+yrs after win95 (I am not really into defending win9x but I
have to in this case).

On the other hand OS/2 is starving for an upgrade to it's client and
some users as yourself appease yourself quite pitifully at that by
saying that really silly statement as you said above, exaggerating as
usual.

> 2) IBM actually _fixes_ the bugs in OS/2

The same for M$. What FUD.

--
-=Ali=-

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 14:31:29
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 19:56:29
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: Hobbyist <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, [e-mail] posted :

> Take it to LINUX advocacy, OK? If that's where you want to go today,
> go there. I use Linux often enough to know that it is: not a panacea,
> not a very good replacement for OS/2 and quite useful.

I don't use linux. I prefer NT, but linux certainly has a SOHO
developmental direction that OS/s doesn't. Get with the program.

> However, Linux is woefully lacking in the productivity tools that
> we all need to do our jobs.

Agreed but OS/2's not too far behind.

> That's changing; but, for now, that's where it's at.  Your claim that
> Linux has more apps is total lunacy, are you counting every bit of
> freeware available anywhere, or what?

Please show me where I said that Linux has more apps than OS/2. I would
and am now saying that windows has probably more apps available than the
two platforms combined.

> Linux certainly poses a major problem for MS in the NT server space;
> it's cheaper, faster and more reliable.

Cheaper per install is all that you can prove there. TCO being cheaper
is yet to be proven. Faster and more reliable? .... again not proven.

> On the desktop front, even Linus himself admits that Linux has at
> least two years to go before it will be ready to compete with
> established, more mature OS's.

Like NT or errr, MacOS or <gulp> win98 you mean?
OS/2 isn't mentioned in the light of desktop OS competition. OS/2 is not
providing competition in the desktop OS market place.

> BTW, VMware ain't soup yet either. The strategy of keeping the NT
> image in the Linux file system is nuts, and _very_ inflexible.
> Moreover, this strategy makes the VMware NT fragile and easily damaged,
> requiring frequent re-installs - not a place to keep your important
> data, email, etc.

What an ignorant statement. Tell me something, have you tried VMWare or
just read about it on usenet?

If you're anal about NT residing in the linux file system, then create
NTFS partitions and install NT in there and then boot it in Linux using
VMWare. Are you aware that you can do this using VMWare? You have the
option of making virtual disks in the host OS file system or making
genuine partitions for the guest OS to be installed.
--
-=Ali=-

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 14:37:03
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 19:56:29
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Hobbyist <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Mike Trettel posted :

> >If I may interject here. In this day and age I'd say that I think that
> >most of you really have not tried anything else apart from win9x.
> >
> >--
> >-=Ali=-
>
> Really?  That's a fairly amazing (and arrogant) presumption on your
> part.  I've tried and/or used the following list over the past 6-7
> years:
>
> MS-DOS 4.*, 5.0, 6.2
> DR-DOS 5.0, 6.0, 7.0. 7.02,7.03
> Win 3.1, 3.11 on top of the previous dosen
> Win95
> Win NT 3.5, 3.51, 4
> OS/2 2.1, 2.11, 3.*, 4.*
> WSEB beta
> Linux 0.99, 1.*, 1.2*, 2.* (Slackware, Debian, Red Hat, SUSE, Caldera,
> and others)
> FreeBSD 2.2, 3.2
> OpenBSD for m68k
> Mac OS 7.1, 7.6.1
> SCO Unix for x86
>
> I would like to try out Solaris for x86 and BEOS for x86, but haven't
> gotten around to it.  The only OS I've run consistently over the past 5
> years has been OS/2, going from 2.1=> 4.* over that time period.  Linux
> has managed to stay on my hard drive fairly consistently for the past
> three years too, with more time being spent lately running SUSE 6.2.  I
> have Win95 running on the basement PC, but that's for the kids to play
> with.  I have to deal with NT at work, and really find it unintuitive
> and kludgy, being blessed with the ever so wonderful Win95 interface.
> Excellent stability and process control along with wonderful apps are
> it's strong points-the interface is crap as far as I'm concerned. The
> really damning thing is that in two years the OSS movement has created
> two excellent GUIs in KDE and Gnome, while MS has essentially stood
> still.  I don't think I'm alone in thinking that pop riviting Internet
> Explorer in place of a desktop GUI is "progress"-KDE and Gnome are
> proof of that.  The scary thing is that (of course) the KDE and Gnome
> teams are not going to stand still.
>
> PLease don't make assumptions about the knowledge of the people in this
> newsgroup-not everyone is a narrow minded idealogue and/or is familiar
> with a one or two OS's.

Thanks Mike for sharing your wide experience with me but in my statement
I used the word "most" and not "all'. I also used two other terms to put
the statement in more perspective and that is 'really tried'. This makes
it perfectly possible for you to make such an anecdotal interjection and
not bring the credibility of my statement crashing to the ground. :)
--
-=Ali=-

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 14:53:18
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 19:56:29
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Hobbyist <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, jansens_at_ibm_dot_net posted :

> > Remember that your primary reason for using an OS is to run apps in a
> > stable, reliable, robust environment. What's with the obsession with the
> > WPS vs Linux window managers vs Windows explorer?
> >
> This is actually a bit hard to explain to a Windows user. You see, we
> OS/2 users have become accustomed to stability and robustness, so
> we're looking at secundary features like ease of use. In that area,
> the WPS is aeons ahead of the rest. (those who consider the WPS
> unstable really should look at the kind of beating it will take before
> it will start complaining)

I used OS/2 for two years and have been using winNT since then, so for
your information, robustness and stability are features that I have
become accustomed to and even more so with NT. I have come to realise
that this is in fact the second most important ingredient of a useful
OS, the most important ingredient being hardware and application
support.

The WPS is not aeons ahead. That's a backward statement. Please remember
that while the OS/2 WPS is being neglected by IBM, all the other OS's
user interfaces have not been and have been being developed.

> Linux users of course know about stability, but they have yet a long
> way to go in the field of usability.

Agreed.

> Windows (pick any flavour of the day) really has neither, but it's
> users *think* it has everything.

NT *is* stable and very usable. "An evil child that's pretty can
sometimes appear very ugly". I think more pragmatism should be exercised
here. Your implied claims of NT being unstable and not usable are just
sadly mistaken and woefully ignorant, and to think, when I was still
very much an OS/2 camper and M$ hater, I used to believe people like you
who made statements like that about NT before I started actually *using*
it. I have certainly moved on. <sigh>

> This will one day in the future become the archetypal example of
> twentieth century mass-psychosis.  Don't you feel proud you're part of
> history already?

Now that's hilarious.

Tell me now. Isn't it wonderful feeling that you are one of the few who
has seen the light of OS/2 and actually choosing to walk the straight
and narrow path of sensible OS choice and computing?

Oh boy, I better go get dust my Warp4 CD's and reinstall.
--
-=Ali=-

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                   10-Oct-99 20:27:17
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 19:57:00
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: [e-mail] (Mike Trettel)

On Sun, 10 Oct 1999 14:37:07 -0500, Hobbyist <[e-mail]> wrote:
>On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Mike Trettel posted :

>
>Thanks Mike for sharing your wide experience with me but in my statement
>I used the word "most" and not "all'. I also used two other terms to put
>the statement in more perspective and that is 'really tried'. This makes
>it perfectly possible for you to make such an anecdotal interjection and
>not bring the credibility of my statement crashing to the ground. :)
>--
>-=Ali=-

Hey!  No fair being nice!  This is an advocacy newsgroup after
all-we're all supposed to offer uninformed opinions based upon popular
misconception!

Well, you're right-it is anecdoctal evidence on my part.  Still,
there's a few people on c.o.o.a. that seem to have at least a little
experience outside the narrow confines of Windows and/or OS/2 only.  I
also know that POSSI did take a web poll (yes, I know-another self
selecting poll) that indicated that OS/2 users tend to use multiple
OS's to a large degree.  As to myself, I have used Linux a great deal
as a desktop OS, and while I would prefer to keep using OS/2, there's
no doubt in my mind that I can use Linux every day for what I do.  It
most certainly is not perfect, and would not be the best solution for
everybody, but that's the way I see it.

Still want to check out Solaris though... :-).





--
===========
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: [e-mail]                                   10-Oct-99 20:42:04
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 19:57:00
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: [e-mail] (Mike Trettel)

On Sun, 10 Oct 1999 14:53:37 -0500, Hobbyist <[e-mail]> wrote:
>On comp.os.os2.advocacy, jansens_at_ibm_dot_net posted :

>
>The WPS is not aeons ahead. That's a backward statement. Please remember
>that while the OS/2 WPS is being neglected by IBM, all the other OS's
>user interfaces have not been and have been being developed.

Not looking for a fight here, but exactly what enhancements have been
done by Microsoft to the Windows GUI outside of the "integration" with
IE5?  The Windows desktop looks pretty stagnant to me-the only way MS
seems to "improve" (sarcasm, of course) it is when their monopoly is
threatened.  Also, simply because the WPS is not being further
developed does not equate to "no longer advanced".  I can just as
easily say that the WPS was so far ahead in the first place that MS
still hasn't come close to the feature set of the WPS.  Of course, this
is no longer important to MS with the removal of OS/2 as a realistic
competitor.

If you really want to see true development in user interfaces one
should look at the KDE and Gnome projects.  Both started off with
essentially *nothing*, and in two years time have come up quite usable
interfaces that are still in the exponential stage of development.


--
===========
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: [e-mail]                             10-Oct-99 21:10:06
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 19:57:00
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]|, [e-mail] writes:
|In <[e-mail]|, [e-mail] (David
Frank) writes:
||In article <[e-mail]|, Kris Kadela <[e-mail]|
||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.
||||
|
|In the last 6-7 yrs, the IBM PC Co has lost billions for IBM by pursuing
|a 'Microsoft' first strategy - their demise is overdue.
|
|Guido

Could not agree more. The division being down sized is the one that has been
least
supportive of OS/2 and Network Computing in general. It bother's me, however,
how
the main stream press views this minor reorganization as a negative and how
the market
evaluated the news as negative news. It is so in keeping with the strategy
that IBM
has been advocating for the last 3 years and even before that when some
thought
PCs could replace mainframes. With Windows being more than 10 percent
of the cost of a PC and that PC costing up to $7,000 for maintenance over 5
years
clearly some change was necessary. The B in IBM is for
business not personal computing. Business is moving to Network Computing and
OS/2 is a big part of that. What I still do not understand is Pat's moving
from the
OS/2 and Java group at IBM to SUN microsystems. The VisualAge for Java 3.0
product is almost out of the door. I would have thought she would want to be
at IBM for that. I am hoping for news at WarpStock.

http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/client.htm


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

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

From: [e-mail]                            10-Oct-99 23:37:01
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 19:57:00
Subj: Re: Opera for OS/2 makes progress

From: "Adrian Gschwend" <[e-mail]>

On 10 Oct 1999 14:58:46 -0500, Jason wrote:

>When they finish it.  They only got the source code very recently.  And
>seeing as they got it compiling, I think things are moving along nicely.

I just got the first binary release (early alpha), so progress is doing
*very* well (remember, we just got the code).

>Because Opera is the best web browser on any platform.

exaclty.

>Again you are showing you ignorance, ignorance we have repeatedly tried
>to cure you of, but you are hopeless.  We *never* paid Opera or any other
>company even one penny for an Opera web browser.  We offered but they
>declined.  No payments will be made, til they have a shipping product.
>This is Opera on OS/2 101, and you have failed again.

Thanks for your words, I couldn't say it bether :)

cu

Adrian


---
Adrian Gschwend
@ OS/2 Netlabs

ICQ: 22419590
[e-mail]
-------
The OS/2 OpenSource Project:
http://www.netlabs.org


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OS/2 Netlabs (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                      10-Oct-99 14:50:24
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 19:57:00
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: "Chad Mulligan" <[e-mail]>

Joseph wrote in message <[e-mail]>...
>
>
>Kelly Robinson wrote:
>
<snipped>
>
>You lack perspective.
>
>Who else besides MS is stupid enough to push the limits so far that the
went to
>trial under anti-trust law?
>

Intel, IBM, AT&T, Standard Oil.....




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

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

From: [e-mail]                      10-Oct-99 14:57:20
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 19:57:00
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: "Chad Mulligan" <[e-mail]>

Marty wrote in message <[e-mail]>...
>[e-mail] wrote:
>>
>> In <ZMb=N7j530l=[e-mail]>, Hobbyist
<[e-mail]> writes:
>> |On comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy, Joseph posted :
>> |
>> || > Yeah, OS/2 Warp 3 has over 24 such fixpaks and OS/2 Warp 4 has
10, the last
>> || > I heard.  And their lot piss on NT because of bugs...
>> ||
>> || "Piss on NT"  that is baby talk
>> ||
>> || Most all of the complaints about NT bugs come from the NT user
community.
>> |
>> |You miss the point. Many OS/2 advocates speak badly of NT putting
bugs
>> |as it's main problem yet Warp has so many *fix*-packs.
>> |
>> |He was not saying anything about who reports NT bugs.
>> |
>> |--
>> |-=Ali=-
>>
>> You miss the point (hobbyists often do): OS/2 has numerous fixpacks
for
>> two major reasons:
>>
>> 1) IBM does not force OS/2 users thru the annual upgrade
blood-letting
>> 2) IBM actually _fixes_ the bugs in OS/2
>
>You also forgot:
>3) IBM releases fixes more often than NT service packs are released.
>
>I'm curious about the number of bugs/number of fixpacks ratio between
NT
>and OS/2.  I imagine OS/2's fixpacks fix fewer bugs, but are released
>more often.  Anyone actually know if this is true?
>

I doubt it somewhat.  You could compare easily enough, the list of KB
articles that the service packs address are available on the technet web
site you'd have to count all of them since they don't enumerate the
fixes in previous service packs.  The number will be quite high for both
OS's but some allowance should also be made for NT being a more complex
OS than OS/2 and some index for removing application fixes that are
included in service packs as well.  Of the 40 odd Security fixes
released by MS this year for NT, only 50% or so are strictly NT related
the rest are IIS, IE, ODBC and Office problems.

>- Marty


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

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            10-Oct-99 22:05:10
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 19:57:00
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Sun, 10 Oct 1999 19:53:37, Hobbyist <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On comp.os.os2.advocacy, jansens_at_ibm_dot_net posted :
>
> > > Remember that your primary reason for using an OS is to run apps in a
> > > stable, reliable, robust environment. What's with the obsession with the
> > > WPS vs Linux window managers vs Windows explorer?
> > >
> > This is actually a bit hard to explain to a Windows user. You see, we
> > OS/2 users have become accustomed to stability and robustness, so
> > we're looking at secundary features like ease of use. In that area,
> > the WPS is aeons ahead of the rest. (those who consider the WPS
> > unstable really should look at the kind of beating it will take before
> > it will start complaining)
>
> I used OS/2 for two years and have been using winNT since then, so for
> your information, robustness and stability are features that I have
> become accustomed to and even more so with NT. I have come to realise
> that this is in fact the second most important ingredient of a useful
> OS, the most important ingredient being hardware and application
> support.
>
Excuse me, why?
This keeps coming up all the time: Windows is great 'cuz it has
hardware and applications support. Why should one care about that as
soon as one has a running and equipped box?

I can see how that could become an issue when new stuff is needed, but
until then, why care about the number of apps that platform X or Y
supports?

And as for NT being flaky: I admit that the last time I used NT was in
its 3.51 incarnation. When it crashed on MS Office, I called it quits
(it wasn't on my own machine, luckily)

> The WPS is not aeons ahead. That's a backward statement. Please remember
> that while the OS/2 WPS is being neglected by IBM, all the other OS's
> user interfaces have not been and have been being developed.
>
The WPS is *still* by far the best user interface in existence for
*any* computer platform. I'll fight anyone over that. Tell you what,
I'll even tie one arm behind my back.

> > Linux users of course know about stability, but they have yet a long
> > way to go in the field of usability.
>
> Agreed.
>
> > Windows (pick any flavour of the day) really has neither, but it's
> > users *think* it has everything.
>
> NT *is* stable and very usable. "An evil child that's pretty can
> sometimes appear very ugly". I think more pragmatism should be exercised
> here. Your implied claims of NT being unstable and not usable are just
> sadly mistaken and woefully ignorant, and to think, when I was still
> very much an OS/2 camper and M$ hater, I used to believe people like you
> who made statements like that about NT before I started actually *using*
> it. I have certainly moved on. <sigh>
>
So why is it that you seem to find it necessary to come back
repeatedly and keep telling us about your great move? I bet you
haven't convinced a single soul in this NG to "convert" to NT, but you
still keep telling us how stupid we all are and how smart you were.
Yeah, I know, "best tool for the job", "I'm not saying you're all
stupid" and more of that. But your actions refute your words why?

> > This will one day in the future become the archetypal example of
> > twentieth century mass-psychosis.  Don't you feel proud you're part of
> > history already?
>
> Now that's hilarious.
>
Why thank you. I'm flattered.

> Tell me now. Isn't it wonderful feeling that you are one of the few who
> has seen the light of OS/2 and actually choosing to walk the straight
> and narrow path of sensible OS choice and computing?
>
I must admit it is a great feeling, yes. But you see, we keep that to
ourselves in our own newsgroup. We're not running around UseNet
shouting at people: "You're all doomed! Use Warp or you'll burn in
hell!"

The Jehovah's Witnesses of UseNet are people like you who find it
necessary to hang around in other NG's telling people that they're
wrong.

> Oh boy, I better go get dust my Warp4 CD's and reinstall.

You're already lost to the Satan. If you ever even so much as touch
that holy CD again, it'll burn the flesh of your fingers.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net

|---------------------------------------------------|
| Windows NT has detected that there were no errors |
| for the past 10 minutes. The system will now try  |
| to restart or crash. Click the OK button to       |
| continue.                                         |
|                      < Ok >                       |
|---------------------------------------------------|

(sigline nicked from Jayan M on comp.os.linux.misc)

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          10-Oct-99 14:53:26
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 21:15:25
Subj: Re: IBM Licenses SciTech Graphics Technology!

From: [e-mail] (Kendall Bennett)

In article <BGtODEdD7Dku-pn2-HsGrY3KH7dnr@localhost>, [e-mail]
says...

> Congratulations, great news for SCI, IBM and OS/2.
>
> Hate to rain on your party. However, how about returning
> the favour of those beta-testers from our community and set
> up a real support (immediate answers) system here in the news-
> groups this community frequents? So that we can overcome tho-
> se pesky install problems a lot of us have experienced (probably
> partly because of the GRADD integration <g>).

Actually we have a news group on our server that you can access at:

 new://news.scitechsoft.com/scitech.display.doctor.os2.beta

This is where you will get the best response from your question, and more
importantly if you don't get a response we will at least read your
problem report and act on it. You can also access those newsgroups via
our web page if you wish, using our new web/news gateway.

> Modernizing your support is easy I learned to my surprise recently.

We are looking at new technologies for use on our web site, that will
allow users to post problem reports on our web site, and have those
reports answered by our technician. You will be able to track your
problem report on the web, and more importantly the problems and answers
will end up in an online knowledge base you will be able to browse.

However I am not sure when we will get that set up, as we are evaluating
different technologies that we can use for that ;-)

--

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
|      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: [e-mail]                           11-Oct-99 09:58:12
  To: All                                               10-Oct-99 21:15:25
Subj: The Innovators

From: Paul Arnott <[e-mail]>

This appears on MS site
Wota freeking JOKE!!!

                     We formed the Freedom to Innovate Network (FIN) as
a response to the
                     overwhelming amount of correspondence we received
from around the
                     U.S. and overseas regarding the trial with the
Department of Justice and
                     other public policy issues. The FIN is a
non-partisan, grassroots network of
                     citizens and businesses who have a stake in the
success of Microsoft and
                     the high-tech industry. The FIN will help you stay
up to date on critical
                     developments in public policy. Sign up for a free
e-newsletter, tell us your
                     thoughts, take action and stay informed. It's how
you can make a
                     difference!

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 19:20:24
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 03:59:11
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Hobbyist <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Mike Trettel posted :

> Hey!  No fair being nice!  This is an advocacy newsgroup after
> all-we're all supposed to offer uninformed opinions based upon popular
> misconception!
>
> Well, you're right-it is anecdoctal evidence on my part.  Still,
> there's a few people on c.o.o.a. that seem to have at least a little
> experience outside the narrow confines of Windows and/or OS/2 only.  I
> also know that POSSI did take a web poll (yes, I know-another self
> selecting poll) that indicated that OS/2 users tend to use multiple
> OS's to a large degree.  As to myself, I have used Linux a great deal
> as a desktop OS, and while I would prefer to keep using OS/2, there's
> no doubt in my mind that I can use Linux every day for what I do.  It
> most certainly is not perfect, and would not be the best solution for
> everybody, but that's the way I see it.

Well this is why I stress, 'really used'. I've given NT and OS/2 their
fair share of time and there is no way someone who has really tried NT
can say that it's trash when compared to OS/2. That's just plain
incorrect and reeking of ignorance.

I wouldn't argue the same for Linux though  in a SOHO setting. It does
need some more maturing.

> Still want to check out Solaris though... :-).

--
-=Ali=-

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                     10-Oct-99 17:35:02
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 03:59:11
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


Dennis Peterson wrote:


> I define serious
> businesses as those who have a multi-million dollar IS group and would
> include MCI, Boeing, GM, GE, Amazon.Com as examples. Even mighty MSFT
> has a significant number of Unix systems running and so far as I know,
> do not depend on Linux for business purposes beyond researching the
> technology (probing for weaknesses'd be my best guess).

This was just sent to me via e-mail.

> >From www.netcraft.com:
>
> www.hotmail.com is running Apache/1.3.6 (Unix)
> mod_ssl/2.2.8 SSLeay/0.9.0b on FreeBSD
>




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

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

From: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 19:34:23
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 03:59:11
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Hobbyist <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Mike Trettel posted :

> Not looking for a fight here, but exactly what enhancements have been
> done by Microsoft to the Windows GUI outside of the "integration" with
> IE5?

The shell enhancements gained from IE+ cannot be belittled. They are
quite significant and comprise the major enhancement.

> The Windows desktop looks pretty stagnant to me-the only way MS
> seems to "improve" (sarcasm, of course) it is when their monopoly is
> threatened.

That sounds like FUD to me. Would you care to prove that?

> Also, simply because the WPS is not being further developed does not
> equate to "no longer advanced".  I can just as easily say that the WPS
> was so far ahead in the first place that MS still hasn't come close to
> the feature set of the WPS.  Of course, this is no longer important to
> MS with the removal of OS/2 as a realistic competitor.

That would have been a valid comment in the world of win3.1 but OS/2
really sensitised me to the object oriented approach and I carried that
mentality over to NT and realised that a very working similarity was
their. Except for more control over associations I could easily achieve
most of the WSP functionality in explorer. I very soon stopped missing
the WPS.

By the way, I just changed my screen resolution on the fly without
rebooting. I adjusted my icon sizes to how I wanted and changed the
color of my windows from that boring light grey color. The font
anti-aliasing is just great. These additions among many others are well
appreciated and more than eased the change from the WPS.

> If you really want to see true development in user interfaces one
> should look at the KDE and Gnome projects.

I have seen them. They're coming along very nicely. :)

What's happening with OS/2's. Oh, I forgot, it's already reached the
top.

> Both started off with essentially *nothing*, and in two years time
> have come up quite usable interfaces that are still in the exponential
> stage of development.

Quite true. Who said that windows explorer or the OS/2 WPS was the best
there could be. There is just as good if not better out there; if you
take a look at NextStep and RiscOS.

--
-=Ali=-

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                     10-Oct-99 17:42:01
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 03:59:11
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


Chad Mulligan wrote:

> Joseph wrote in message <[e-mail]>...
> >
> >
> >Kelly Robinson wrote:
> >
> <snipped>
> >
> >You lack perspective.
> >
> >Who else besides MS is stupid enough to push the limits so far that the
> went to
> >trial under anti-trust law?
> >
>
> Intel, IBM, AT&T, Standard Oil.....

Intel has not gone to trial but rather choose to deal quitely with the FTC.
AT&T agreed on a break-up so they could enter into new markets.

Standard Oil ? yes
IBM ?  yes.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 20:56:09
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 03:59:11
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Hobbyist wrote:
>
> On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Mike Trettel posted :
>
> > Hey!  No fair being nice!  This is an advocacy newsgroup after
> > all-we're all supposed to offer uninformed opinions based upon popular
> > misconception!
> >
> > Well, you're right-it is anecdoctal evidence on my part.  Still,
> > there's a few people on c.o.o.a. that seem to have at least a little
> > experience outside the narrow confines of Windows and/or OS/2 only.  I
> > also know that POSSI did take a web poll (yes, I know-another self
> > selecting poll) that indicated that OS/2 users tend to use multiple
> > OS's to a large degree.  As to myself, I have used Linux a great deal
> > as a desktop OS, and while I would prefer to keep using OS/2, there's
> > no doubt in my mind that I can use Linux every day for what I do.  It
> > most certainly is not perfect, and would not be the best solution for
> > everybody, but that's the way I see it.
>
> Well this is why I stress, 'really used'. I've given NT and OS/2 their
> fair share of time and there is no way someone who has really tried NT
> can say that it's trash when compared to OS/2. That's just plain
> incorrect and reeking of ignorance.

I beg to differ.  I've used NT 4.0 for word processing, "internetting",
development of GUI apps, Netscape plugins, and device drivers, and even
games.  I much prefer working in and using OS/2 for all of these areas.
Your generalization speaks of your own closed-mindedness and ignorance.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                     10-Oct-99 17:50:11
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 03:59:11
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


[e-mail] wrote:

> In <[e-mail]|, [e-mail] writes:
>

>
> |In the last 6-7 yrs, the IBM PC Co has lost billions for IBM by pursuing
> |a 'Microsoft' first strategy - their demise is overdue.
> |
> |Guido
>
> Could not agree more. The division being down sized is the one that has been
least
> supportive of OS/2 and Network Computing in general.

Cannivino, who headed the OS/2 effort vs. MS estimated that IBM spend 1-2
billion on developing
and promoting OS/2.  That amount is talked about as a large waste of money for
IBM.  The PC Co.
lost 1 billion in 1998 trying to sell MS Windows based systems.  You sometimes
have to put costs
into perspective.

IBM seems to be dealing more with DELL as a retailer and IBM as the technology
supplier.  Rather
than losing billions, IBM should focus on selling technologies to the PC
market and pushing the
NC market.

IMHO their best chance on a new consumer PC is with Nintendo and the PPC based
"Dolphin"
entertainment console.



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

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

From: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 20:03:18
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 03:59:11
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Hobbyist <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, jansens_at_ibm_dot_net posted :

> > I used OS/2 for two years and have been using winNT since then, so for
> > your information, robustness and stability are features that I have
> > become accustomed to and even more so with NT. I have come to realise
> > that this is in fact the second most important ingredient of a useful
> > OS, the most important ingredient being hardware and application
> > support.
> >
> Excuse me, why?
> This keeps coming up all the time: Windows is great 'cuz it has
> hardware and applications support. Why should one care about that as
> soon as one has a running and equipped box?

That's true if we are just speaking of your individual situation. I left
OS/2 because I couldn't equip my box with the apps that I wanted to run.

If you wish to advocate your OS you have to speak about these issues.
You can't run away from them. An OS is nothing without application and
hardware support being solid. This is why it's always brought up.

> I can see how that could become an issue when new stuff is needed, but
> until then, why care about the number of apps that platform X or Y
> supports?

You may well be missing a lot out there. If you like stagnation, are
overwhelmed by advancing technology or have very specialised needs that
only OS/2 will cater to then I guess you have your point.

Linux would be a roller coaster ride for you it would seem. Once you get
it working, there's no interest in getting it working better or done
better. Hmmmm

> And as for NT being flaky: I admit that the last time I used NT was in
> its 3.51 incarnation. When it crashed on MS Office, I called it quits
> (it wasn't on my own machine, luckily)

Cripes! Thanks for putting me in perspective and I'm sure that this is
the type of experience that OS/2 users have with NT when they claim that
it's unstable, unreliable and flaky. I suggest that you take another
look before so ignorantly brushing it off. Just like how OS/2 has
undergone major changes since version 3. So has NT undergone changes.

> The WPS is *still* by far the best user interface in existence for
> *any* computer platform. I'll fight anyone over that. Tell you what,
> I'll even tie one arm behind my back.

:-) Who am I to convince a man who's convinced himself so much.

> So why is it that you seem to find it necessary to come back
> repeatedly and keep telling us about your great move? I bet you
> haven't convinced a single soul in this NG to "convert" to NT, but you
> still keep telling us how stupid we all are and how smart you were.

I don't consider you stupid at all. Why do you think that. I used to say
the very things that you used to say. :) I don't care about converting
anyone really. I post here for the fun of it. It makes for interesting
discussion especially since I've been there and done that.

> Yeah, I know, "best tool for the job", "I'm not saying you're all
> stupid" and more of that. But your actions refute your words why?

You read too much into why I'm here.

> > Now that's hilarious.
> >
> Why thank you. I'm flattered.

:-)

> I must admit it is a great feeling, yes. But you see, we keep that to
> ourselves in our own newsgroup. We're not running around UseNet
> shouting at people: "You're all doomed! Use Warp or you'll burn in
> hell!"

Well you don't do it because you won't be credible doing it. You'll be
laughed at. If we come here saying that you should stop using OS/2 and
get with the program, then a discussion starts. :)

> The Jehovah's Witnesses of UseNet are people like you who find it
> necessary to hang around in other NG's telling people that they're
> wrong.

It's people like us that make this advocacy group come alive. Can't you
see that? Why are *you* here in this advocacy group? Do you prefer
having discussions with the likes of me or having exchanges like this:

 "The WPS is *still* by far the best user interface in existence for
 * any* computer platform.  I'll fight anyone over that.  Tell you
 what, I'll even tie one arm behind my back."

Reply:

 "Preach it brother OS/2 Vocate!!!"

or

 "Agreed. :)"

We make the group exciting. Admit it?

> > Oh boy, I better go get dust my Warp4 CD's and reinstall.
>
> You're already lost to the Satan. If you ever even so much as touch
> that holy CD again, it'll burn the flesh of your fingers.

Hahahahahahahaha. The exchange was fun by the way and I'm glad that you
take it in good spirit. We're just speaking about OS's right?

<grumble> The spirits of OS/2 continue to walk these newsgroups.
--
-=Ali=-

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 20:07:13
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 03:59:11
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Hobbyist <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :

> Hobbyist wrote:
> >
> > Now this is where windows comes in. OS/2 is left in a cloud of smoke
> > where application support is concerned. There's always better on the
> > windows side. This OS/2 apps is better than any other OS's anthem is as
> > outdated as hell.
>
> That's a remarkably close-minded and completely unsupportable statement.

How so?

> > > OS/2 users aren't exactly unknowledgeble people who don't try out
> > > alternatives.
> >
> > <rant> They are however largely closed minded and stubbornly loyal to
> > their obsolete cause. </end rant> That's a generalisation of course.
>
> Remove obsolete and now you have a "generalization" of the windoze
> advocate.  Is it a correct one?

Agreed. At least they aren't stubbornly loyal to an obsolete cause.;-)

Personally, I advocate the best OS for whatever purpose. I'm not a
windows advocate per se though NT happens to work best for me.
--
-=Ali=-

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                      10-Oct-99 18:07:04
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 03:59:11
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: "Chad Mulligan" <[e-mail]>

Joseph wrote in message <[e-mail]>...
>
>
>Chad Mulligan wrote:
>
>> Joseph wrote in message <[e-mail]>...
>> >
>> >
>> >Kelly Robinson wrote:
>> >
>> <snipped>
>> >
>> >You lack perspective.
>> >
>> >Who else besides MS is stupid enough to push the limits so far that
the
>> went to
>> >trial under anti-trust law?
>> >
>>
>> Intel, IBM, AT&T, Standard Oil.....
>
>Intel has not gone to trial but rather choose to deal quitely with the
FTC.
The weekend before trial began.

>AT&T agreed on a break-up so they could enter into new markets.
They were ordered to breakup by a Judge.

>
>Standard Oil ? yes
>IBM ?  yes.
>
>


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

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

From: [e-mail]                              10-Oct-99 18:06:29
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 03:59:11
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Dennis Peterson <[e-mail]>

Joseph wrote:
>
> Dennis Peterson wrote:
>
> > I define serious
> > businesses as those who have a multi-million dollar IS group and would
> > include MCI, Boeing, GM, GE, Amazon.Com as examples. Even mighty MSFT
> > has a significant number of Unix systems running and so far as I know,
> > do not depend on Linux for business purposes beyond researching the
> > technology (probing for weaknesses'd be my best guess).
>
> This was just sent to me via e-mail.
>
> > >From www.netcraft.com:
> >
> > www.hotmail.com is running Apache/1.3.6 (Unix)
> > mod_ssl/2.2.8 SSLeay/0.9.0b on FreeBSD
> >

But what are they running their business tools on? You know, the HR
stuff, the billing system, etc. That is the trough where the big boys
feed. A web server is a really trivial thing for non-NT systems.

--
dp -- BS#3, LF#27, AH#95

                 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: [e-mail]                                     10-Oct-99 18:10:26
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 03:59:11
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>

I appreciated your commentary on checking software for OS/2.

William Sonna wrote:

> I'm not sure I would be interested in balancing my check book or doing
> my taxes on the web.  The web is too public a place.

There are many points of failure for those seeking financial scams and easy
access to our
personal information.   Even physical mail is stolen and the bills we mail are
cleaned, and
reissued with phoney transactions.

I want the security and reliability of my data being stored on the server.  A
point of failure
is the web but on-line transactions and banking is not that vulnerable.
128-bit encryption for
transactions.  A bank doing the IT security.  I see less risk using common
sense for selecting
passwords.  I'd rather use a web service associated with an insured bank.

IMHO the biggest risk people face is from a lost day planner.  Too much info
is left in those
and when stolen you're very vulnerable.  I have a Palm which I have security
enabled and still
refuse to put anything in there that would compromise my banking or list my
passwords.



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

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

From: [e-mail]                      11-Oct-99 11:12:14
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 03:59:11
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: [e-mail] (Khairil Yusof)

On Sun, 10 Oct 1999 16:37:20, Hobbyist <[e-mail]> wrote:

> > Well the G4 Imac's with 256mbs of RAM, a short cycle way at the labs
> > at uni will do fine for my DTP/Graphics work :) Also since OS/2 has
> > Xfree86/OS2 and can run Linux programs (display them at least) can
>                                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>                                        you're joking right?

Nope.. by using Xfree86/OS2 I run programs off my friends Linux box and uni
servers all the time. Hmm.. Enlightenment (0.16), Eterm, XChat, Gimp 1.1.9,
Spruce, Lame... They've been ported and are running fine on my OS/2 machine
though Gimp 1.1.9 is very unstable but it's a DR.

> <rant> They are however largely closed minded and stubbornly loyal to
> their obsolete cause. </end rant> That's a generalisation of course.
> If those are the reasons, why even consider BeOS? Somehow I sense a
> severe lack of pragmatism here.

You've just contradicted yourself here. Why am I closed minded yet trying
other
alternatives? :) No OS is perfect, I use OS/2 on my desktop, Macs for design
work, Windows NT in the labs at Uni (and support). I also use Linux regularly
on
my friends computer (though mostly remotely by displaying it on my X Server).
OS/2 has it's limiatations just as everything else, that's why I use all these

platforms. At the moment, I have no reason to use Windows much as I'm happy
with
my OS/2 applications. When there is a Windows program that I really have to
use
to do my work, then I will be using Windows.

> What will make it a better alternative?

Userbility.

> Have you looked at NT and really used it?

Yeah.. like I have to use it everyday :)

> Have you really tried one of the recent Linux distros or just glanced at
> one?

Yes since the start of the year (RH 5.2, 6.0, Suse 6.2 and Mandrake 6.0)

:)

Stuff this NG ... Gotta get work done.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                     10-Oct-99 18:15:04
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 03:59:11
Subj: Re: Opera for OS/2 makes progress

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


Kelly Robinson wrote:

> So when will it finally be released for OS/2, in 2003 - long after IE 9.0
> and Netscape 20.51 are released?

IE 9.0?   Who made fun of whom?

This endless need to update a browser is a liability and the reason Windows
PCs
are doomed.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                            10-Oct-99 21:34:02
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 03:59:11
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>Hobbyist wrote:
>>
>> On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Mike Trettel posted :
>>
>> > Hey!  No fair being nice!  This is an advocacy newsgroup after
>> > all-we're all supposed to offer uninformed opinions based upon popular
>> > misconception!
>> >
>> > Well, you're right-it is anecdoctal evidence on my part.  Still,
>> > there's a few people on c.o.o.a. that seem to have at least a little
>> > experience outside the narrow confines of Windows and/or OS/2 only.  I
>> > also know that POSSI did take a web poll (yes, I know-another self
>> > selecting poll) that indicated that OS/2 users tend to use multiple
>> > OS's to a large degree.  As to myself, I have used Linux a great deal
>> > as a desktop OS, and while I would prefer to keep using OS/2, there's
>> > no doubt in my mind that I can use Linux every day for what I do.  It
>> > most certainly is not perfect, and would not be the best solution for
>> > everybody, but that's the way I see it.
>>
>> Well this is why I stress, 'really used'. I've given NT and OS/2 their
>> fair share of time and there is no way someone who has really tried NT
>> can say that it's trash when compared to OS/2. That's just plain
>> incorrect and reeking of ignorance.
>
>I beg to differ.  I've used NT 4.0 for word processing, "internetting",
>development of GUI apps, Netscape plugins, and device drivers, and even
>games.  I much prefer working in and using OS/2 for all of these areas.
>Your generalization speaks of your own closed-mindedness and ignorance.
>
>- Marty
>

I believe his point is that if you've used both extensive, like I have, you
would not call NT trash. I had a close-mind about NT like so many here, but NT

opened it by being an extremely capable operating system.

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                     10-Oct-99 18:21:23
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 03:59:11
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


Dennis Peterson wrote:

> "[e-mail]" wrote:
> >
> > Dennis Peterson wrote:
> > >
>
> > >
> > > Of course, if all you want is a cute OS to replace OS/2 that is also not
> > > NT then Linux will do.
> >
> > What do you think about the BSDs?  FreeBSD and NetBSD.
>
> Are they cute? I like the BSD Unixes -- I learned Unix on a BSD Unix at
> Berkeley, in fact. I wouldn't use one at work, though.

I believe Yahoo runs BSD for their servers.  I've been told MS Hot mail runs
BSD.  I use BSD as a compute server because of its security and LINUX
compatibility.   We also use BSD for controlling instruments.  I still use
OS/2
as a PC OS.

I don't disagree about crummy Wintel hardware and how the marketing driven
technology can hold a project/person back.  My compute server was a nightmare
to
put together -- Intel's undocumented limitations with their CPUs and etc.  I
can
see why talking about scaling Wintel is such a joke just with the hardware
problems alone.



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

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

From: [e-mail]                                     10-Oct-99 18:36:21
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 03:59:11
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


Chad Mulligan wrote:

> Joseph wrote in message <[e-mail]>...
> >
> >
> >Chad Mulligan wrote:
> >
> >> Joseph wrote in message <[e-mail]>...
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Kelly Robinson wrote:
> >> >
> >> <snipped>
> >> >
> >> >You lack perspective.
> >> >
> >> >Who else besides MS is stupid enough to push the limits so far that
> the
> >> went to
> >> >trial under anti-trust law?
> >> >
> >>
> >> Intel, IBM, AT&T, Standard Oil.....
> >
> >Intel has not gone to trial but rather choose to deal quitely with the
> FTC.
> The weekend before trial began.

Yes.  Quite and civil discussions and no ugly trial.
That is very different from MS which went to trial over the consent decree
they were accused of violating.  Then they found themselves in such a
disagreement with the DOJ that they were sued for anti-trust violations in
a sweeping case that addresses events which occurred during the tenure of
the consent decree.

>
> >AT&T agreed on a break-up so they could enter into new markets.
> They were ordered to breakup by a Judge.

Please be specific .  IMHO
AT&T did not go to trial over anti-trust violations.  That's a non-starter
in a MS comparison.  The judge overseeing the case of regulating AT&T's
monopoly gave conditions for AT&T's entry into new markets.  AT&T's breakup
has been described as a voluntary breakup.


> >Standard Oil ? yes
> >IBM ?  yes.

Oh, add US Steel

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 21:58:09
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 03:59:11
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >Hobbyist wrote:
> >>
> >> On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Mike Trettel posted :
> >>
> >> > Hey!  No fair being nice!  This is an advocacy newsgroup after
> >> > all-we're all supposed to offer uninformed opinions based upon popular
> >> > misconception!
> >> >
> >> > Well, you're right-it is anecdoctal evidence on my part.  Still,
> >> > there's a few people on c.o.o.a. that seem to have at least a little
> >> > experience outside the narrow confines of Windows and/or OS/2 only.  I
> >> > also know that POSSI did take a web poll (yes, I know-another self
> >> > selecting poll) that indicated that OS/2 users tend to use multiple
> >> > OS's to a large degree.  As to myself, I have used Linux a great deal
> >> > as a desktop OS, and while I would prefer to keep using OS/2, there's
> >> > no doubt in my mind that I can use Linux every day for what I do.  It
> >> > most certainly is not perfect, and would not be the best solution for
> >> > everybody, but that's the way I see it.
> >>
> >> Well this is why I stress, 'really used'. I've given NT and OS/2 their
> >> fair share of time and there is no way someone who has really tried NT
> >> can say that it's trash when compared to OS/2. That's just plain
> >> incorrect and reeking of ignorance.
> >
> >I beg to differ.  I've used NT 4.0 for word processing, "internetting",
> >development of GUI apps, Netscape plugins, and device drivers, and even
> >games.  I much prefer working in and using OS/2 for all of these areas.
> >Your generalization speaks of your own closed-mindedness and ignorance.
> >
> >- Marty
> >
>
> I believe his point is that if you've used both extensive, like I have, you
> would not call NT trash. I had a close-mind about NT like so many here, but
NT
> opened it by being an extremely capable operating system.

Well, I've used both fairly extensively.  While I wouldn't call NT
trash, there's a lot about it that I find utterly repulsive and it's
certainly not where I want to spend my computing time by choice.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 22:03:02
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 03:59:11
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Hobbyist wrote:
>
> On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :
>
> > Hobbyist wrote:
> > >
> > > Now this is where windows comes in. OS/2 is left in a cloud of smoke
> > > where application support is concerned. There's always better on the
> > > windows side. This OS/2 apps is better than any other OS's anthem is as
> > > outdated as hell.
> >
> > That's a remarkably close-minded and completely unsupportable statement.
>
> How so?

Have you run every application that has a win32 and os/2 version?
Dubious.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 21:05:16
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 03:59:11
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Hobbyist <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, David H. McCoy posted :

> >> Well this is why I stress, 'really used'. I've given NT and OS/2 their
> >> fair share of time and there is no way someone who has really tried NT
> >> can say that it's trash when compared to OS/2. That's just plain
> >> incorrect and reeking of ignorance.
> >
> >I beg to differ.  I've used NT 4.0 for word processing, "internetting",
> >development of GUI apps, Netscape plugins, and device drivers, and even
> >games.  I much prefer working in and using OS/2 for all of these areas.
> >Your generalization speaks of your own closed-mindedness and ignorance.
> >
> >- Marty
> >
>
> I believe his point is that if you've used both extensive, like I have, you
> would not call NT trash. I had a close-mind about NT like so many here, but
NT
> opened it by being an extremely capable operating system.

It's good that someone understands what I'm getting at. It's so
difficult to get these simple points across without being pounced upon.

--
-=Ali=-

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 22:42:10
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 03:59:11
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Hobbyist wrote:
>
> On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :
>
> > Hobbyist wrote:
> > >
> > > On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :
> > >
> > > > Hobbyist wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Now this is where windows comes in. OS/2 is left in a cloud of smoke
> > > > > where application support is concerned. There's always better on the
> > > > > windows side. This OS/2 apps is better than any other OS's anthem is
as
> > > > > outdated as hell.
> > > >
> > > > That's a remarkably close-minded and completely unsupportable
statement.
> > >
> > > How so?
> >
> > Have you run every application that has a win32 and os/2 version?
> > Dubious.
>
> I think you know the answer to that and it's a no.
>
> By the way, when you say that my statement is unsupportable, are you
> implying that the converse is true?

The converse would be just as unsupportable.  I was simply pointing out
that such a blanket statement is not true.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                        11-Oct-99 03:26:09
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 10:31:03
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: "Brent Davies" <[e-mail]>

Hobbyist <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
| On comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy, [e-mail] posted :
|
| > You miss the point (hobbyists often do): OS/2 has numerous fixpacks for
| > two major reasons:
| >
| > 1) IBM does not force OS/2 users thru the annual upgrade blood-letting
|
| What annual upgrade blood-letting? Please stop exaggerating. When was
| NT4 released. Is it's next major upgrade yet released.

[snip]

I find Guido's argument interesting.  While most people accuse NT of falling
behind, he is exaggerating the upgrade path of Windows.  It can't be both
ways.

-B


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

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

From: [e-mail]                            11-Oct-99 00:29:07
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 10:31:03
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <uNcM3.7926$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] says...
>
>Hobbyist <[e-mail]> wrote in message
>news:[e-mail]...
>| On comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy, [e-mail] posted :
>|
>| > You miss the point (hobbyists often do): OS/2 has numerous fixpacks for
>| > two major reasons:
>| >
>| > 1) IBM does not force OS/2 users thru the annual upgrade blood-letting
>|
>| What annual upgrade blood-letting? Please stop exaggerating. When was
>| NT4 released. Is it's next major upgrade yet released.
>
>[snip]
>
>I find Guido's argument interesting.  While most people accuse NT of falling
>behind, he is exaggerating the upgrade path of Windows.  It can't be both
>ways.
>
>-B
>
>
>

It can be here where revisionism and distortion are tools of the OS/2 advocacy

trade.

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                        11-Oct-99 04:37:00
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 10:31:03
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: "Brent Davies" <[e-mail]>

Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
| [e-mail] wrote:
| >
[snip]
| >
| > 1) IBM does not force OS/2 users thru the annual upgrade blood-letting
| > 2) IBM actually _fixes_ the bugs in OS/2
|
| You also forgot:
| 3) IBM releases fixes more often than NT service packs are released.

Have you heard of hot-fixes?  MS is fixing bugs with NT as soon as they are
found.  Service Packs are more of a convenience for people who are
installing new systems.  Who wants to install hundreds of hot-fixes into a
server that you're building tomorrow?  You could actually apply all of the
hot-fixes post-SP 3 and have successfully installed everything that SP 3
would install.

-B


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                   11-Oct-99 03:35:12
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 10:31:03
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: Kris Kadela <[e-mail]>

But 4.7 has no new must have features and doesn't run any faster than
4.6 nor is it more stable. Absolutely no reason to upgrade (I have to
since I develop web sites and need to use all the browsers I can get my
hands on).

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> In article <qjcM3.595$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >
> >David H. McCoy wrote in message ...
> >>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
> >>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.
> >
> >
> >IBM does the port and they port the Windows version to OS/2.  It will
always
> >be behind.
> >
> >Curtis Maurand
> >AdventureQuest.com LLC
> >
> >
> >
>
> Since the Unix and Mac versions are released with the Windows version, it
seem
> to me that if parity was important, they could have an OS/2 version released
> with the others.
>
> --
> ---------------------------------------
> David H. McCoy
> dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
> ---------------------------------------

--

**********************
DigiGraph Technical
http://www.dgraph.com
**********************

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

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

From: [e-mail]                              10-Oct-99 18:59:12
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 10:31:03
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: Dennis Peterson <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:
>
> Hobbyist,
>
> Take it to LINUX advocacy, OK? If that's where you want to go today,
> go there. I use Linux often enough to know that it is: not a panacea,
> not a very good replacement for OS/2 and quite useful.
>
> However, Linux is woefully lacking in the productivity tools that
> we all need to do our jobs. That's changing; but, for now, that's
> where it's at. Your claim that Linux has more apps is total lunacy,
> are you counting every bit of freeware available anywhere, or what?
>
> Linux certainly poses a major problem for MS in the NT server space;
> it's cheaper, faster and more reliable. On the desktop front, even
> Linus himself admits that Linux has at least two years to go before
> it will be ready to compete with established, more mature OS's.
>
> BTW, VMware ain't soup yet either. The strategy of keeping the NT
> image in the Linux file system is nuts, and _very_ inflexible.
> Moreover, this strategy makes the VMware NT fragile and easily damaged,
> requiring frequent re-installs - not a place to keep your important
> data, email, etc.
>
> Guido

Guido - you have your finger bulls-eyed on the crux of the problem
regarding Linux and these after-market add-ins. Well stated.

--
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: [e-mail]                              10-Oct-99 18:55:22
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 10:31:03
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Dennis Peterson <[e-mail]>

Joseph wrote:
>
> Dennis Peterson wrote:
>

[snip]


>
> I don't disagree about crummy Wintel hardware and how the marketing driven
> technology can hold a project/person back.  My compute server was a
nightmare to
> put together -- Intel's undocumented limitations with their CPUs and etc.  I
can
> see why talking about scaling Wintel is such a joke just with the hardware
> problems alone.

It is a real and serious problem. The world at large, though, is
catching on.

--
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: [e-mail]                               10-Oct-99 21:16:11
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 10:31:03
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Hobbyist <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :

> Hobbyist wrote:
> >
> > On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :
> >
> > > Hobbyist wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Now this is where windows comes in. OS/2 is left in a cloud of smoke
> > > > where application support is concerned. There's always better on the
> > > > windows side. This OS/2 apps is better than any other OS's anthem is
as
> > > > outdated as hell.
> > >
> > > That's a remarkably close-minded and completely unsupportable statement.
> >
> > How so?
>
> Have you run every application that has a win32 and os/2 version?
> Dubious.

I think you know the answer to that and it's a no.

By the way, when you say that my statement is unsupportable, are you
implying that the converse is true?
--
-=Ali=-

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                  11-Oct-99 02:46:24
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 10:31:03
Subj: Re: Warpstock '99 Atlanta, GA USA

From: dana <[e-mail]>

we use os2 all the time, and unix also.





***** **************************************************
"Contrary to popular belief, Unix is user friendly. It's
just very particular about who it makes friends with."

On 6 Oct 1999 [e-mail] wrote:

> Date: 6 Oct 1999 02:57:53 GMT
> From: [e-mail]
> Newsgroups: atl.forsale, comp.os.os2.advocacy, comp.os.os2.apps,
>     comp.os.os2.beta, comp.os.os2.bugs
> Subject: Re: Warpstock '99 Atlanta, GA USA
>
> 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: Comstar Communications (comstar.net) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                     10-Oct-99 21:00:04
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 10:31:03
Subj: Re: Wardell and IBM--How it might have been...

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


Curtis Maurand wrote:

> Actually, It went more like.
>
> Brad - So what's up?
>
> IBM Corporate - What, you didn't read John Soyring's (sp?) testimony in the
> Microsoft/DOJ trial.  We signed a deal with Microsoft so that we could sell
> Windows 95.  As part of that deal, we have until 2002 to kill OS/2.
> Therefore, no new clients.
>

As I recall:
Mr. Sorying testified about application support and OS/2 and Windows APIs.
Mr. Norris testified about Win95 and negotiations between IBM and MS over
Win3.1 and Win95 and links to marketing OS/2.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                            11-Oct-99 00:30:13
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 10:31:03
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <qjcM3.595$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>David H. McCoy wrote in message ...
>>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
>>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.
>
>
>IBM does the port and they port the Windows version to OS/2.  It will always
>be behind.
>
>Curtis Maurand
>AdventureQuest.com LLC
>
>
>

Since the Unix and Mac versions are released with the Windows version, it seem

to me that if parity was important, they could have an OS/2 version released
with the others.

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               11-Oct-99 04:43:22
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 10:31:03
Subj: Re: The Innovators

From: Carl Kaufmann <[e-mail]>


Paul Arnott wrote:
>
> This appears on MS site
> Wota freeking JOKE!!!
>
>                      We formed the Freedom to Innovate Network (FIN) as
> a response to the
>                      overwhelming amount of correspondence we received
> from around the
>                      U.S. and overseas regarding the trial with the
> Department of Justice and
>                      other public policy issues. The FIN is a
> non-partisan, grassroots network of
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^

>                      citizens and businesses who have a stake in the
                                                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> success of Microsoft and
>                      the high-tech industry. The FIN will help you stay
> up to date on critical
>                      developments in public policy. Sign up for a free
> e-newsletter, tell us your
>                      thoughts, take action and stay informed. It's how
> you can make a
>                      difference!

Is Microsoft now embracing and extending the English language?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Soulless Minions of Orthodoxy (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                     10-Oct-99 22:49:01
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 10:31:03
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


Dennis Peterson wrote:

> Joseph wrote:
> >
> > Dennis Peterson wrote:
> >
> > > I define serious
> > > businesses as those who have a multi-million dollar IS group and would
> > > include MCI, Boeing, GM, GE, Amazon.Com as examples. Even mighty MSFT
> > > has a significant number of Unix systems running and so far as I know,
> > > do not depend on Linux for business purposes beyond researching the
> > > technology (probing for weaknesses'd be my best guess).
> >
> > This was just sent to me via e-mail.
> >
> > > >From www.netcraft.com:
> > >
> > > www.hotmail.com is running Apache/1.3.6 (Unix)
> > > mod_ssl/2.2.8 SSLeay/0.9.0b on FreeBSD
> > >
>
> But what are they running their business tools on? You know, the HR
> stuff, the billing system, etc. That is the trough where the big boys
> feed. A web server is a really trivial thing for non-NT systems.

They run their business on BSD.  It's not an HR billing system but it's the
company -- Hotmail or Yahoo is the server.  This isn't a rouge LINUX web
server.

BSD itself has merit as a OS for large scale serving in limited situations. It
is workable as a OS for a mission critical function.  The application base is
weak.  Java for BSD is weak.  The tool base is weak.  I don't use it on my
desktop, I like OS/2.  But the OS isn't in the same class as LINUX.  It is
very different and IMHO has a different future.

BSD has a different development model -- a small team.  It has a difference
open source license much more friendly for business.  The BSD codebase can be
used and modified without opening the code up and the BSD can be resold and
rebranded.  It is not LINUX, not GNU.  It makes sense that a Yahoo or Hotmail
would adopt the OS and modify it as they need as part of their mission
critical tool, implementing their business.

I pay for and use and like Solaris/Sparc to run heavy duty commercial apps
like GIS and remote sensing.  I do not want to step back to NT/intel for these
tools for the reasons you mention also they apply to managing a lab of
workstations.  With NT my costs would go up and performance go down.  OS/2 is
fun but the OS has to run on intel hardware and that hardware is problematic.

I do use BSD for "my" core business, running simulations codes, or embedded OS
to control a sensor.  I use OS/2 and StarOffice 5.1a to edit and share Office
files.  Solaris for workstation class computing with commercial stuff, as you
have said.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                     10-Oct-99 22:55:12
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 10:31:03
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


Dennis Peterson wrote:

> Joseph wrote:
> >
> > Dennis Peterson wrote:
> >
>
> [snip]
>
> >
> > I don't disagree about crummy Wintel hardware and how the marketing driven
> > technology can hold a project/person back.  My compute server was a
nightmare to
> > put together -- Intel's undocumented limitations with their CPUs and etc.
I can
> > see why talking about scaling Wintel is such a joke just with the hardware
> > problems alone.
>
> It is a real and serious problem. The world at large, though, is
> catching on.

The competitor strategy in a wintel world is to (1) politely nod and offer
support to
Merced (Windows 2000) to placate the press and popular wisdom while (2)
continue RISC
(and UNIX, etc) work when the wheels come off the wintel franchise.



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

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

From: [e-mail]                               11-Oct-99 08:54:12
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 14:43:19
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Brent Davies wrote:
>
> Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> news:[e-mail]...
> | [e-mail] wrote:
> | >
> [snip]
> | >
> | > 1) IBM does not force OS/2 users thru the annual upgrade blood-letting
> | > 2) IBM actually _fixes_ the bugs in OS/2
> |
> | You also forgot:
> | 3) IBM releases fixes more often than NT service packs are released.
>
> Have you heard of hot-fixes?  MS is fixing bugs with NT as soon as they are
> found.  Service Packs are more of a convenience for people who are
> installing new systems.  Who wants to install hundreds of hot-fixes into a
> server that you're building tomorrow?  You could actually apply all of the
> hot-fixes post-SP 3 and have successfully installed everything that SP 3
> would install.

Does this make my statement any less true?  I'm sure IBM's corporate
OS/2 customers get fixes as soon as bugs are found too.  OS/2 Fixpacks
are released more often than NT service packs.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               11-Oct-99 08:59:16
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 14:43:19
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> In article <qjcM3.595$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >
> >David H. McCoy wrote in message ...
> >>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
> >>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.
> >
> >
> >IBM does the port and they port the Windows version to OS/2.  It will
always
> >be behind.
> >
> >Curtis Maurand
> >AdventureQuest.com LLC
> >
> >
> >
>
> Since the Unix and Mac versions are released with the Windows version, it
seem
> to me that if parity was important, they could have an OS/2 version released
> with the others.

Another reason I can see for the slack time between the port is that the
interface to the OS/2 version is probably undergoing some bugfixes and
whatnot specific to OS/2.  Most of the other ports are quite mature by
now and don't need that much overhead.  If all it took was a simple
unzipping and rebuilding of the source tree, it would be done by now.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                11-Oct-99 09:13:19
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 14:43:19
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: "Mike Ruskai" <[e-mail]>

On Mon, 11 Oct 1999 08:54:25 -0400, Marty wrote:

>Brent Davies wrote:
>>
>> Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
>> news:[e-mail]...
>> | [e-mail] wrote:
>> | >
>> [snip]
>> | >
>> | > 1) IBM does not force OS/2 users thru the annual upgrade blood-letting
>> | > 2) IBM actually _fixes_ the bugs in OS/2
>> |
>> | You also forgot:
>> | 3) IBM releases fixes more often than NT service packs are released.
>>
>> Have you heard of hot-fixes?  MS is fixing bugs with NT as soon as they are
>> found.  Service Packs are more of a convenience for people who are
>> installing new systems.  Who wants to install hundreds of hot-fixes into a
>> server that you're building tomorrow?  You could actually apply all of the
>> hot-fixes post-SP 3 and have successfully installed everything that SP 3
>> would install.
>
>Does this make my statement any less true?  I'm sure IBM's corporate
>OS/2 customers get fixes as soon as bugs are found too.  OS/2 Fixpacks
>are released more often than NT service packs.

IBM is constantly providing stop-gap fixes for reported problems.  To find
out where to get these fixes, all you have to do is put yourself on the
interested-party list for a given problem (call APAR by IBM).  If you
report a bug, you're automatically put on the interested-part list if it
becomes an APAR.

They then periodically combine all of these fixes into a fixpack, once
thorough testing has been done.

They're fix policy is at least as good as that of MS with NT.



 - Mike

Remove 'spambegone' to send e-mail.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                            11-Oct-99 14:46:09
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 14:43:19
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: Tim Timmins <[e-mail]>

No, it's just some kid (Chris) who's pissed off about living in Hull .
He knows nothing about OS2. He uses Win9x and now Linux.

Regards,
Tim

[e-mail] wrote:

> In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Esther Schindler) writes:
> |On Fri, 8 Oct 1999 21:23:26, Mark Kelley <[e-mail]> 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
>
> QCC reminds me of a sign on a former co-worker's wall. She was/is a
> brilliant SNA specialist, another dinosaur technology, just like OS/2.
>
> The sign on her wall read:
>
> "I refuse to become involved in a battle of wits with an unarmed man."
>
> Seems quite applicable here...
>
> Guido

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

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            11-Oct-99 14:30:18
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 14:43:19
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Mon, 11 Oct 1999 01:03:37, Hobbyist <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On comp.os.os2.advocacy, jansens_at_ibm_dot_net posted :
>
> > > I used OS/2 for two years and have been using winNT since then, so for
> > > your information, robustness and stability are features that I have
> > > become accustomed to and even more so with NT. I have come to realise
> > > that this is in fact the second most important ingredient of a useful
> > > OS, the most important ingredient being hardware and application
> > > support.
> > >
> > Excuse me, why?
> > This keeps coming up all the time: Windows is great 'cuz it has
> > hardware and applications support. Why should one care about that as
> > soon as one has a running and equipped box?
>
> That's true if we are just speaking of your individual situation. I left
> OS/2 because I couldn't equip my box with the apps that I wanted to run.
>
> If you wish to advocate your OS you have to speak about these issues.
> You can't run away from them. An OS is nothing without application and
> hardware support being solid. This is why it's always brought up.
>
> > I can see how that could become an issue when new stuff is needed, but
> > until then, why care about the number of apps that platform X or Y
> > supports?
>
> You may well be missing a lot out there. If you like stagnation, are
> overwhelmed by advancing technology or have very specialised needs that
> only OS/2 will cater to then I guess you have your point.
>
I need to get a job done. The best tools for that job include OS/2
(robustness, ease of use, consequent and mature UI), so that's what I
use. Technology is not a goal by itself, although both the computer
press and the industry would like us to believe that (and it sure
looks like you fell for it with the 'overwhelmed by advancing
technology" - sjeesh! go program a quantum computer and then come back
and laugh at me!).

> Linux would be a roller coaster ride for you it would seem. Once you get
> it working, there's no interest in getting it working better or done
> better. Hmmmm
>
Actually, I'm still at the stage of getting it to work properly
(Netscape still leaves running processes that won't die and going
online is still a hit-and-miss affair), but once it rolls, why rock
it? I'm still sticking to kernel 2.0.35 BTW, good enough for me.

> > And as for NT being flaky: I admit that the last time I used NT was in
> > its 3.51 incarnation. When it crashed on MS Office, I called it quits
> > (it wasn't on my own machine, luckily)
>
> Cripes! Thanks for putting me in perspective and I'm sure that this is
> the type of experience that OS/2 users have with NT when they claim that
> it's unstable, unreliable and flaky. I suggest that you take another
> look before so ignorantly brushing it off. Just like how OS/2 has
> undergone major changes since version 3. So has NT undergone changes.
>
Ahum. One of my PC's still runs Warp 3. The stability is the same, the
kernel is virtually the same. Only difference is that it is "lean and
mean" and - for some strange reason - won't run StarOffice (not above
version 3.1, that is). But that might actually be a plus.

Why do NT? It needs three to four times the resources OS/2 needs (and
even then is still slower), it won't run half the games and it's even
more peckish than OS/2 re its device drivers. If I ever need a MS OS,
I'll probably install some bare-bones 95 to play some games. At least
on a different partition it con't do much harm to the important stuff.

> > The WPS is *still* by far the best user interface in existence for
> > *any* computer platform. I'll fight anyone over that. Tell you what,
> > I'll even tie one arm behind my back.
>
> :-) Who am I to convince a man who's convinced himself so much.
>
Oh come on. You've used OS/2 yourself. Have you *ever* *anywhere* come
across a better user interface than the OOUI WPS? The only reason PS
hasn't copied it yet is because they don't know how.

> > So why is it that you seem to find it necessary to come back
> > repeatedly and keep telling us about your great move? I bet you
> > haven't convinced a single soul in this NG to "convert" to NT, but you
> > still keep telling us how stupid we all are and how smart you were.
>
> I don't consider you stupid at all. Why do you think that. I used to say
> the very things that you used to say. :) I don't care about converting
> anyone really. I post here for the fun of it. It makes for interesting
> discussion especially since I've been there and done that.
>
> > Yeah, I know, "best tool for the job", "I'm not saying you're all
> > stupid" and more of that. But your actions refute your words why?
>
> You read too much into why I'm here.
>
> > > Now that's hilarious.
> > >
> > Why thank you. I'm flattered.
>
> :-)
>
> > I must admit it is a great feeling, yes. But you see, we keep that to
> > ourselves in our own newsgroup. We're not running around UseNet
> > shouting at people: "You're all doomed! Use Warp or you'll burn in
> > hell!"
>
> Well you don't do it because you won't be credible doing it. You'll be
> laughed at. If we come here saying that you should stop using OS/2 and
> get with the program, then a discussion starts. :)
>
<There should be an icon of someone struck by lightning here, but I
can't find one>

> > The Jehovah's Witnesses of UseNet are people like you who find it
> > necessary to hang around in other NG's telling people that they're
> > wrong.
>
> It's people like us that make this advocacy group come alive. Can't you
> see that? Why are *you* here in this advocacy group? Do you prefer
> having discussions with the likes of me or having exchanges like this:
>
>  "The WPS is *still* by far the best user interface in existence for
>  * any* computer platform.  I'll fight anyone over that.  Tell you
>  what, I'll even tie one arm behind my back."
>
> Reply:
>
>  "Preach it brother OS/2 Vocate!!!"
>
> or
>
>  "Agreed. :)"
>
See? The truth comes out at last!

> We make the group exciting. Admit it?
>
> > > Oh boy, I better go get dust my Warp4 CD's and reinstall.
> >
> > You're already lost to the Satan. If you ever even so much as touch
> > that holy CD again, it'll burn the flesh of your fingers.
>
> Hahahahahahahaha. The exchange was fun by the way and I'm glad that you
> take it in good spirit. We're just speaking about OS's right?
>
To paraphrase "Voyager's" Doctor: "I'm a doctor, damnit! Not an
operating system!"

> <grumble> The spirits of OS/2 continue to walk these newsgroups.

What about the lurching Windows zombies?

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net

|---------------------------------------------------|
|                  NT boot options                  |
|                                                   |
|               Please choose from list             |
|                                                   |
|       <crash>         <OS/2>        <linux>       |
|---------------------------------------------------|

(a new one. Jayan threatened to sue)

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

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            11-Oct-99 14:30:17
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 14:43:20
Subj: Re: The Innovators

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Mon, 11 Oct 1999 04:43:45, Carl Kaufmann <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>
>
> Paul Arnott wrote:
> >
> > This appears on MS site
> > Wota freeking JOKE!!!
> >
> >                      We formed the Freedom to Innovate Network (FIN) as
> > a response to the
> >                      overwhelming amount of correspondence we received
> > from around the
> >                      U.S. and overseas regarding the trial with the
> > Department of Justice and
> >                      other public policy issues. The FIN is a
> > non-partisan, grassroots network of
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> >                      citizens and businesses who have a stake in the
>                                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > success of Microsoft and
> >                      the high-tech industry. The FIN will help you stay
> > up to date on critical
> >                      developments in public policy. Sign up for a free
> > e-newsletter, tell us your
> >                      thoughts, take action and stay informed. It's how
> > you can make a
> >                      difference!
>
> Is Microsoft now embracing and extending the English language?


English2000: you'll only be able to understand it after repeatedly
smashing your head through a window.

The press luvs is tho'.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net

|---------------------------------------------------|
|                  NT boot options                  |
|                                                   |
|               Please choose from list             |
|                                                   |
|       <crash>         <OS/2>        <linux>       |
|---------------------------------------------------|

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               11-Oct-99 15:08:03
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 14:43:20
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: [e-mail] (M.P. van Dobben de Bruijn)

> [e-mail] (John Hong) wrote:


> : You don't have to choose between Linux and Windoze.  When I say
> : superior, I mean that it gives you everything that OS/2 gives you and
> : more. Since VMWARE can run Win2000 and below and Linux
> : runs VMWARE you can bring the entire Windows world into a Xwindows
> : window. This cannot be done with OS/2.
>
>     Still, at $299 a pop.

Aren't you forgetting that you not only shell out $299 for the VMWare license,
but then also have to pay for a Win200 or whatever license to run on top of
it?


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: [e-mail]                               11-Oct-99 15:08:04
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 14:43:20
Subj: Re: IBM Licenses SciTech Graphics Technology!

From: [e-mail] (M.P. van Dobben de Bruijn)

> [e-mail] (Kendall Bennett) wrote:

[ .. ]

> Actually we have a news group on our server that you can access at:
>
>  new://news.scitechsoft.com/scitech.display.doctor.os2.beta
>
> This is where you will get the best response from your question, and more
> importantly if you don't get a response we will at least read your
> problem report and act on it. You can also access those newsgroups via
> our web page if you wish, using our new web/news gateway.

Noblesse oblige, I learned. If you want to become part of the
OS/2 community you should be here. You are no longer just a
supplier of an alternative technology you have because of this
agreement become (partly) part of the OS/2 world. By the way I
seem to remember that members of this community made it possi-
ble for you to enter this market. As I said, how about returning the
favor? Further you overstep the possibility that there are people with
newsreaders (<VBG> ProNews 1.0 Gold i.e.but beta 1.5 has it) who
cannot enter several servers into their system (or don't know how to).

>> Modernizing your support is easy I learned to my surprise recently.

> We are looking at new technologies for use on our web site, that will
> allow users to post problem reports on our web site, and have those
> reports answered by our technician. You will be able to track your
> problem report on the web, and more importantly the problems and answers
> will end up in an online knowledge base you will be able to browse.
>
> However I am not sure when we will get that set up, as we are evaluating
> different technologies that we can use for that ;-)

That route is wrong as it will mainly become a one-to-one informing
you about problems. It is also additional technology that is slow, most
people will not bother to read the website (cumbersome) untill they have
a problem. If you take active part in these OS/2 newsgroups people will be
able to scroll through what is going on on a daily or weekly basis automagi-
cally. That is the strenght of the subscription model of newsgroups. They will
learn during the scrolling and if later on facing the same problems have Deja
or
their peers here to help them out without you having to send in more staff.
Ans-
wers of your staff can be posted and mailed if you take the newsgroups route,
to
make your support shine without extra costs. You can scan automatically the
news-
groups by setting up filters at Deja and send an unexpected answer from the
authors
Which makes your support and commitment to OS/2 make an extra-ordinary
experience.

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: [e-mail]                               11-Oct-99 11:52:01
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 17:05:23
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Hobbyist <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, M.P. van Dobben de Bruijn posted :

> > : You don't have to choose between Linux and Windoze.  When I say
> > : superior, I mean that it gives you everything that OS/2 gives you and
> > : more. Since VMWARE can run Win2000 and below and Linux
> > : runs VMWARE you can bring the entire Windows world into a Xwindows
> > : window. This cannot be done with OS/2.
> >
> >     Still, at $299 a pop.
>
> Aren't you forgetting that you not only shell out $299 for the VMWare
license,
> but then also have to pay for a Win200 or whatever license to run on top of
it?

VMWare was developed to provide the convenience of running multiple OS's
at the same time on one machine. It was never intended to be a means to
forfeit licensing issues with respect to the OS's that you use. I don't
get your point.
--
-=Ali=-

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                             11-Oct-99 16:48:24
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 17:05:23
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
  Hobbyist <[e-mail]> wrote:
> On comp.os.os2.advocacy, [e-mail] posted :
>
> > But, until someone comes along with a GUI shell that's as elegant as
> > the WPS, there will be those who stick with OS/2, if only for that
> > one aspect alone (i.e., the Work Place Shell).
>
> It's nice, but far from indispensable. It's really the only thing left
> to hang on to where OS/2 advocacy is concerned. What can the OS/2 WPS
> do that the windows explorer can't that's indispensable?

"Indespensible?"

Let's get something straight -- *nothing* is absolutely "indespensible"
when it comes to platforms/operating systems/user interfaces.  It all
boils down to user preference.

To be sure, there's nothing about Windows that's the least bit
"indespensible," claims to the contrary by the MS-Contingent
notwithstanding.  DVD certainly isn't. Being able to play the latest,
state-of-the-art procrastinationware (i.e., games) isn't. These two
sample "features" are simply candy to be used as Windows advocacy
points, but they certainly aren't something everyone *must* have in
order to do computing.

Now that we have that out of the way, what I like about the WPS, for
which there are no equals in either Windows or Linux, are Templates and
d'n'd customization. An example of the latter is opeing up the Font
Palette, then dragging and dropping fonts onto windows, title bars,
menus, etc., in order to change the font(s) therein, rather than the
standard "Go To An Options Dialog" route that everyone else takes.

Templates are harder to explain, but they allow me to create new objects
according to my needs, and place them on the desktop, where they can
become d'n'd targets themselves.

That's just a couple of items off the bat. I'm sure that other platforms
can offer similar funtionality in a different package, but I've grown
used to the way the WPS works, and feel hadcuffed when using NT or even
Linux' latest window managers.

But no, the items I mentioned aren't "indespensible."

-- 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: [e-mail]                    11-Oct-99 12:46:16
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 17:05:23
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: [e-mail] (Jason S.)

Dave Tholen tholened the following first-level quoted material to
comp.os.os2.advocacy:

>I wrote:

>> Tholen was *twice* nominated for Usenet Kook of the Month -- the first
>> time by Roberto Alsina back in 1997,

>Alsina is the person who accused me of posting an average of 134 articles
>every day, which was ludicrous.  When he pointed to his alleged evidence,
>it became obvious that he didn't even bother to check the range of dates.
>Even then, he continued to insist that he was right, until others started
>getting on his case.  How ironic that he nominated me rather than himself.

None of this changes the fact that you were nominated 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

>Actually, that's the wake of your notorious attempts to "get a rise" out
>of me.  Put the onus where it belongs, Jason:  on you, not me.

Typical Tholen attempt to obfuscate the *real* issue.

>> There was no evidence of tampering

>Incorrect.  The voting deadline was extended,

..which is not evidence of tampering...

>and I know that at least
>one vote wasn't counted.

..for a person who wasn't nominated, so the alleged vote was a nullity.

>> Tholen claimed that someone named "Wayne Strang" (who was not even
>> nominated)

>Incorrect.  Consult deja.com for proof.

Dave, the ballot has been reposted repeatedly. "Wayne Strang" (whoever
that is) was not on it. Now, it is possible that a nomination was made,
but the rules require a second, and it appears that no second was made --
thus, he was not properly nominated under the rules.

>> won the election and complained that a vote cast by some unnamed person
>> allegedly for me was not counted.

>You want actual names, Jason?

Provide it, if you think you can.

>Check the people who criticized you for
>your "campaigning" in sci.astro.

Are you alleging that these alleged people voted for me, Dave?

>As for the person who contacted me
>privately to say that he voted for you, just what do you think the
>word "privately" means?

I imagine that it means that this alleged person allegedly sent you
an email.

>> Tholen conveniently disregarded the fact that I was not nominated in
>> making this complaint.

>Doesn't change the fact that you received at least one vote, and quite
>possibly more, perhaps even the most.

And perhaps you were on the grassy knoll in Dallas in 1963, Dave.

>> The second KOTM title that Dave won

>I haven't won any, Jason.

Incorrect.

>> 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.

>Incorrect.  You and Edwin both had thousands of votes that disappeared.

..and the technical problems with the polling were straightened out
by the people who run that site.

>And from Eric Bennett:

>] The other poll (csma KOTM) was not well protected against vote fraud.  I
>] had an amusing evening playing with their vote counting system to see if I
>] could get around their belatedly instituted safeguards (which I did...

..and Eric voted for Nathan A. Hughes, not for you, Dave.

--
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)

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

From: [e-mail]                                   11-Oct-99 17:01:17
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 17:05:23
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: [e-mail] (Mike Trettel)

On Sun, 10 Oct 1999 19:34:46 -0500, Hobbyist <[e-mail]> wrote:
>On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Mike Trettel posted :
>
>> Not looking for a fight here, but exactly what enhancements have been
>> done by Microsoft to the Windows GUI outside of the "integration" with
>> IE5?
>
>The shell enhancements gained from IE+ cannot be belittled. They are
>quite significant and comprise the major enhancement.

Which is my point, really.  The "enhancements" seem to me have been
done simply to kill Netscape as a going concern.  I can get very much
the same conceptual layout under OS/2 with a simple two line change in
the config.sys file (of course, it won't be anywhere as nicely done as
the MS layout).  That, to me, is not terribly innovative-it's just
business the MS way.  MS is acting as a purely reactive company-they do
something when they see a threat, and not before.  The really ironic
thing is that IE5 is fairly widely considered to be a better browser
than Comm 4.7.  MS can come up with good stuff when they put their
minds to it, but they simply won't compete on technical standards
alone-they seem incapable of not playing their trump card (a totally
stuffed retail channel). If they had not done the integration thing,
the antitrust suit would be far weaker, and they probably would have
won against Netscape anyway.  It would have taken two more years
though, and the MS management does not seem to be a patient lot.
>
>> The Windows desktop looks pretty stagnant to me-the only way MS
>> seems to "improve" (sarcasm, of course) it is when their monopoly is
>> threatened.
>
>That sounds like FUD to me. Would you care to prove that?

There's no FUD in that statement-it's an opinion.  No fear, no
uncertainty, and no doubt. If you don't like the way I drive, get off
the sidewalk :-).

Let me put this another way.  What new innovations can we consumers
expect to see from MS with regards to the GUI/desktop paradigm? (Uh oh,
I'm Dilbertizing)
>
>> Also, simply because the WPS is not being further developed does not
>> equate to "no longer advanced".  I can just as easily say that the WPS
>> was so far ahead in the first place that MS still hasn't come close to
>> the feature set of the WPS.  Of course, this is no longer important to
>> MS with the removal of OS/2 as a realistic competitor.
>
>That would have been a valid comment in the world of win3.1 but OS/2
>really sensitised me to the object oriented approach and I carried that
>mentality over to NT and realised that a very working similarity was
>their. Except for more control over associations I could easily achieve
>most of the WSP functionality in explorer. I very soon stopped missing
>the WPS.

You really didn't push the WPS very hard than, to make this statment.
One thing I really find irritating under NT is a simple thing-differing
backgrounds for my desktop folders.  Multiple file associations is also
very good thing-why can't this be in Win95/NT out of the box?  I can
get it with Window Blinds, but why does it need to be added anyway?
The Win95 GUI *appears* to be object oriented-but it's only very
slightly object oriented.  I will make a really difficult prediction
here-if Windows Blinds starts taking off in a big way suddenly the
feature set of Windows Blinds will be "integrated" into a newly
refreshed Windows desktop.  As I said before-MS is a reactive company.
>
>By the way, I just changed my screen resolution on the fly without
>rebooting. I adjusted my icon sizes to how I wanted and changed the
>color of my windows from that boring light grey color. The font
>anti-aliasing is just great. These additions among many others are well
>appreciated and more than eased the change from the WPS.

Yep, that's a good thing all right.  Of course, these are the features
that Windows users always manage to bring up when discussing the
Windows GUI.  Wonder why that is...

What both of us are saying here is that either GUI has its good points
and bad points.
>
>> If you really want to see true development in user interfaces one
>> should look at the KDE and Gnome projects.
>
>I have seen them. They're coming along very nicely. :)
>
>What's happening with OS/2's. Oh, I forgot, it's already reached the
>top.

I never said it was at the top, of course.  I will say that overall
it's better than the Windows GUI.

>
>> Both started off with essentially *nothing*, and in two years time
>> have come up quite usable interfaces that are still in the exponential
>> stage of development.
>
>Quite true. Who said that windows explorer or the OS/2 WPS was the best
>there could be. There is just as good if not better out there; if you
>take a look at NextStep and RiscOS.
>
>--
>-=Ali=-
--  ===========
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: [e-mail]                               11-Oct-99 12:22:28
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 17:05:23
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Hobbyist <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, jansens_at_ibm_dot_net posted :

> > You may well be missing a lot out there. If you like stagnation, are
> > overwhelmed by advancing technology or have very specialised needs that
> > only OS/2 will cater to then I guess you have your point.
> >
> I need to get a job done. The best tools for that job include OS/2
> (robustness, ease of use, consequent and mature UI), so that's what I
> use.

What about the apps and the hardware to get the job done?
The hardware isn't bad but the applications are meager in variety.
Many just settle for what's available (as I found myself doing with OS/2
apps in my last days of using OS/2) rather than picking one that really
suited my needs best.

> Technology is not a goal by itself, although both the computer
> press and the industry would like us to believe that (and it sure
> looks like you fell for it with the 'overwhelmed by advancing
> technology" - sjeesh! go program a quantum computer and then come back
> and laugh at me!).

With improved technology comes innovation which in turn leads often to
increased speed and efficiency if you look in the right direction. The
quantity of windows apps out there is really huge. You have to sift
through the trash to get to the quality and unfortunately a lot of the
popular windows apps do qualify IMHO as trash. This casts a bad
impression in the eyes of the cursory observer such as an OS/2 user/M$
hater type. In *every* software category that I use personally, I've
found and am using apps that are better than the ones that I used in
OS/2. Funny when I started using OS/2 I claimed the opposite but windows
apps have matured so much over the last 3-4 yrs that it's pretty
amazing.

> Actually, I'm still at the stage of getting it to work properly
> (Netscape still leaves running processes that won't die and going
> online is still a hit-and-miss affair), but once it rolls, why rock
> it? I'm still sticking to kernel 2.0.35 BTW, good enough for me.

Yeah, exactly what I thought. If you get it working now, it could never
be made to work better. This is why updates are made, to offer new
features that often do tasks better than the old way and also to improve
on the already established features. It's good to update, generally
speaking of course.

> Ahum. One of my PC's still runs Warp 3. The stability is the same, the
> kernel is virtually the same. Only difference is that it is "lean and
> mean" and - for some strange reason - won't run StarOffice (not above
> version 3.1, that is). But that might actually be a plus.

Why would that be a plus?

> Why do NT? It needs three to four times the resources OS/2 needs (and
> even then is still slower),

On a resource starved system yes. Things change when resources are
abundant on for example my system here with 128MB of RAM. To my
amazement when I installed NT, it actually ran faster than OS/2.

Some would say that the apps that I ran with OS/2 such Object Desktop
Pro, X-it, Dialog Enhancer among other shell enhancements slowed it down
but NT was faster and remained faster after installing IE and other
shell enhancements as well. It was definitely faster because I tried NT
with an antiM$ mentality. This was when I realised that one has to try
an OS before making any statements about it.

Have you ever ran OS/2 and NT in resource abundant environments to see
which runs better?

> it won't run half the games

OS/2 ran even fewer of the games that I wanted to run and that was one
of the reasons why I switched to NT. I could then play QuakeII, Diablo,
Hexen and later Unreal without having to boot to another OS. The win32
OS/2 project's solution for running quake II was really pitiful. What's
happening with that anyway?

> and it's even more peckish than OS/2 re its device drivers.

What do you mean peckish? If you are implying that there are more device
drivers for OS/2 than NT then I need to know what you are smoking. :)

> If I ever need a MS OS, I'll probably install some bare-bones 95 to
> play some games.  At least on a different partition it con't do much
> harm to the important stuff.

<chuckle> If you know what you're doing, windows will not interfere with
OS/2 if they're on the same system.

> > :-) Who am I to convince a man who's convinced himself so much.
> >
> Oh come on. You've used OS/2 yourself. Have you *ever* *anywhere* come
> across a better user interface than the OOUI WPS? The only reason PS
> hasn't copied it yet is because they don't know how.

I must admit that it's object oriented concept as purely as it's
implemented is unequalled but as I said before, I can do most of the
things that I used to do in OS/2 with the windows WPS. It's just that
you have to know how to do it. My only problem with windows explorer is
with associations. You have far better control with OS/2 but believe me
it's no great loss.

> > Well you don't do it because you won't be credible doing it. You'll be
> > laughed at. If we come here saying that you should stop using OS/2 and
> > get with the program, then a discussion starts. :)
> >
> <There should be an icon of someone struck by lightning here, but I
> can't find one>

<chuckle>

> What about the lurching Windows zombies?

You have those zombie types in windows flavours, OS/2 flavours, MacOS
flavours, Linux flavours etc. Every camp has them.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               11-Oct-99 13:52:24
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 17:05:23
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Hobbyist wrote:
>
> > it won't run half the games
>
> OS/2 ran even fewer of the games that I wanted to run and that was one
> of the reasons why I switched to NT. I could then play QuakeII, Diablo,
> Hexen and later Unreal without having to boot to another OS.

Two out of the mentioned 4 run in OS/2.  (Hexen has a native port)

> The win32 OS/2 project's solution for running quake II was really pitiful.

In what way?  The only annoyance I've found with it is that the ALT key
gets sticky because of PMSHELL interpretting it that you want to pop up
the menu.  If you change strafe to another key, it functions perfectly
fine, and at the same speed from my experience.

> What's happening with that anyway?

They're about to have another release soon which runs WinHlp32.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               11-Oct-99 15:08:16
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 17:05:23
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: Hobbyist <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, [e-mail] posted :

> > It's nice, but far from indispensable. It's really the only thing left
> > to hang on to where OS/2 advocacy is concerned. What can the OS/2 WPS
> > do that the windows explorer can't that's indispensable?
>
> "Indespensible?"
>
> Let's get something straight -- *nothing* is absolutely "indespensible"
> when it comes to platforms/operating systems/user interfaces.  It all
> boils down to user preference.

Well for me, a GUI is indispensable. I'd refuse to use an OS without
one.

> To be sure, there's nothing about Windows that's the least bit
> "indespensible," claims to the contrary by the MS-Contingent
> notwithstanding.

I don't argue windows features being indispensable. I, however, see very
bad points against OS/2 being brushed off with the statement to the
effect that I'm willing to put up with X,Y, and Z because of the great
WPS as if it is indeed indispensable, hence my question?

> DVD certainly isn't.  Being able to play the latest, state-of-the-art
> procrastinationware (i.e., games) isn't.  These two sample "features"
> are simply candy to be used as Windows advocacy points, but they
> certainly aren't something everyone *must* have in order to do
> computing.
>
> Now that we have that out of the way,

Great!

> what I like about the WPS, for which there are no equals in either
> Windows or Linux, are Templates and d'n'd customization.  An example
> of the latter is opeing up the Font Palette, then dragging and
> dropping fonts onto windows, title bars, menus, etc., in order to
> change the font(s) therein, rather than the standard "Go To An Options
> Dialog" route that everyone else takes.

Try drag'n'dropping a colour to your windows. They remain the same grey
color. From the same customisation applet that you so dislike I can
customise the whole windows interface, i.e., window colors, font sizes
specific to menus, icons, pop-up windows. You can change screen
resolution on the fly and activate screen savers.

> Templates are harder to explain, but they allow me to create new objects
> according to my needs, and place them on the desktop, where they can
> become d'n'd targets themselves.

You don't have to explain templates to me since I used OS/2. I find that
right clicking the windows desktop, selecting new and selecting from the
menu provides a similar template type functionality. Where's the WPS
file manager by the way? Do you have a send to menu that is activatable
where ever you are. Do you create templates all over the place to mimic
the windows right click context menu -> new -> whatever file type
functionality that is available throughout the work place?

> That's just a couple of items off the bat. I'm sure that other platforms
> can offer similar funtionality in a different package,

You're darned right about that so it does make me wonder what makes the
WPS such a killer in functionality. As I said, the days of win3.1 are
long gone.

> but I've grown used to the way the WPS works, and feel hadcuffed when
> using NT or even Linux' latest window managers.

I felt handcuffed when I was trying NT as well. I soon realised that I
was just being unaccommodating and this stemmed more from M$ hate than
anything else.

I also tried Litestep for windows which seems to be a fad.  All over the
Litestep website is evangelism on how it gives you more control etc than
explorer and how stable it is etc.  Anyway, I tried it and it was then
that I felt handcuffed. Apart from the fact that it pleasingly makes
your desktop look nothing like windows, I mean a change is always
welcome, but it's hardly as functional and it was unstable!

> But no, the items I mentioned aren't "indespensible."

Good.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            11-Oct-99 21:20:10
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 19:55:28
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Mon, 11 Oct 1999 17:22:57, Hobbyist <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On comp.os.os2.advocacy, jansens_at_ibm_dot_net posted :
>
> > > You may well be missing a lot out there. If you like stagnation, are
> > > overwhelmed by advancing technology or have very specialised needs that
> > > only OS/2 will cater to then I guess you have your point.
> > >
> > I need to get a job done. The best tools for that job include OS/2
> > (robustness, ease of use, consequent and mature UI), so that's what I
> > use.
>
> What about the apps and the hardware to get the job done?
> The hardware isn't bad but the applications are meager in variety.
> Many just settle for what's available (as I found myself doing with OS/2
> apps in my last days of using OS/2) rather than picking one that really
> suited my needs best.
>
I happen to have everything that suits my needs perfectly. I've been
working with DeScribe so long that it's almost become automative now.
I tried other WP's, but they seemed too much hassle to learn and
giving too little in return. And yes, I also tried some 'doze stuff: I
had Smartsuite Millenium running on a 95 box for a couple of weeks,
just to see how it looked. I deleted it after I found out you actually
needed to perform complex programming tricks to assign a shortcut key
to a macro. Talk about idiocy!
I have StarOffice 5.1 installed, and I decided to do some real work
with it over the weekend. I needed some new business cards (I change
company logo's like other people change desktop backdrops, I'm told),
so I decided to make them in StarWriter this time (instead of
WordPerfect 6.0 DOS). You know, in spite of all the "handy" enhancers,
it actually took me longer to do. Progress really doesn't own up to
it's hype...

> > Technology is not a goal by itself, although both the computer
> > press and the industry would like us to believe that (and it sure
> > looks like you fell for it with the 'overwhelmed by advancing
> > technology" - sjeesh! go program a quantum computer and then come back
> > and laugh at me!).
>
> With improved technology comes innovation which in turn leads often to
> increased speed and efficiency if you look in the right direction. The
> quantity of windows apps out there is really huge. You have to sift
> through the trash to get to the quality and unfortunately a lot of the
> popular windows apps do qualify IMHO as trash. This casts a bad
> impression in the eyes of the cursory observer such as an OS/2 user/M$
> hater type. In *every* software category that I use personally, I've
> found and am using apps that are better than the ones that I used in
> OS/2. Funny when I started using OS/2 I claimed the opposite but windows
> apps have matured so much over the last 3-4 yrs that it's pretty
> amazing.
>
Well, I still haven't. Of course, it all depends on what you're
looking at. I tend to look for "easy" and not so much for features or
how modern a program is.

> > Actually, I'm still at the stage of getting it to work properly
> > (Netscape still leaves running processes that won't die and going
> > online is still a hit-and-miss affair), but once it rolls, why rock
> > it? I'm still sticking to kernel 2.0.35 BTW, good enough for me.
>
> Yeah, exactly what I thought. If you get it working now, it could never
> be made to work better. This is why updates are made, to offer new
> features that often do tasks better than the old way and also to improve
> on the already established features. It's good to update, generally
> speaking of course.
>
I don't understand. If it works well, why go through the trouble of
trying to make it work better? I used to do that, until I realised
that most of the time things end out working less well, or in the best
case working better differently, which is also a pain.

> > Ahum. One of my PC's still runs Warp 3. The stability is the same, the
> > kernel is virtually the same. Only difference is that it is "lean and
> > mean" and - for some strange reason - won't run StarOffice (not above
> > version 3.1, that is). But that might actually be a plus.
>
> Why would that be a plus?
>
I deeply *hate* the integrated look of SO 5. I don't like my programs
to load a lot of bull excrements because I *might* use it. I wnat to
decide for myself what I load.
In fact, I'm going to dig up my old copy of StarOffice 3.1 tonight and
see if I can get Sun's generic key into it. If that works, 5.1 is
outta here.

> > Why do NT? It needs three to four times the resources OS/2 needs (and
> > even then is still slower),
>
> On a resource starved system yes. Things change when resources are
> abundant on for example my system here with 128MB of RAM. To my
> amazement when I installed NT, it actually ran faster than OS/2.
>
I don't have resource-abundant systems and I'd rather eat a Windows CD
than buy extra RAM just to make my OS feel more comfortable. It's the
bloody thing's job to make *me* feel comfortable!

> Some would say that the apps that I ran with OS/2 such Object Desktop
> Pro, X-it, Dialog Enhancer among other shell enhancements slowed it down
> but NT was faster and remained faster after installing IE and other
> shell enhancements as well. It was definitely faster because I tried NT
> with an antiM$ mentality. This was when I realised that one has to try
> an OS before making any statements about it.
>
I have never used a shell enhancer for OS/2. Seems a bit like shampoo
for a bald head: it maybe a pretty bottle but what is it going to do?

> Have you ever ran OS/2 and NT in resource abundant environments to see
> which runs better?
>
See above. None of my PC's have more than 40 megs of RAM, and several
have a lot less. Even NT 3.51 didn't like such low figures; my guess
is the later versions won't even boot up properly.

> > it won't run half the games
>
> OS/2 ran even fewer of the games that I wanted to run and that was one
> of the reasons why I switched to NT. I could then play QuakeII, Diablo,
> Hexen and later Unreal without having to boot to another OS. The win32
> OS/2 project's solution for running quake II was really pitiful. What's
> happening with that anyway?
>
OS/2 Netlabs have taken over, renamed it Project Odin and are steadily
working on it. The actual use of such a program is limited for me (no
Win apps needed), but enough people have said they'd like it. In term
Odin will have to merge with the Everblue project (porting X libs to
OS/2).

As for the games, I'm still at the DOS stuff. Shows how much I'm
behind the in-crowd. Some of the games you mention I don't even know.
(What's a Diablo?) And DOS-games run smoothly on Warp.

> > and it's even more peckish than OS/2 re its device drivers.
>
> What do you mean peckish? If you are implying that there are more device
> drivers for OS/2 than NT then I need to know what you are smoking. :)
>
Oh, I'm sure NT has more device drivers than OS/2. But don't confuse
NT with 9x, as many "upgraders" have discovered untimely.

> > If I ever need a MS OS, I'll probably install some bare-bones 95 to
> > play some games.  At least on a different partition it con't do much
> > harm to the important stuff.
>
> <chuckle> If you know what you're doing, windows will not interfere with
> OS/2 if they're on the same system.
>
No worries there, mate. 9x runs on FAT and wouldn't know where to
begin thrashing a HPFS partition.

> > > :-) Who am I to convince a man who's convinced himself so much.
> > >
> > Oh come on. You've used OS/2 yourself. Have you *ever* *anywhere* come
> > across a better user interface than the OOUI WPS? The only reason PS
> > hasn't copied it yet is because they don't know how.
>
> I must admit that it's object oriented concept as purely as it's
> implemented is unequalled but as I said before, I can do most of the
> things that I used to do in OS/2 with the windows WPS. It's just that
> you have to know how to do it. My only problem with windows explorer is
> with associations. You have far better control with OS/2 but believe me
> it's no great loss.
>
That's the problem with the 9x shell: it looks so much like the WPS
that you forget it doesn't even come near to the functionality and
consistency of it. As soon as you start the real OO stuff, that
Windows thing becomes all weird and funky.

> > > Well you don't do it because you won't be credible doing it. You'll be
> > > laughed at. If we come here saying that you should stop using OS/2 and
> > > get with the program, then a discussion starts. :)
> > >
> > <There should be an icon of someone struck by lightning here, but I
> > can't find one>
>
> <chuckle>
>
> > What about the lurching Windows zombies?
>
> You have those zombie types in windows flavours, OS/2 flavours, MacOS
> flavours, Linux flavours etc. Every camp has them.

At least the OS/2 zombies are from the cool Living Dead movie, not
that seventies shopping mall crapola.
I figure the Mac zombies come from "Dawn of the Living Dead": you
can't even kill them by chopping their heads off, and they're funny
(If you're reading this: Eric Bennett, this is you!!!).

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net

|---------------------------------------------------|
|                  NT boot options                  |
|                                                   |
|               Please choose from list             |
|                                                   |
|       <crash>         <OS/2>        <linux>       |
|---------------------------------------------------|

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               11-Oct-99 16:46:12
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 19:55:28
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Hobbyist <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :

> > OS/2 ran even fewer of the games that I wanted to run and that was one
> > of the reasons why I switched to NT. I could then play QuakeII, Diablo,
> > Hexen and later Unreal without having to boot to another OS.
>
> Two out of the mentioned 4 run in OS/2.  (Hexen has a native port)

I meant HexenII actually.

> > The win32 OS/2 project's solution for running quake II was really pitiful.
>
> In what way?  The only annoyance I've found with it is that the ALT key
> gets sticky because of PMSHELL interpretting it that you want to pop up
> the menu.  If you change strafe to another key, it functions perfectly
> fine, and at the same speed from my experience.

I use a keyboard to play and the keys that I used couldn't be mapped
hence I couldn't play it in OS/2.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               11-Oct-99 16:44:10
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 19:55:28
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Hobbyist <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Mike Trettel posted :

> >The shell enhancements gained from IE+ cannot be belittled. They are
> >quite significant and comprise the major enhancement.
>
> Which is my point, really.  The "enhancements" seem to me have been
> done simply to kill Netscape as a going concern.  I can get very much
> the same conceptual layout under OS/2 with a simple two line change in
> the config.sys file (of course, it won't be anywhere as nicely done as
> the MS layout).  That, to me, is not terribly innovative-it's just
> business the MS way.  MS is acting as a purely reactive company-they do
> something when they see a threat, and not before.

No; they saw a big pie of a market through the internet and wanted a
piece of it if not all of it. They didn't see a threat, they saw the
internet for what it was fairly late in the game.

> The really ironic thing is that IE5 is fairly widely considered to be
> a better browser than Comm 4.7.

Yes and I agree with the opinion.

> MS can come up with good stuff when they put their minds to it, but
> they simply won't compete on technical standards alone-they seem
> incapable of not playing their trump card (a totally stuffed retail
> channel).  If they had not done the integration thing, the antitrust
> suit would be far weaker, and they probably would have won against
> Netscape anyway.  It would have taken two more years though, and the
> MS management does not seem to be a patient lot.

Have they lost to Netscape or are you jumping the gun there?

> >> The Windows desktop looks pretty stagnant to me-the only way MS
> >> seems to "improve" (sarcasm, of course) it is when their monopoly is
> >> threatened.
> >
> >That sounds like FUD to me. Would you care to prove that?
>
> There's no FUD in that statement-it's an opinion.  No fear, no
> uncertainty, and no doubt. If you don't like the way I drive, get off
> the sidewalk :-).

There's plenty of room on the sidewalk thank you.
A opinion I construe as FUD anyway, especially to non-windows user. :)

> Let me put this another way.  What new innovations can we consumers
> expect to see from MS with regards to the GUI/desktop paradigm? (Uh oh,
> I'm Dilbertizing)

I can't really think of much else with the present paradigm. I can only
think of many ways in which they could fine tune what they already have
implemented.

> >That would have been a valid comment in the world of win3.1 but OS/2
> >really sensitised me to the object oriented approach and I carried that
> >mentality over to NT and realised that a very working similarity was
> >their. Except for more control over associations I could easily achieve
> >most of the WSP functionality in explorer. I very soon stopped missing
> >the WPS.
>
> You really didn't push the WPS very hard than, to make this statment.
> One thing I really find irritating under NT is a simple thing-differing
> backgrounds for my desktop folders.

I'm glad that you say that it's simple. :)

> Multiple file associations is also very good thing-why can't this be
> in Win95/NT out of the box?

For the life of me I don't know. Many of the more astute application
developers realise this shortcoming and dealt with it. It's not really
an issue for me as a result. I can still do my associations. Some may
still stubbornly argue from a purist point of view but I'm juts being
pragmatic. Your associations are achieved in the end.

> I can get it with Window Blinds, but why does it need to be added
> anyway?  The Win95 GUI *appears* to be object oriented-but it's only
> very slightly object oriented.  I will make a really difficult
> prediction here-if Windows Blinds starts taking off in a big way
> suddenly the feature set of Windows Blinds will be "integrated" into a
> newly refreshed Windows desktop.  As I said before-MS is a reactive
> company.

It's not unusual for an application to introduce a new concept that is
widely adopted by other application developers. This is how new
standards come about. Why single out M$?

> >By the way, I just changed my screen resolution on the fly without
> >rebooting. I adjusted my icon sizes to how I wanted and changed the
> >color of my windows from that boring light grey color. The font
> >anti-aliasing is just great. These additions among many others are well
> >appreciated and more than eased the change from the WPS.
>
> Yep, that's a good thing all right.  Of course, these are the features
> that Windows users always manage to bring up when discussing the
> Windows GUI.  Wonder why that is...

I'm simply illustrating very useful and fundamental shell features that
the OS/2 WPS doesn't support.

> What both of us are saying here is that either GUI has its good points
> and bad points.

Good. Hence, my point that windows explorer is far from the trash that
it's claimed to be by so many OS/2 advocates with their usual sweeping
statements about it. When you do analyse the issue, you see the lack of
truth in such a bluntly negative statement.

> >What's happening with OS/2's. Oh, I forgot, it's already reached the
> >top.
>
> I never said it was at the top, of course.  I will say that overall
> it's better than the Windows GUI.

I'd say it's better in a pure sense but not more functional.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               11-Oct-99 18:02:21
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 21:17:00
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Karel Jansens wrote:
>
> > > What about the lurching Windows zombies?
> >
> > You have those zombie types in windows flavours, OS/2 flavours, MacOS
> > flavours, Linux flavours etc. Every camp has them.
>
> At least the OS/2 zombies are from the cool Living Dead movie, not
> that seventies shopping mall crapola.

BRAINS!  MUST ... EAT ... BRAINS!!!

> I figure the Mac zombies come from "Dawn of the Living Dead": you
> can't even kill them by chopping their heads off, and they're funny
> (If you're reading this: Eric Bennett, this is you!!!).

I love the ending of the original B&W movie.  The hero that survived the
whole night through getting mistaken for a zombie, shot, and dragged out
of the house on meat hooks to be burned in a pile of zombies.  Good
stuff.  ;-)

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                11-Oct-99 19:22:18
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 21:17:00
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: "TomG" <[e-mail]>

Kim, the end of your note has made me curious.  What stuff will you be
showing at WarpStock that Windows people can only dream about for years?


"Kim Cheung" <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
> 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: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                            11-Oct-99 19:54:00
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 21:17:00
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>>
>> In article <qjcM3.595$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>> >
>> >David H. McCoy wrote in message ...
>> >>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
>> >>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.
>> >
>> >
>> >IBM does the port and they port the Windows version to OS/2.  It will
always
>> >be behind.
>> >
>> >Curtis Maurand
>> >AdventureQuest.com LLC
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Since the Unix and Mac versions are released with the Windows version, it
seem
>> to me that if parity was important, they could have an OS/2 version
released
>> with the others.
>
>Another reason I can see for the slack time between the port is that the
>interface to the OS/2 version is probably undergoing some bugfixes and
>whatnot specific to OS/2.  Most of the other ports are quite mature by
>now and don't need that much overhead.  If all it took was a simple
>unzipping and rebuilding of the source tree, it would be done by now.
>
>- Marty
>

IMO, if parity was priority, they all would be ready simultaneously.

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            11-Oct-99 19:56:27
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 21:17:00
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>Brent Davies wrote:
>>
>> Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
>> news:[e-mail]...
>> | [e-mail] wrote:
>> | >
>> [snip]
>> | >
>> | > 1) IBM does not force OS/2 users thru the annual upgrade blood-letting
>> | > 2) IBM actually _fixes_ the bugs in OS/2
>> |
>> | You also forgot:
>> | 3) IBM releases fixes more often than NT service packs are released.
>>
>> Have you heard of hot-fixes?  MS is fixing bugs with NT as soon as they are
>> found.  Service Packs are more of a convenience for people who are
>> installing new systems.  Who wants to install hundreds of hot-fixes into a
>> server that you're building tomorrow?  You could actually apply all of the
>> hot-fixes post-SP 3 and have successfully installed everything that SP 3
>> would install.
>
>Does this make my statement any less true?  I'm sure IBM's corporate
>OS/2 customers get fixes as soon as bugs are found too.  OS/2 Fixpacks
>are released more often than NT service packs.
>
>- Marty
>

But how is this important to YOU? You don't rely on IBM, nor do you need
fixpacks. Why is this important to you?

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                    11-Oct-99 23:58:02
  To: All                                               11-Oct-99 21:17:00
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: [e-mail] (William Sonna)

On Mon, 11 Oct 1999 09:35:25, Kris Kadela <[e-mail]> wrote:

> But 4.7 has no new must have features and doesn't run any faster than
> 4.6 nor is it more stable. Absolutely no reason to upgrade (I have to
> since I develop web sites and need to use all the browsers I can get my
> hands on).
>

But that's not the point.  To app-junkies, it doesn't matter whether
the new and improved version does anything better.

Or anything at all, actually, since its presumably just one of
thousands of applications he's got (and who's got time to run, much
less learn that much software?  Especially after a hard day of
trolling).

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                12-Oct-99 00:15:13
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 05:53:23
Subj: More $ and complexity,

From: joseph <[e-mail]>

Why stick with OS/2?

http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB19991011S0020

                  Enterprises using Microsoft
                  software should expect to pay 50
                  percent more per year through 2002
                  as a result of changes to terms and
                  conditions, according to a study
                  from the Gartner Group.
--

                  Costs to an enterprise rose as much as 224
                  percent over five years if all three
                  entitlements were affected in a 5,000-desktop
                  setting, licensing only Microsoft Office, the
                  analysis said.

                  Gartner also quoted a new industry study
                  that said Microsoft, on track to manage eight
                  separate operating systems by 2002, will be
                  forced to change its development strategy so
                  drastically that it may "not be a change that
                  [it] is prepared to manage successfully.

-- 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: [e-mail]                               11-Oct-99 21:08:12
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 05:53:23
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >Brent Davies wrote:
> >>
> >> Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> >> news:[e-mail]...
> >> | [e-mail] wrote:
> >> | >
> >> [snip]
> >> | >
> >> | > 1) IBM does not force OS/2 users thru the annual upgrade
blood-letting
> >> | > 2) IBM actually _fixes_ the bugs in OS/2
> >> |
> >> | You also forgot:
> >> | 3) IBM releases fixes more often than NT service packs are released.
> >>
> >> Have you heard of hot-fixes?  MS is fixing bugs with NT as soon as they
are
> >> found.  Service Packs are more of a convenience for people who are
> >> installing new systems.  Who wants to install hundreds of hot-fixes into
a
> >> server that you're building tomorrow?  You could actually apply all of
the
> >> hot-fixes post-SP 3 and have successfully installed everything that SP 3
> >> would install.
> >
> >Does this make my statement any less true?  I'm sure IBM's corporate
> >OS/2 customers get fixes as soon as bugs are found too.  OS/2 Fixpacks
> >are released more often than NT service packs.
> >
> >- Marty
> >
>
> But how is this important to YOU? You don't rely on IBM, nor do you need
> fixpacks. Why is this important to you?

How/why is anything to do with OS/2 important to you David?  I'm simply
adding another thought to the topic.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            11-Oct-99 21:27:06
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 05:53:23
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <05C6FUhLDNUU-pn2-fokqIBYyo4dL@localhost>, [e-mail] says...
>On Mon, 11 Oct 1999 09:35:25, Kris Kadela <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> But 4.7 has no new must have features and doesn't run any faster than
>> 4.6 nor is it more stable. Absolutely no reason to upgrade (I have to
>> since I develop web sites and need to use all the browsers I can get my
>> hands on).
>>
>
>But that's not the point.  To app-junkies, it doesn't matter whether
>the new and improved version does anything better.

Nope. The point is that people like yourself stay true to form. When 4.61 was
released you guys said the same thing, but ran, not walked, out to get. Same
thing when 4.04 was released, and 2.02 before that.

It is fascinating to see how unnecessary all these versions are until they
find
their way to OS/2 months after the fact.



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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               11-Oct-99 21:18:21
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 05:53:23
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >>
> >> In article <qjcM3.595$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
> >> >
> >> >David H. McCoy wrote in message ...
> >> >>In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail]
> >> >>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.
> >> >
> >> >IBM does the port and they port the Windows version to OS/2.  It will
always
> >> >be behind.
> >> >
> >> >Curtis Maurand
> >> >AdventureQuest.com LLC
> >>
> >> Since the Unix and Mac versions are released with the Windows version, it
seem
> >> to me that if parity was important, they could have an OS/2 version
released
> >> with the others.
> >
> >Another reason I can see for the slack time between the port is that the
> >interface to the OS/2 version is probably undergoing some bugfixes and
> >whatnot specific to OS/2.  Most of the other ports are quite mature by
> >now and don't need that much overhead.  If all it took was a simple
> >unzipping and rebuilding of the source tree, it would be done by now.
> >
> >- Marty
>
> IMO, if parity was priority, they all would be ready simultaneously.

Who said it was?  It seems important to you strangely enough, however.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          12-Oct-99 01:50:09
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 05:53:23
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>> Remember that your primary reason for using an OS is to run apps in a
>> stable, reliable, robust environment. What's with the obsession with the
>> WPS vs Linux window managers vs Windows explorer?

>jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)
>This is actually a bit hard to explain to a Windows user. You see, we
>OS/2 users have become accustomed to stability and robustness

What is hard to explain to clueless, naive OS/2 fanatics, such as
yourself is that, for many of us, OS/2 is a "been there, done that,
moved on" example, and your laughable attempt at condescending "I'm
better than you" attitude is just one more nail in OS/2's coffin, just
like it was so with "Amiga True Believers" who helped kill off their
"better than anything" platform too with their unappealing brand of
"advocacy".

Maybe if you weren't so utterly clueless, you'd know something about
that history. But alas, an unaware advocate you certainly are, which
is why you've been consigned to repeating the past (probably
indefinitely. I predict by next year you'll be a babbling, and still
utterly clueless Linux "advocate", helping to swear people off of that
system too. Yes, folks like you and Tholen did a "great" job of
selling OS/2. guffaw!)

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             12-Oct-99 02:01:19
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 05:53:23
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: [e-mail]

In <7ttrpd$ir4$[e-mail]>, "TomG" <[e-mail]> writes:
>[e-mail]>

I will jump in for Kim. Try Workspace on Demand. Last I checked it still was
not available on a Microsoft platform.

>
>Kim, the end of your note has made me curious.  What stuff will you be
>showing at WarpStock that Windows people can only dream about for years?
>
>
>"Kim Cheung" <[e-mail]> wrote in message
>news:[e-mail]...
>> 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: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               11-Oct-99 21:13:18
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 05:53:24
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: Hobbyist <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, TomG posted :

> Kim, the end of your note has made me curious.  What stuff will you be
> showing at WarpStock that Windows people can only dream about for years?

I'm on the edge of my seat; or should we wait for Warpstock which we
won't attend anyway so ... so much for the dreaming for years. :)

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               11-Oct-99 21:13:19
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 05:53:24
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Hobbyist <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :

> > > You have those zombie types in windows flavours, OS/2 flavours, MacOS
> > > flavours, Linux flavours etc. Every camp has them.
> >
> > At least the OS/2 zombies are from the cool Living Dead movie, not
> > that seventies shopping mall crapola.
>
> BRAINS!  MUST ... EAT ... BRAINS!!! ....

OF ... THOSE ... SENSIBLE ... NT/LINUX ... USERS!!!!

I think I had better run ...>>>>>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               11-Oct-99 22:29:17
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 05:53:24
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Hobbyist wrote:
>
> On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :
>
> > > > You have those zombie types in windows flavours, OS/2 flavours, MacOS
> > > > flavours, Linux flavours etc. Every camp has them.
> > >
> > > At least the OS/2 zombies are from the cool Living Dead movie, not
> > > that seventies shopping mall crapola.
> >
> > BRAINS!  MUST ... EAT ... BRAINS!!! ....
>
> OF ... THOSE ... SENSIBLE ... NT/LINUX ... USERS!!!!
>
> I think I had better run ...>>>>>

Nah, you're not in that group, don't worry.  ;-P

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            11-Oct-99 23:29:12
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 05:53:24
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>> >unzipping and rebuilding of the source tree, it would be done by now.
>> >
>> >- Marty
>>
>> IMO, if parity was priority, they all would be ready simultaneously.
>
>Who said it was?  It seems important to you strangely enough, however.
>
>- Marty
>
>

Well, Marty. Let's try to reason this out. It may be difficult. IBM has ported

2.02, 4.04, and 4.61 so it must be obvious, even to such an indepedent OS/2
user such as yourself, that parity is important. Clearly, what *isn't*
important is achieving this parity in a timely manner.


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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            11-Oct-99 23:37:07
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 05:53:24
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>>
>> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>> >Brent Davies wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
>> >> news:[e-mail]...
>> >> | [e-mail] wrote:
>> >> | >
>> >> [snip]
>> >> | >
>> >> | > 1) IBM does not force OS/2 users thru the annual upgrade
blood-letting
>> >> | > 2) IBM actually _fixes_ the bugs in OS/2
>> >> |
>> >> | You also forgot:
>> >> | 3) IBM releases fixes more often than NT service packs are released.
>> >>
>> >> Have you heard of hot-fixes?  MS is fixing bugs with NT as soon as they
are
>> >> found.  Service Packs are more of a convenience for people who are
>> >> installing new systems.  Who wants to install hundreds of hot-fixes into
a
>> >> server that you're building tomorrow?  You could actually apply all of
the
>> >> hot-fixes post-SP 3 and have successfully installed everything that SP 3
>> >> would install.
>> >
>> >Does this make my statement any less true?  I'm sure IBM's corporate
>> >OS/2 customers get fixes as soon as bugs are found too.  OS/2 Fixpacks
>> >are released more often than NT service packs.
>> >
>> >- Marty
>> >
>>
>> But how is this important to YOU? You don't rely on IBM, nor do you need
>> fixpacks. Why is this important to you?
>
>How/why is anything to do with OS/2 important to you David?  I'm simply
>adding another thought to the topic.
>
>- Marty
>

I'm interested in many operating systems, Marty. Do you have similar interests

in fixpacks?

By the logic of you and others of your ilk, people shouldn't be interested in
sports unless they play, motorcycles if they drive cars, or other countries
unless they live in them.


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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               11-Oct-99 23:31:13
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 05:53:24
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! [yawn]

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >> >unzipping and rebuilding of the source tree, it would be done by now.
> >> >
> >> >- Marty
> >>
> >> IMO, if parity was priority, they all would be ready simultaneously.
> >
> >Who said it was?  It seems important to you strangely enough, however.
> >
> >- Marty
>
> Well, Marty. Let's try to reason this out. It may be difficult. IBM has
ported
> 2.02, 4.04, and 4.61 so it must be obvious, even to such an indepedent OS/2
> user such as yourself, that parity is important. Clearly, what *isn't*
> important is achieving this parity in a timely manner.

Hey... if it's there, great.  If it ain't, I'm not cryin.  If it's on
the way, what's the point of arguing?  Not gonna make the developers
code any faster.  I'm glad they are taking their time because the OS/2
version of 4.61 beats the pants off of several other ports of 4.61 that
I've used, including AIX and Solaris.  BTW, how quickly do you think
these ports are released after the core code is updated?

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 12-Oct-99 05:27:01
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 05:53:24
Subj: [README] New banners available

From: "Philippe Duchenne" <[e-mail]>

New banners uploaded:

 SBill078 : "Microsoft acquired: Hotmail, LinkExchange, ...
             Who wants to break Microsoft's Freedom to Innovate ?"
 SBill079 : "Sorry Bill, I'm a computer user, not a Crash Test Dummy"

Available from:

 <URL:http://www.ping.be/amigaphil/pic/SBill.html>




More about the README campaign on:

 <URL:http://www.ping.be/amigaphil/README.html>







Philippe Duchenne <URL:http://www.ping.be/amigaphil/>
PGP ID : 9C07F6C1
Don't hate a guy.  Just show him a AMIGA, and give him a PC.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               11-Oct-99 23:37:20
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 05:53:24
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >>
> >> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >> >Brent Davies wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> >> >> news:[e-mail]...
> >> >> | [e-mail] wrote:
> >> >> | >
> >> >> [snip]
> >> >> | >
> >> >> | > 1) IBM does not force OS/2 users thru the annual upgrade
blood-letting
> >> >> | > 2) IBM actually _fixes_ the bugs in OS/2
> >> >> |
> >> >> | You also forgot:
> >> >> | 3) IBM releases fixes more often than NT service packs are released.
> >> >>
> >> >> Have you heard of hot-fixes?  MS is fixing bugs with NT as soon as
they are
> >> >> found.  Service Packs are more of a convenience for people who are
> >> >> installing new systems.  Who wants to install hundreds of hot-fixes
into a
> >> >> server that you're building tomorrow?  You could actually apply all of
the
> >> >> hot-fixes post-SP 3 and have successfully installed everything that SP
3
> >> >> would install.
> >> >
> >> >Does this make my statement any less true?  I'm sure IBM's corporate
> >> >OS/2 customers get fixes as soon as bugs are found too.  OS/2 Fixpacks
> >> >are released more often than NT service packs.
> >> >
> >> >- Marty
> >> >
> >>
> >> But how is this important to YOU? You don't rely on IBM, nor do you need
> >> fixpacks. Why is this important to you?
> >
> >How/why is anything to do with OS/2 important to you David?  I'm simply
> >adding another thought to the topic.
> >
> >- Marty
>
> I'm interested in many operating systems, Marty. Do you have similar
interests
> in fixpacks?

Yes.  I like to keep up with what is new in fixpacks in case any of it
is of interest.

> By the logic of you and others of your ilk, people shouldn't be interested
in
> sports unless they play, motorcycles if they drive cars, or other countries
> unless they live in them.

And by your logic, I can't be interested or knowledgable about fixpacks
unless I use them, or rather you were saying I cannot use fixpacks
without relying on them.  I rely on getting paid to put food on the
table and stay alive.  I don't rely on a favorite television program
coming on TV.  I still watch said television program whenever it happens
to be on, however.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]               11-Oct-99 20:42:29
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 05:53:24
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: "Kim Cheung" <[e-mail]>

On Mon, 11 Oct 1999 19:22:37 -0400, TomG wrote:

>Kim, the end of your note has made me curious.  What stuff will you be
>showing at WarpStock that Windows people can only dream about for years?

There are a number of applications I will be showing - some are vertical and
some are horizontals.   People that have seen my applications know that I
always "push the edge".   I don't develop "hobbyist" style applications.

For starter, my primary application is the WisePath program which handles
upwards of 64 T1 lines per CPU - scalable to 1.2 million phone lines - but
that's really boring to watch because my customers only use a few of these
machines in each site to handle the phone traffic - instead of the "PC Wall"
my competitor's customer do.   You see, their "NT solution" is so reliable
that nobody dare to run more than a few T1 lines per box.  So, they ended up
with these "PC walls" which is literally a wall of PCs (hundreds and hundreds
of them) to do the same job my "pitiful" few OS/2 PCs do.   But a few PC is
not "impressive", you know.   It's quite a sight to watch these hundreds and
hundreds of NT boxes in operation.   How IMPRESSIVE!!!   (And how stupid!!!)

If that's not you cup of tea, you can go to the Serenity Pavilion, we are
sponsoring a dozen or so booths to show off ver 1.2 of WiseManager.   There
will be a number of machines - various hardware configurations, all will be
running different software.   Some machine will be running the Vendor 100
program, some will be running the VendorPro program, some will be running
multimedia applications, and so forth.   I will show it in front of everybody
how I can build this whole pavilion from ground zero: I will install OS/2 on
all of them, get each one to set up the applications (some machines will have
close to 100 native OS/2 applications), ready for the show - all in MINUTES:
like less than 5.

In fact, setting up hundreds and thousands of machines will be no harder than
setting up the dozen or so machines - mostly likely in the same time span
because you would usually have only a hundred or so machines per group.

This is possible because I leverage heavily on the WPS.

I will also show our Telephony/DataBase server.   One CPU handles close to
2000 phone lines.

Then there is BASS - Building Automation and Security Server.    You will see
a new concept in Home and Business Security system.

And, of course, don't miss my talk on "The  OS/2 Super Client".

But don't come if you expect to see "hobbyist" applications.


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

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

From: [e-mail]               11-Oct-99 20:45:23
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 05:53:24
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: "Kim Cheung" <[e-mail]>

On Sun, 3 Oct 1999 17:36:12 -0400, David H. McCoy wrote:

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

Huh???  Very lovely logic.

Suicide is not very good for you, but people do it.   Why?   It is supported.
  If something goes wrong, you can turn around and sue somebody....


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

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

From: alliem@ *nospam* wtjam.net                        11-Oct-99 22:51:25
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 05:53:24
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Hobbyist <alliem@ *nospam* wtjam.net>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :

> Hobbyist wrote:
> >
> > On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :
> >
> > > > > You have those zombie types in windows flavours, OS/2 flavours,
MacOS
> > > > > flavours, Linux flavours etc. Every camp has them.
> > > >
> > > > At least the OS/2 zombies are from the cool Living Dead movie, not
> > > > that seventies shopping mall crapola.
> > >
> > > BRAINS!  MUST ... EAT ... BRAINS!!! ....
> >
> > OF ... THOSE ... SENSIBLE ... NT/LINUX ... USERS!!!!
> >
> > I think I had better run ...>>>>>
>
> Nah, you're not in that group, don't worry.  ;-P

But you're certainly in that OS/2 zombie group out of brains and a need
to eat some. ;-b

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               12-Oct-99 00:51:09
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 05:53:24
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Hobbyist wrote:
>
> On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :
>
> > Hobbyist wrote:
> > >
> > > On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :
> > >
> > > > > > You have those zombie types in windows flavours, OS/2 flavours,
MacOS
> > > > > > flavours, Linux flavours etc. Every camp has them.
> > > > >
> > > > > At least the OS/2 zombies are from the cool Living Dead movie, not
> > > > > that seventies shopping mall crapola.
> > > >
> > > > BRAINS!  MUST ... EAT ... BRAINS!!! ....
> > >
> > > OF ... THOSE ... SENSIBLE ... NT/LINUX ... USERS!!!!
> > >
> > > I think I had better run ...>>>>>
> >
> > Nah, you're not in that group, don't worry.  ;-P
>
> But you're certainly in that OS/2 zombie group out of brains and a need
> to eat some. ;-b

Aw common... after a clever comeback like that you accuse me of not
having brains?  ;-)

Besides, it's better to be undead than never to have lived at all.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                     11-Oct-99 21:48:11
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 05:53:24
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


"David H. McCoy" wrote:

> In article <05C6FUhLDNUU-pn2-fokqIBYyo4dL@localhost>, [e-mail] says...
> >On Mon, 11 Oct 1999 09:35:25, Kris Kadela <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> >> But 4.7 has no new must have features and doesn't run any faster than
> >> 4.6 nor is it more stable. Absolutely no reason to upgrade (I have to
> >> since I develop web sites and need to use all the browsers I can get my
> >> hands on).
> >>
> >
> >But that's not the point.  To app-junkies, it doesn't matter whether
> >the new and improved version does anything better.
>
> Nope. The point is that people like yourself stay true to form. When 4.61
was
> released you guys said the same thing, but ran, not walked, out to get. Same
> thing when 4.04 was released, and 2.02 before that.
>
> It is fascinating to see how unnecessary all these versions are until they
find
> their way to OS/2 months after the fact.

What is unnecessary is the unexplained urgency.   Software applications are
not
pokeman cards.

Windows user view and speak of software applications are like children who
chase
and trade pokeman cards.  They will exaggerate that OS/2 is dead since an OS/2
user
cannot frantically upgrade software the same day or month or quarter as the
windows pokeman master.  When the OS/2 version is released it is high quality
and
the pokeman mind frame is confused.

BTW 2.02 behaves like v3.0.  The 2.02 version isn't indicating the browser
functionality with the Netscape versions.  It is foolish to treat software
like
pokeman cards but it is done.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                     11-Oct-99 21:53:10
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 05:53:24
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


"David H. McCoy" wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>

>
> >> But how is this important to YOU? You don't rely on IBM, nor do you need
> >> fixpacks. Why is this important to you?
> >
> >How/why is anything to do with OS/2 important to you David?  I'm simply
> >adding another thought to the topic.
>
> I'm interested in many operating systems, Marty. Do you have similar
interests
> in fixpacks?
>
> By the logic of you and others of your ilk, people shouldn't be interested
in
> sports unless they play, motorcycles if they drive cars, or other countries
> unless they live in them.

Imagine that, mocking and ridicule is called "an interest."

Was it interest that lead you to banter with an IBM programmer about the
netscape
codebase?   No.  It was Ego.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                     11-Oct-99 22:04:03
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 05:53:24
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


"David H. McCoy" wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >> >unzipping and rebuilding of the source tree, it would be done by now.
> >> >
> >> >- Marty
> >>
> >> IMO, if parity was priority, they all would be ready simultaneously.
> >
> >Who said it was?  It seems important to you strangely enough, however.
> >
> >- Marty
> >
> >
>
> Well, Marty. Let's try to reason this out. It may be difficult. IBM has
ported
> 2.02, 4.04, and 4.61 so it must be obvious, even to such an indepedent OS/2
> user such as yourself, that parity is important. Clearly, what *isn't*
> important is achieving this parity in a timely manner.

Parity in what regard?  Stability?  That's more important to IBM than MS or
Netscape.
How about parity as measured by comparing version numbers?  No.  That's a
metric
that is not justifiable, not even close to understanding what is going on.  No
wonder you bitch and moan.  "My software version is higher than yours -- let's
play software pokeman. "

OS/2 Netscape V 2.02 implements Windows V 3.0 functionality.  Bummer.  OS/2
Java
1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality.  Bummer, bummer.  IBM isn't playing
your
game.  They are adding functionality based on need and reliability and
stability.
They do the development.  They set the standard.  If that confuses you then
we'll
have to accept your confusion as it indicates the low quality of your
understanding.

Windows communicator 4.70 has more hit points than Communicator 4.61 for OS/2.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                   12-Oct-99 01:35:11
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 05:53:24
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: [e-mail] (Eric Bennett)

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] wrote:


> >Incorrect.  You and Edwin both had thousands of votes that disappeared.
>
> ..and the technical problems with the polling were straightened out
> by the people who run that site.


Umm, well, sort of.

--
Eric Bennett ( http://www.pobox.com/~ericb/ )
Cornell University / Chemistry & Chemical Biology

Drawing on my fine command of the language, I said nothing.
-Robert Benchley

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Ho You Kong Fan Club (1:109/42)

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            12-Oct-99 08:33:14
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 10:16:26
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Tue, 12 Oct 1999 04:51:19, Marty <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hobbyist wrote:
> >
> > On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :
> >
> > > Hobbyist wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :
> > > >
> > > > > > > You have those zombie types in windows flavours, OS/2 flavours,
MacOS
> > > > > > > flavours, Linux flavours etc. Every camp has them.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > At least the OS/2 zombies are from the cool Living Dead movie, not
> > > > > > that seventies shopping mall crapola.
> > > > >
> > > > > BRAINS!  MUST ... EAT ... BRAINS!!! ....
> > > >
> > > > OF ... THOSE ... SENSIBLE ... NT/LINUX ... USERS!!!!
> > > >
> > > > I think I had better run ...>>>>>
> > >
> > > Nah, you're not in that group, don't worry.  ;-P
> >
> > But you're certainly in that OS/2 zombie group out of brains and a need
> > to eat some. ;-b
>
> Aw common... after a clever comeback like that you accuse me of not
> having brains?  ;-)
>
> Besides, it's better to be undead than never to have lived at all.
>

Right on! <much munch>
Hey! Leave me some hypothalamus, Marty. It's my favourite.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net

|---------------------------------------------------|
|                  NT boot options                  |
|                                                   |
|               Please choose from list             |
|                                                   |
|       <crash>         <OS/2>        <linux>       |
|---------------------------------------------------|

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

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

From: alliem@ *nospam* wtjam.net                        12-Oct-99 07:50:20
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 16:57:24
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Hobbyist <alliem@ *nospam* wtjam.net>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :

> > > > > > At least the OS/2 zombies are from the cool Living Dead movie, not
> > > > > > that seventies shopping mall crapola.
> > > > >
> > > > > BRAINS!  MUST ... EAT ... BRAINS!!! ....
> > > >
> > > > OF ... THOSE ... SENSIBLE ... NT/LINUX ... USERS!!!!
> > > >
> > > > I think I had better run ...>>>>>
> > >
> > > Nah, you're not in that group, don't worry.  ;-P
> >
> > But you're certainly in that OS/2 zombie group out of brains and a need
> > to eat some. ;-b
>
> Aw common... after a clever comeback like that you accuse me of not
> having brains?  ;-)

It wasn't particularly clever. It was the only come back you could make.
;-b

> Besides, it's better to be undead than never to have lived at all.

Now that's interesting. I'll give it some thought and get back to yah!
;-)

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                12-Oct-99 13:36:00
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 16:57:24
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: [e-mail] (rj friedman)

On Sun, 10 Oct 1999 17:11:06, [e-mail] wrote:

ε|I've played around with KDE. I found it looked nice, but was a system
ε|hog and really more on par with the Windows desktop (which it tries to
ε|mimick) than the WPS environment. I'm now using Xfce as my window
ε|manager in Linux (is much nicer towards RAM), but I'm still in OS/2
ε|most of the time.
ε|
ε|GNOME is even worse than KDE.


εKDE is OK; but, like most of Linux, very immature.
»
εBottom line, Linux doesn't even have _one_ decent editor - 15 year old
εKedit still beats 'em all!


I've been playing around with Linux off and on for better
than a year now. Just about two weeks ago I installed the
Mandrake version (which is KDE on Red Hat, pretty much).
It's ok - I can't really fault it all that much, but, just
like all the other times in the past, there is NOTHING there
that I would want to give up OS/2 for. And KDE - while
pretty looking enough - doesn't come within a mile of the
WPS.




________________________________________________________

[RJ]                 OS/2 - Live it, or live with it.
rj friedman          Team ABW
Taipei, Taiwan       [e-mail]

To send email - remove the `yyy'
________________________________________________________

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          12-Oct-99 10:25:09
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 16:57:25
Subj: Re: The Innovators

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Carl Kaufmann wrote:
>
> Paul Arnott wrote:
> >
> > This appears on MS site
> > Wota freeking JOKE!!!
> >
> >                      We formed the Freedom to Innovate Network (FIN) as
> > a response to the
> >                      overwhelming amount of correspondence we received
> > from around the
> >                      U.S. and overseas regarding the trial with the
> > Department of Justice and
> >                      other public policy issues. The FIN is a
> > non-partisan, grassroots network of
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> >                      citizens and businesses who have a stake in the
>                                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > success of Microsoft and
> >                      the high-tech industry. The FIN will help you stay
> > up to date on critical
> >                      developments in public policy. Sign up for a free
> > e-newsletter, tell us your
> >                      thoughts, take action and stay informed. It's how
> > you can make a
> >                      difference!
>
> Is Microsoft now embracing and extending the English language?

I guess it depends upon what the meaning of "is" is.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             12-Oct-99 15:19:10
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 16:57:25
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: [e-mail] ()

On 1 Oct 1999 17:44:01 GMT, Emery Lapinski <[e-mail]> wrote:
>In article <7sdsfk$kcv$[e-mail]>,
>Tim Mayer <[e-mail]> wrote:
>[deleted]
>>However, following the introduction of this perfect Kevlar jacket,
>>someone develops a bullet capable of piercing this perfect Kevlar jacket -
>>rendering it useless. Since the bullet represents a very real threat, it is
>>outlawed, preventing it from becoming legally available. Since this new
>>ammunition is very desirable for criminal activity it quickly reappears
>>through illegal suppliers and is ultimately used against owners of the
>>previously perfect kevlar jacket. Now who do you blame?

    Perfect anti-fragmentation vest in this case is somewhat
    of an absurdity. Those familiar with firearms know this.
    Those that sell 'bulletproof vests' simply should know
    better and advise their customers accordingly and not
    commit fraud.

    This is akin to MS (and advocates) attempting to paint
    NT as some better Unix than Unix with the ease of admin
    of a Macintosh.

>
>For me it would depend on what what involved in the development of this
>new bullet.
>
>If it required painstaking years of materials and ballistics research,
>OK, maybe I blame the guy that invented the new bullet.
>
>If it only required some trivial modification, say, changing the color
>of the bullet, then I'd probably blame the guy that sold me the
>jacket.
>
>(I'd say Windows virii are more like the later.)
>
>Emery
>--
>[e-mail]                                      http://www.panix.com/~ewl/
>This post is Copyright 1997 Emery Lapinski and is distributed under the terms
>and conditions of GNU's General Public License.
>                                              It's what the astronauts drink!

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             12-Oct-99 22:55:18
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 21:21:11
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
  [e-mail] (David Frank) wrote:
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
writes:
>
> > In the last 6-7 yrs, the IBM PC Co has lost billions for IBM by
> > pursuing a 'Microsoft' first strategy - their demise is overdue.
>
>
> At the time MS released what turned out to be the warp-killer OS.
> that is... Win95  in aug 95,
> IBM was offering OS/2 pre-loads and was a little tardy offering Win95
> pre-load option to buyers, but immediately IBM's win95 sales so
> swamped OS/2 buyer preload sales, that by '97? IBM had dropped
> offering  warp pre-loaded..
>
> It seems you are suggesting IBM PC company should have gone
> down the drain with OS/2 rather than give buyers what they wanted?

Actually, what the original poster is saying is that by "giv[ing] buyers
what they wanted" (i.e., Win95) and *refusing* to even offer OS/2
preloads, the IBM PC Co. ended up going "down the drain" anyway.  One
implication is that IBM *should* have promoted OS/2, and offered it as a
preload option, and made the option seem attractive (which is to say,
"promoted OS/2").

By trying to ride on MS' coat tails, IBM's PC Co. got what they had
coming, as it were.


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: alliem@ *nospam* wtjam.net                        12-Oct-99 18:11:15
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 21:21:12
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: Hobbyist <alliem@ *nospam* wtjam.net>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, [e-mail] posted :

> > > Let's get something straight -- *nothing* is absolutely
> > > "indespensible"  when it comes to platforms/operating systems/user
> > > interfaces.  It all boils down to user preference.
> >
> > Well for me, a GUI is indispensable. I'd refuse to use an OS without
> > one.
>
> As I was saying, it boils down to user preference . . . some may
> actually prefer a CLI, or a character-based windowing system.

Yes, and not that one is trash or cranky while the other is glorious.
Good!

> > I don't argue windows features being indispensable. I, however, see
> > very bad points against OS/2 being brushed off with the statement to
> > the effect that I'm willing to put up with X,Y, and Z because of the
> > great WPS as if it is indeed indispensable, hence my question?
>
> As I was saying . . . it boils down to user preference.

Yes, and not that the WPS is the holy grail while windows explorer is
just trash. Good!!!!

> Don't you get it yet?

I see that we're on the same wavelength now.

<snip>
> > Try drag'n'dropping a colour to your windows. They remain the same
> > grey color.
>
> Wrong.  D'n'd colors work the same as d'n'd fonts.

As I said, try to change the colour of your window from the default gray
by drag'n'drop.

> At least, they do for me. Are we discussing the same OS/2?  Did you use
> the right mouse button?
>
> Are you really an ex-OS/2-user?

Yup, and an avid one at that. This is why I know that I can't change the
grey colour of the windows. Never could when I used OS/2. Mind you I
could change the colour of most other things with drag'n'drop. :)

> > From the same customisation applet that you so dislike I can
> > customise the whole windows interface, i.e., window colors, font sizes
> > specific to menus, icons, pop-up windows. You can change screen
> > resolution on the fly and activate screen savers.
>
> Did I ever say that I *disliked* the applet? No, it just strikes me as
> being . . . uninspired, coming from a company that whines so much about
> how Big Bad Government stifles their ability to "innovate."  The OS/2
> method *is* innovative. The MS-Windows method isn't.

Drag'n'dropping to customise is innovative and hence better than
customising from a central customisation applet as in windows, even
though your customising ability are in many ways easier and more
flexible than in OS/2. The only thing that I miss about OS/2 is that I
could individually customise the folder backgrounds and behaviour.
Windows changes in this regard tend to be global. Interesting that you
claim that OS/2's way is superior since it happens to be different and
perhaps innovative. Sounds like you hate M$ too much. It clouds your
judgement making you lose objectivity.

> Not that it ultimately matters. For all their crowing about innovation,
> the MS-Contigent seem quite happy with uninspired interfaces and tools.

As I said, you hate M$ too much. I know, I used to share the same
feelings about windows. It's a mindset that I personally had to outgrow
and as a result learn to be more pragmatic.

> Gaudy, yes. But uninspired, nonetheless.

Gaudy. Hah. I mean really now.

> > You don't have to explain templates to me since I used OS/2. I find
> > that right clicking the windows desktop, selecting new and selecting
> > from the menu provides a similar template type functionality.
>
> These two statements contradict each other -- if you really are an
> ex-OS/2-user, you would understand that selecting a new file type from a
> context menu has little to do with duplicating the functionality of a
> template.

Certainly, with the ways that I personally used templates, it does offer
a similar functionality.

> > Where's the WPS file manager by the way?
>
> Drives object, Tree view, open up a folder in Details view.
>
> There are traditional file manager utilities available for OS/2, from
> freeware through shareware to commercial, all with varying arrays of
> bells and whistles.
>
> For those who need a traditional (i.e., uninspired) file manager.

<chuckle>

> > Do you have a send to menu that is activatable where ever you are.
>
> No, but I honestly don't consider the ability to e-mail my desktop to
> someone an "indespensible" piece of funtionality.

<sarcasm> That's really a sensible statement. </sarcasm> Firstly, you
may send any file as an e-mail attachment invoking your e-mail client
via the send to menu. Your e-mail client however is not the only item in
the send to menu. The send to menu is a nice convenience feature, that's
all.

> > Do you create templates all over the place to mimic the windows right
> > click context menu -> new -> whatever file type functionality that is
> > available throughout the work place?
>
> Hell, no!  Why use a Ferrari to mimic a Honda? And, again, do you really
> know what templates are?

Yes I do. I think, however, that you aren't very familiar with windows
explorer and that's the problem. Do you at least agree that it's useful
to have templates in other places apart from in the templates folder. I
used to find it particularly annoying to have to visit the templates
folder whenever I needed to create one.

> What I have usually done with templates is create a folder full of
> PM-FTP icons, each of which logged onto a different FTP site, using the
> password I plugged into the object, and navigateed to the appropriate
> subdirectories on both the remote and local machines.
>
> Similarly, when doing MVS programming, I may have several TN-3270
> objects configured for different screen sizes (27 x 132 for TSO/ISPF
> sessions, 25 x 80 for CICS regions, etc), which also log on
> automatically.
>
> And that's just scratching the surface. Yes, I have used NT for a couple
> of years, now, and no, it doesn't offer anything even close.

Yes, you indeed have outlined some specific uses of templates I hadn't
really thought of or needed to use them for and I concede that AFAIK I
couldn't do such things with windows explorer.:)

> > You're darned right about that so it does make me wonder what makes
> > the WPS such a killer in functionality. As I said, the days of win3.1
> > are long gone.
>
> Yet again, I must ask, "What in hell are you talking about?" The "days
> of win3.1???!!"

I meant from a comparison POV. The OS/2 WPS was pretty much booming in
the days of win3.1 which is an absolute joke when compared to the OS/2
WPS and the current windows explorer for that matter. The OS/2 WPS
therefore shun like a beacon in the days of win3.1 and yes it was darned
innovative. The win3.1 days are gone now and the windows shell has
improved a whole lot. The gulf between the two has drastically dwindled
to the point where I don't see it as such a big issue in decision making
between the two platforms. Not especially of there are other glaring
issues. IMHO and user situation of course.

> Do you seriously expect me to believe that you've ever used OS/2 with
> "observations" like those?  I mean, comparing the WPS to win3.1 is
> absurd.

I'm not comparing the two. I was trying to say that we are actually
*not* doing this because I feel as if we are.

> Frankly, whining about OS/2's alleged lack of a file manager strikes me
> as a throwback to the days of Win3.1.  One can make the Drives object
> behave in a manner similar to a typical file manager, but one doesn't
> have to.
>
> > > but I've grown used to the way the WPS works, and feel hadcuffed
> > > when using NT or even Linux' latest window managers.
> >
> > I felt handcuffed when I was trying NT as well. I soon realised that I
> > was just being unaccommodating
>
> So, then, you admit that one has to "accomodate" NT's interface, rather
> than the interface accomodate the user?

Actually I meant accommodating in the sense that I was being closed
minded about it and just plain complaining. I had to learn OS/2's WPS
you see and was very accommodating in that regard. I made my share of
concessions with it, don't you for once believe otherwise. In a similar
sense windows explorers functionality has to be learnt as well to be
taken advantage of.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               12-Oct-99 19:30:14
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 21:21:12
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Cameron Hughes <[e-mail]>

rj friedman wrote:
>
> On Sun, 10 Oct 1999 17:11:06, [e-mail] wrote:
>
> ε|I've played around with KDE. I found it looked nice, but was a system
> ε|hog and really more on par with the Windows desktop (which it tries to
> ε|mimick) than the WPS environment. I'm now using Xfce as my window
> ε|manager in Linux (is much nicer towards RAM), but I'm still in OS/2
> ε|most of the time.
> ε|
> ε|GNOME is even worse than KDE.
>
> εKDE is OK; but, like most of Linux, very immature.
> ε
> εBottom line, Linux doesn't even have _one_ decent editor - 15 year old
> εKedit still beats 'em all!
>
> I've been playing around with Linux off and on for better
> than a year now. Just about two weeks ago I installed the
> Mandrake version (which is KDE on Red Hat, pretty much).
> It's ok - I can't really fault it all that much, but, just
> like all the other times in the past, there is NOTHING there
> that I would want to give up OS/2 for. And KDE - while
> pretty looking enough - doesn't come within a mile of the
> WPS.
>
> ________________________________________________________
>
> [RJ]                 OS/2 - Live it, or live with it.
> rj friedman          Team ABW
> Taipei, Taiwan       [e-mail]
>
> To send email - remove the `yyy'
> ________________________________________________________


The problem is not where OS/2 is at this exact moment.  The problem
is where it will be when IA-64 is released. How will it compare after
Corel Corp has put some finishing touches on K.  After Borland (Inprise)
has finished porting its latest development suite to Linux.  How does
OS/2 look when a developer is trying to load it on one of those
snazzy HP Pavillions that SIS530, SIS630.  How does OS/2 look when one
is trying to run the latest Object Oriented Development Tools i.e. UML
tools?  For those who don't do state of the art development or who
come from a user's perspective, OS/2 has about 3 years of usefulness.
For those who require the latest RAD, Case, latest hardware, OS/2
is not an option.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          12-Oct-99 16:32:28
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 23:18:16
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: [e-mail] ()

On Sat, 09 Oct 1999 12:39:13 -0400, Joseph <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>
>Kelly Robinson wrote:
>
>> > >As usual they cannot
>> > > admit someone else is better in any way. They do everything to wipe out
>> > the
>> > > competition and all the dirty tricks is allowed.
>> >
>> > Such as?
>>
>> Are you really that ignorant?  Who needs direct evidence?  America is a
>> capitalism money-before-all-else country.  Microsoft ain't alone in the biz
>> of screwing everybody to make an extra buck.
>
>You lack perspective.
>
>Who else besides MS is stupid enough to push the limits so far that the went
to
>trial under anti-trust law?
>
That most people here would care about: IBM
(you know those cool guys that make OS/2 and support Linux...)

I would suspect that most industries have investigations
ongoing at the moment, anywhere you see big mergers going on.
How many of those go to trial depends on politics and severity
of transgressions.

--
Daniel Taylor

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               12-Oct-99 17:43:15
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 23:18:16
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: Roberto Alsina <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>,
  [e-mail] wrote:
> Dave Tholen tholened the following first-level quoted material to
comp.os.os2.advocacy:
>
> >I wrote:
>
> >> Tholen was *twice* nominated for Usenet Kook of the Month -- the
first
> >> time by Roberto Alsina back in 1997,
>
> >Alsina is the person who accused me of posting an average of 134
articles
> >every day, which was ludicrous.  When he pointed to his alleged
evidence,
> >it became obvious that he didn't even bother to check the range of
dates.
> >Even then, he continued to insist that he was right, until others
started
> >getting on his case.  How ironic that he nominated me rather than
himself.

Well, Dave, that should show you that you are not universally seen
as the beacon of pure reason and thought you apparently think you are.

BTW: you were nominated for being stupid enough to argue with Eliza.

Anyway, you still haven't groen out of this? Man, are you a grudgy
old fellow!

PS: they weren't 134 a day, but they sure felt like it.
PPS: preemptive Tholen argument response: they felt like that to me,
that's subjective, personal opinion, you have no way of proving I
didn't feel that way, so save it for the winter.

--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)


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: [e-mail]                                  12-Oct-99 18:20:10
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 23:18:16
Subj: Modules for Escape GL

From: CII <[e-mail]>

Please inform Snow Storm if being able to add modules would benifit
you....

Thanks


> Can you add other Modules to Escape GL 2.2???
>
> Like other *.SSM Files, or like the attached Dll files???
>
> (See attached file: 3DOBJECT.DLL)(See attached file:
> COSMIC.DLL)



We do not currently support other modules, however that is not to say
it
is not possible. If sufficient interest is shown we will consider
adding
this. You can however make custom Escape GL modules with the free
developers kits. Again if sufficient requests are made, we will convert
some other popular modules to Escape GL modules. In addition, we always
appreciate any new module ideas.

Steve
Snow Storm Software

--
http://trss.webjump.com


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: [e-mail]                               12-Oct-99 19:34:20
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 23:18:16
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Roberto Alsina <[e-mail]>

In article <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-lIrUPhcxPNgo@localhost>,
  jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Oct 1999 17:11:06, [e-mail] wrote:
> > Bottom line, Linux doesn't even have _one_ decent editor - 15 year
old
> > Kedit still beats 'em all!
> >
>
> I thought Kedit was part of the KDE-package.

I think he meant another Kedit. At least KDE's Kedit is nowhere near
15 years old :-)

> It ain't half nice, though. I only wish I could find a character mode
> editor a la DOS "edit" (I'm a CUA-junk; <CTRL>+<KEY> sequences tend to
> unleash homicidal fits for me). The Pine editor is sort of okay, but
> still not it. I'm now mainly doing mcedit (the editor in Midnight
> Commander).

You may want to take a look at FTE, or perhaps my KDE port KFTE.
All keybindings are configurable, and the default is quite sane.

In fact, there is even a OS/2 port, I believe.

You can find them all in freshmeat.net

--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)


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: [e-mail]               12-Oct-99 13:03:04
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 23:18:16
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: "Kim Cheung" <[e-mail]>

On 12 Oct 1999 11:55:06 GMT, David Frank wrote:

>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
>
>>
>>In the last 6-7 yrs, the IBM PC Co has lost billions for IBM by pursuing
>>a 'Microsoft' first strategy - their demise is overdue.
>>
>>
>
>At the time MS released what turned out to be the warp-killer OS.
>that is... Win95  in aug 95,
>IBM was offering OS/2 pre-loads and was a little tardy offering Win95
>pre-load option to buyers, but immediately IBM's win95 sales so
>swamped OS/2 buyer preload sales, that by '97? IBM had dropped
>offering  warp pre-loaded..
>
>It seems you are suggesting IBM PC company should have gone
>down the drain with OS/2 rather than give buyers what they wanted?
>

They should have fold the tent.   Nobody had the gut to do that.   Now looks
like they are finally coming around to their senses and start thinking about
pulling out.

If IBM stood firm with their enterprise only plan, W95 could have never made
any headway in the enterprise.   They called the bluff - and IBM crumbled.

IBM never made any money on PC and probably never will.   This is simple
economic - would you rather loose billion after billion for every year you
try, or would you rather cut the loses and walk away?





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

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

From: [e-mail]                             12-Oct-99 20:49:11
  To: All                                               12-Oct-99 23:18:17
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: [e-mail]

In article <UD8COJjJHJt=[e-mail]>,
  Hobbyist <[e-mail]> wrote:
> On comp.os.os2.advocacy, [e-mail] posted :

-- snip --

> > Let's get something straight -- *nothing* is absolutely
> > "indespensible"  when it comes to platforms/operating systems/user
> > interfaces.  It all boils down to user preference.
>
> Well for me, a GUI is indispensable. I'd refuse to use an OS without
> one.

As I was saying, it boils down to user preference . . . some may
actually prefer a CLI, or a character-based windowing system.

> > To be sure, there's nothing about Windows that's the least bit
> > "indespensible," claims to the contrary by the MS-Contingent
> > notwithstanding.
>
> I don't argue windows features being indispensable. I, however, see
> very bad points against OS/2 being brushed off with the statement to
> the effect that I'm willing to put up with X,Y, and Z because of the
> great WPS as if it is indeed indispensable, hence my question?

As I was saying . . . it boils down to user preference.

Don't you get it yet?

-- snip --

> > what I like about the WPS, for which there are no equals in either
> > Windows or Linux, are Templates and d'n'd customization.  An example
> > of the latter is opeing up the Font Palette, then dragging and
> > dropping fonts onto windows, title bars, menus, etc., in order to
> > change the font(s) therein, rather than the standard "Go To An
> > Options Dialog" route that everyone else takes.
>
> Try drag'n'dropping a colour to your windows. They remain the same
> grey color.

Wrong.  D'n'd colors work the same as d'n'd fonts.

At least, they do for me. Are we discussing the same OS/2?  Did you use
the right mouse button?

Are you really an ex-OS/2-user?

> From the same customisation applet that you so dislike I can
> customise the whole windows interface, i.e., window colors, font sizes
> specific to menus, icons, pop-up windows. You can change screen
> resolution on the fly and activate screen savers.

Did I ever say that I *disliked* the applet? No, it just strikes me as
being . . . uninspired, coming from a company that whines so much about
how Big Bad Government stifles their ability to "innovate."  The OS/2
method *is* innovative. The MS-Windows method isn't.

Not that it ultimately matters. For all their crowing about innovation,
the MS-Contigent seem quite happy with uninspired interfaces and tools.

Gaudy, yes. But uninspired, nonetheless.

> > Templates are harder to explain, but they allow me to create new
> > objects according to my needs, and place them on the desktop, where
> > they can become d'n'd targets themselves.
>
> You don't have to explain templates to me since I used OS/2. I find
> that right clicking the windows desktop, selecting new and selecting
> from the menu provides a similar template type functionality.

These two statements contradict each other -- if you really are an
ex-OS/2-user, you would understand that selecting a new file type from a
context menu has little to do with duplicating the functionality of a
template.

> Where's the WPS file manager by the way?

Drives object, Tree view, open up a folder in Details view.

There are traditional file manager utilities available for OS/2, from
freeware through shareware to commercial, all with varying arrays of
bells and whistles.

For those who need a traditional (i.e., uninspired) file manager.

> Do you have a send to menu that is activatable where ever you are.

No, but I honestly don't consider the ability to e-mail my desktop to
someone an "indespensible" piece of funtionality.

> Do you create templates all over the place to mimic the windows right
> click context menu -> new -> whatever file type functionality that is
> available throughout the work place?

Hell, no!  Why use a Ferrari to mimic a Honda? And, again, do you really
know what templates are?

What I have usually done with templates is create a folder full of
PM-FTP icons, each of which logged onto a different FTP site, using the
password I plugged into the object, and navigateed to the appropriate
subdirectories on both the remote and local machines.

Similarly, when doing MVS programming, I may have several TN-3270
objects configured for different screen sizes (27 x 132 for TSO/ISPF
sessions, 25 x 80 for CICS regions, etc), which also log on
automatically.

And that's just scratching the surface. Yes, I have used NT for a couple
of years, now, and no, it doesn't offer anything even close.

> > That's just a couple of items off the bat. I'm sure that other
> > platforms can offer similar funtionality in a different package,
>
> You're darned right about that so it does make me wonder what makes
> the WPS such a killer in functionality. As I said, the days of win3.1
> are long gone.

Yet again, I must ask, "What in hell are you talking about?" The "days
of win3.1???!!"

Do you seriously expect me to believe that you've ever used OS/2 with
"observations" like those?  I mean, comparing the WPS to win3.1 is
absurd.

Frankly, whining about OS/2's alleged lack of a file manager strikes me
as a throwback to the days of Win3.1.  One can make the Drives object
behave in a manner similar to a typical file manager, but one doesn't
have to.

> > but I've grown used to the way the WPS works, and feel hadcuffed
> > when using NT or even Linux' latest window managers.
>
> I felt handcuffed when I was trying NT as well. I soon realised that I
> was just being unaccommodating

So, then, you admit that one has to "accomodate" NT's interface, rather
than the interface accomodate the user?

-- 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: [e-mail]                                 13-Oct-99 00:26:20
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 03:37:02
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: [e-mail] (Mike Timbol)

In article <[e-mail]>, Joseph  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>OS/2 Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality.  Bummer, bummer.

It's also bullshit.  Download something like NetBeans, that requires
JDK 1.2.  Try to run it on OS/2.  No dice.

JDK 1.1.x -> JDK 1.2 is a major upgrade; it's not something that
IBM snuck in when going from 1.1.7 -> 1.1.8.

     - Mike


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

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

From: [e-mail]                            12-Oct-99 21:06:21
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 03:37:02
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, Hobbyist <alliem@ *nospam*
wtjam.net> says...
>> No, but I honestly don't consider the ability to e-mail my desktop to
>> someone an "indespensible" piece of funtionality.
>
><sarcasm> That's really a sensible statement. </sarcasm> Firstly, you
>may send any file as an e-mail attachment invoking your e-mail client
>via the send to menu. Your e-mail client however is not the only item in
>the send to menu. The send to menu is a nice convenience feature, that's
>all.
>
>

And more WPS shell like than any option available under OS/2. An older version

of CC:Mail under OS/2 used to be able to do this.
--
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            12-Oct-99 21:09:10
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 03:37:02
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>>
>> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>> >> >Brent Davies wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
>> >> >> news:[e-mail]...
>> >> >> | [e-mail] wrote:
>> >> >> | >
>> >> >> [snip]
>> >> >> | >
>> >> >> | > 1) IBM does not force OS/2 users thru the annual upgrade
blood-letting
>> >> >> | > 2) IBM actually _fixes_ the bugs in OS/2
>> >> >> |
>> >> >> | You also forgot:
>> >> >> | 3) IBM releases fixes more often than NT service packs are
released.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Have you heard of hot-fixes?  MS is fixing bugs with NT as soon as
they are
>> >> >> found.  Service Packs are more of a convenience for people who are
>> >> >> installing new systems.  Who wants to install hundreds of hot-fixes
into a
>> >> >> server that you're building tomorrow?  You could actually apply all
of the
>> >> >> hot-fixes post-SP 3 and have successfully installed everything that
SP 3
>> >> >> would install.
>> >> >
>> >> >Does this make my statement any less true?  I'm sure IBM's corporate
>> >> >OS/2 customers get fixes as soon as bugs are found too.  OS/2 Fixpacks
>> >> >are released more often than NT service packs.
>> >> >
>> >> >- Marty
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> But how is this important to YOU? You don't rely on IBM, nor do you need
>> >> fixpacks. Why is this important to you?
>> >
>> >How/why is anything to do with OS/2 important to you David?  I'm simply
>> >adding another thought to the topic.
>> >
>> >- Marty
>>
>> I'm interested in many operating systems, Marty. Do you have similar
interests
>> in fixpacks?
>
>Yes.  I like to keep up with what is new in fixpacks in case any of it
>is of interest.

How many have you installed?

>> By the logic of you and others of your ilk, people shouldn't be interested
in
>> sports unless they play, motorcycles if they drive cars, or other countries
>> unless they live in them.
>
>And by your logic, I can't be interested or knowledgable about fixpacks
>unless I use them, or rather you were saying I cannot use fixpacks
>without relying on them.

Your conclusion is flawed. I merely asked about your interest considering how
adamant you've been about not needing fixpacks.

>- Marty
>

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               12-Oct-99 21:05:16
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 03:37:02
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >>
> >> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
> >> >> >Brent Davies wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> >> >> >> news:[e-mail]...
> >> >> >> | [e-mail] wrote:
> >> >> >> | >
> >> >> >> [snip]
> >> >> >> | >
> >> >> >> | > 1) IBM does not force OS/2 users thru the annual upgrade
blood-letting
> >> >> >> | > 2) IBM actually _fixes_ the bugs in OS/2
> >> >> >> |
> >> >> >> | You also forgot:
> >> >> >> | 3) IBM releases fixes more often than NT service packs are
released.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Have you heard of hot-fixes?  MS is fixing bugs with NT as soon as
they are
> >> >> >> found.  Service Packs are more of a convenience for people who are
> >> >> >> installing new systems.  Who wants to install hundreds of hot-fixes
into a
> >> >> >> server that you're building tomorrow?  You could actually apply all
of the
> >> >> >> hot-fixes post-SP 3 and have successfully installed everything that
SP 3
> >> >> >> would install.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Does this make my statement any less true?  I'm sure IBM's corporate
> >> >> >OS/2 customers get fixes as soon as bugs are found too.  OS/2
Fixpacks
> >> >> >are released more often than NT service packs.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >- Marty
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> But how is this important to YOU? You don't rely on IBM, nor do you
need
> >> >> fixpacks. Why is this important to you?
> >> >
> >> >How/why is anything to do with OS/2 important to you David?  I'm simply
> >> >adding another thought to the topic.
> >> >
> >> >- Marty
> >>
> >> I'm interested in many operating systems, Marty. Do you have similar
interests
> >> in fixpacks?
> >
> >Yes.  I like to keep up with what is new in fixpacks in case any of it
> >is of interest.
>
> How many have you installed?

Not sure.  FP1, FP2, FP3, FP5, FP8, FP9, FP11, FP12 I think.

> >> By the logic of you and others of your ilk, people shouldn't be
interested in
> >> sports unless they play, motorcycles if they drive cars, or other
countries
> >> unless they live in them.
> >
> >And by your logic, I can't be interested or knowledgable about fixpacks
> >unless I use them, or rather you were saying I cannot use fixpacks
> >without relying on them.
>
> Your conclusion is flawed. I merely asked about your interest considering
how
> adamant you've been about not needing fixpacks.

Do I need to watch my favorite TV shows?  No.
Do I watch my favorite TV shows?  Yes.

You can do something with NEEDING to do it.  Why is this a conceptual
problem?

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            12-Oct-99 22:01:03
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 03:37:02
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>>
>> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>> >> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
>> >> >> >Brent Davies wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
>> >> >> >> news:[e-mail]...
>> >> >> >> | [e-mail] wrote:
>> >> >> >> | >
>> >> >> >> [snip]
>> >> >> >> | >
>> >> >> >> | > 1) IBM does not force OS/2 users thru the annual upgrade
blood-letting
>> >> >> >> | > 2) IBM actually _fixes_ the bugs in OS/2
>> >> >> >> |
>> >> >> >> | You also forgot:
>> >> >> >> | 3) IBM releases fixes more often than NT service packs are
released.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Have you heard of hot-fixes?  MS is fixing bugs with NT as soon as
they are
>> >> >> >> found.  Service Packs are more of a convenience for people who are
>> >> >> >> installing new systems.  Who wants to install hundreds of
hot-fixes into a
>> >> >> >> server that you're building tomorrow?  You could actually apply
all of the
>> >> >> >> hot-fixes post-SP 3 and have successfully installed everything
that SP 3
>> >> >> >> would install.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Does this make my statement any less true?  I'm sure IBM's corporate
>> >> >> >OS/2 customers get fixes as soon as bugs are found too.  OS/2
Fixpacks
>> >> >> >are released more often than NT service packs.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >- Marty
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> But how is this important to YOU? You don't rely on IBM, nor do you
need
>> >> >> fixpacks. Why is this important to you?
>> >> >
>> >> >How/why is anything to do with OS/2 important to you David?  I'm simply
>> >> >adding another thought to the topic.
>> >> >
>> >> >- Marty
>> >>
>> >> I'm interested in many operating systems, Marty. Do you have similar
interests
>> >> in fixpacks?
>> >
>> >Yes.  I like to keep up with what is new in fixpacks in case any of it
>> >is of interest.
>>
>> How many have you installed?
>
>Not sure.  FP1, FP2, FP3, FP5, FP8, FP9, FP11, FP12 I think.

Hmmmm...quite a few for someone so self-reliant. Why so many fixpacks with so
smooth running a system?

>> >> By the logic of you and others of your ilk, people shouldn't be
interested in
>> >> sports unless they play, motorcycles if they drive cars, or other
countries
>> >> unless they live in them.
>> >
>> >And by your logic, I can't be interested or knowledgable about fixpacks
>> >unless I use them, or rather you were saying I cannot use fixpacks
>> >without relying on them.
>>
>> Your conclusion is flawed. I merely asked about your interest considering
how
>> adamant you've been about not needing fixpacks.
>
>Do I need to watch my favorite TV shows?  No.
>Do I watch my favorite TV shows?  Yes.

These statements do nothing to address your flawed conclusion.

>You can do something with NEEDING to do it.  Why is this a conceptual
>problem?

Is this why you installed so many fixpacks? Just to do it?

>- Marty
>

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               12-Oct-99 22:05:05
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 03:37:02
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >>
> >> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
> >> >> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
> >> >> >> >Brent Davies wrote:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> news:[e-mail]...
> >> >> >> >> | [e-mail] wrote:
> >> >> >> >> | >
> >> >> >> >> [snip]
> >> >> >> >> | >
> >> >> >> >> | > 1) IBM does not force OS/2 users thru the annual upgrade
blood-letting
> >> >> >> >> | > 2) IBM actually _fixes_ the bugs in OS/2
> >> >> >> >> |
> >> >> >> >> | You also forgot:
> >> >> >> >> | 3) IBM releases fixes more often than NT service packs are
released.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Have you heard of hot-fixes?  MS is fixing bugs with NT as soon
as they are
> >> >> >> >> found.  Service Packs are more of a convenience for people who
are
> >> >> >> >> installing new systems.  Who wants to install hundreds of
hot-fixes into a
> >> >> >> >> server that you're building tomorrow?  You could actually apply
all of the
> >> >> >> >> hot-fixes post-SP 3 and have successfully installed everything
that SP 3
> >> >> >> >> would install.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Does this make my statement any less true?  I'm sure IBM's
corporate
> >> >> >> >OS/2 customers get fixes as soon as bugs are found too.  OS/2
Fixpacks
> >> >> >> >are released more often than NT service packs.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >- Marty
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> But how is this important to YOU? You don't rely on IBM, nor do you
need
> >> >> >> fixpacks. Why is this important to you?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >How/why is anything to do with OS/2 important to you David?  I'm
simply
> >> >> >adding another thought to the topic.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >- Marty
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm interested in many operating systems, Marty. Do you have similar
interests
> >> >> in fixpacks?
> >> >
> >> >Yes.  I like to keep up with what is new in fixpacks in case any of it
> >> >is of interest.
> >>
> >> How many have you installed?
> >
> >Not sure.  FP1, FP2, FP3, FP5, FP8, FP9, FP11, FP12 I think.
>
> Hmmmm...quite a few for someone so self-reliant. Why so many fixpacks with
so
> smooth running a system?

See below.

> >> >> By the logic of you and others of your ilk, people shouldn't be
interested in
> >> >> sports unless they play, motorcycles if they drive cars, or other
countries
> >> >> unless they live in them.
> >> >
> >> >And by your logic, I can't be interested or knowledgable about fixpacks
> >> >unless I use them, or rather you were saying I cannot use fixpacks
> >> >without relying on them.
> >>
> >> Your conclusion is flawed. I merely asked about your interest considering
how
> >> adamant you've been about not needing fixpacks.
> >
> >Do I need to watch my favorite TV shows?  No.
> >Do I watch my favorite TV shows?  Yes.
>
> These statements do nothing to address your flawed conclusion.

Thanks professor Tholen.

> >You can do something with NEEDING to do it.  Why is this a conceptual
> >problem?
>
> Is this why you installed so many fixpacks? Just to do it?

You got it.  You catch on real fast.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            12-Oct-99 22:43:06
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 03:37:02
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>>
>> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>> >> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
>> >> >> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
>> >> >> >> >Brent Davies wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
>> >> >> >> >> news:[e-mail]...
>> >> >> >> >> | [e-mail] wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> | >
>> >> >> >> >> [snip]
>> >> >> >> >> | >
>> >> >> >> >> | > 1) IBM does not force OS/2 users thru the annual upgrade
blood-letting
>> >> >> >> >> | > 2) IBM actually _fixes_ the bugs in OS/2
>> >> >> >> >> |
>> >> >> >> >> | You also forgot:
>> >> >> >> >> | 3) IBM releases fixes more often than NT service packs are
released.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Have you heard of hot-fixes?  MS is fixing bugs with NT as soon
as they are
>> >> >> >> >> found.  Service Packs are more of a convenience for people who
are
>> >> >> >> >> installing new systems.  Who wants to install hundreds of
hot-fixes into a
>> >> >> >> >> server that you're building tomorrow?  You could actually apply
all of the
>> >> >> >> >> hot-fixes post-SP 3 and have successfully installed everything
that SP 3
>> >> >> >> >> would install.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >Does this make my statement any less true?  I'm sure IBM's
corporate
>> >> >> >> >OS/2 customers get fixes as soon as bugs are found too.  OS/2
Fixpacks
>> >> >> >> >are released more often than NT service packs.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >- Marty
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> But how is this important to YOU? You don't rely on IBM, nor do
you need
>> >> >> >> fixpacks. Why is this important to you?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >How/why is anything to do with OS/2 important to you David?  I'm
simply
>> >> >> >adding another thought to the topic.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >- Marty
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I'm interested in many operating systems, Marty. Do you have similar
interests
>> >> >> in fixpacks?
>> >> >
>> >> >Yes.  I like to keep up with what is new in fixpacks in case any of it
>> >> >is of interest.
>> >>
>> >> How many have you installed?
>> >
>> >Not sure.  FP1, FP2, FP3, FP5, FP8, FP9, FP11, FP12 I think.
>>
>> Hmmmm...quite a few for someone so self-reliant. Why so many fixpacks with
so
>> smooth running a system?
>
>See below.
>
>> >> >> By the logic of you and others of your ilk, people shouldn't be
interested in
>> >> >> sports unless they play, motorcycles if they drive cars, or other
countries
>> >> >> unless they live in them.
>> >> >
>> >> >And by your logic, I can't be interested or knowledgable about fixpacks
>> >> >unless I use them, or rather you were saying I cannot use fixpacks
>> >> >without relying on them.
>> >>
>> >> Your conclusion is flawed. I merely asked about your interest
considering how
>> >> adamant you've been about not needing fixpacks.
>> >
>> >Do I need to watch my favorite TV shows?  No.
>> >Do I watch my favorite TV shows?  Yes.
>>
>> These statements do nothing to address your flawed conclusion.
>
>Thanks professor Tholen.

Nothing to do with Tholen. You stated "And by your logic, I can't be
interested
or knowledgable about fixpacks unless I use them, or rather you were saying I
cannot use fixpacks without relying on them."

First, my first point was obvious. You asked "How/why is anything to do with
OS/2 important to you David?" I answer that I am interested in operating
systems. Nothing in my statement would support the first part of yours.
Second,
I fail to see how you can use a fixpack and not rely on it. As soon as you
install it, you are reliant on the quality of the fixpack.

>> >You can do something with NEEDING to do it.  Why is this a conceptual
>> >problem?
>>
>> Is this why you installed so many fixpacks? Just to do it?
>
>You got it.  You catch on real fast.

And you, it seems, are quite the lemming. How ironic. This not the very
upgrade-itis that your fellow OS/2'ers subscribe to Windows users.

>- Marty
>

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                              13-Oct-99 02:25:14
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 03:37:02
Subj: Re: [README] New banners available

From: Amiga User <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>,
  "Philippe Duchenne" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> New banners uploaded:
>
>  SBill078 : "Microsoft acquired: Hotmail, LinkExchange, ...
>              Who wants to break Microsoft's Freedom to Innovate ?"
>  SBill079 : "Sorry Bill, I'm a computer user, not a Crash Test Dummy"

  Why are you so envious of Bill Gates and Microsoft?

>  <URL:http://www.ping.be/amigaphil/pic/*SPAM*.html>


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: [e-mail]                               12-Oct-99 23:08:24
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 03:37:02
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >>
> >> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
> >> >> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
> >> >> >> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >> >> >> >>

[snip]

> >> >> >> >> But how is this important to YOU? You don't rely on IBM, nor do
you need
> >> >> >> >> fixpacks. Why is this important to you?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >How/why is anything to do with OS/2 important to you David?  I'm
simply
> >> >> >> >adding another thought to the topic.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >- Marty
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I'm interested in many operating systems, Marty. Do you have
similar interests
> >> >> >> in fixpacks?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Yes.  I like to keep up with what is new in fixpacks in case any of
it
> >> >> >is of interest.
> >> >>
> >> >> How many have you installed?
> >> >
> >> >Not sure.  FP1, FP2, FP3, FP5, FP8, FP9, FP11, FP12 I think.
> >>
> >> Hmmmm...quite a few for someone so self-reliant. Why so many fixpacks
with so
> >> smooth running a system?
> >
> >See below.
> >
> >> >> >> By the logic of you and others of your ilk, people shouldn't be
interested in
> >> >> >> sports unless they play, motorcycles if they drive cars, or other
countries
> >> >> >> unless they live in them.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >And by your logic, I can't be interested or knowledgable about
fixpacks
> >> >> >unless I use them, or rather you were saying I cannot use fixpacks
> >> >> >without relying on them.
> >> >>
> >> >> Your conclusion is flawed. I merely asked about your interest
considering how
> >> >> adamant you've been about not needing fixpacks.
> >> >
> >> >Do I need to watch my favorite TV shows?  No.
> >> >Do I watch my favorite TV shows?  Yes.
> >>
> >> These statements do nothing to address your flawed conclusion.
> >
> >Thanks professor Tholen.
>
> Nothing to do with Tholen.

Obi-Wan has taught you well, but you are not a Jedi yet...

> You stated "And by your logic, I can't be interested or knowledgable about
> fixpacks unless I use them, or rather you were saying I cannot use fixpacks
> without relying on them."

*** "As soon as you install it, you are reliant on the quality of the
fixpack."

Is this not what you said just below?  Does this not also mean,
"or rather you were saying I cannot use fixpacks without relying on
them."
as I have stated above?

> First, my first point was obvious. You asked "How/why is anything to do with
> OS/2 important to you David?" I answer that I am interested in operating
> systems. Nothing in my statement would support the first part of yours.

The comment was an intended response to:
> By the logic of you and others of your ilk, people shouldn't be interested
in
> sports unless they play, motorcycles if they drive cars, or other countries
> unless they live in them.

(hence, it was written immediately after said paragraph)

> Second,
> I fail to see how you can use a fixpack and not rely on it. As soon as you
> install it, you are reliant on the quality of the fixpack.

We are not discussing reliance on current fixpacks, but on future ones
(or would you like to change the subject again?).

> >> >You can do something with NEEDING to do it.  Why is this a conceptual
> >> >problem?
> >>
> >> Is this why you installed so many fixpacks? Just to do it?
> >
> >You got it.  You catch on real fast.
>
> And you, it seems, are quite the lemming. How ironic. This not the very
> upgrade-itis that your fellow OS/2'ers subscribe to Windows users.

Don't put their words in my mouth.  We're all individuals here (except
for the sock puppets).

Even still, as I have <repeatedly> pointed out, I have no need of
further fixpacks, yet I choose to install them when they are available
to see what they do and how smoothly they install.  The fixpacks are
free and have been thoroughly tested before they are released.  I can't
see how downloading and installing it qualifies me to be a lemming.

Now what may I ask (<yawn>), is the point of this, other than attempting
to show what a fraud and lemming I am?

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            12-Oct-99 23:29:02
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 03:37:02
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>>
>> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>> >> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
>> >> >> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
>> >> >> >> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>
>
>[snip]
>
>> >> >> >> >> But how is this important to YOU? You don't rely on IBM, nor do
you need
>> >> >> >> >> fixpacks. Why is this important to you?
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >How/why is anything to do with OS/2 important to you David?  I'm
simply
>> >> >> >> >adding another thought to the topic.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >- Marty
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I'm interested in many operating systems, Marty. Do you have
similar interests
>> >> >> >> in fixpacks?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Yes.  I like to keep up with what is new in fixpacks in case any of
it
>> >> >> >is of interest.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> How many have you installed?
>> >> >
>> >> >Not sure.  FP1, FP2, FP3, FP5, FP8, FP9, FP11, FP12 I think.
>> >>
>> >> Hmmmm...quite a few for someone so self-reliant. Why so many fixpacks
with so
>> >> smooth running a system?
>> >
>> >See below.
>> >
>> >> >> >> By the logic of you and others of your ilk, people shouldn't be
interested in
>> >> >> >> sports unless they play, motorcycles if they drive cars, or other
countries
>> >> >> >> unless they live in them.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >And by your logic, I can't be interested or knowledgable about
fixpacks
>> >> >> >unless I use them, or rather you were saying I cannot use fixpacks
>> >> >> >without relying on them.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Your conclusion is flawed. I merely asked about your interest
considering how
>> >> >> adamant you've been about not needing fixpacks.
>> >> >
>> >> >Do I need to watch my favorite TV shows?  No.
>> >> >Do I watch my favorite TV shows?  Yes.
>> >>
>> >> These statements do nothing to address your flawed conclusion.
>> >
>> >Thanks professor Tholen.
>>
>> Nothing to do with Tholen.
>
>Obi-Wan has taught you well, but you are not a Jedi yet...

Original.

>> You stated "And by your logic, I can't be interested or knowledgable about
>> fixpacks unless I use them, or rather you were saying I cannot use fixpacks

>> without relying on them."
>
>*** "As soon as you install it, you are reliant on the quality of the
>fixpack."
>
>Is this not what you said just below?  Does this not also mean,
>"or rather you were saying I cannot use fixpacks without relying on
>them."
>as I have stated above?



>> First, my first point was obvious. You asked "How/why is anything to do
with
>> OS/2 important to you David?" I answer that I am interested in operating
>> systems. Nothing in my statement would support the first part of yours.
>
>The comment was an intended response to:
>> By the logic of you and others of your ilk, people shouldn't be interested
in
>> sports unless they play, motorcycles if they drive cars, or other countries
>> unless they live in them.
>
>(hence, it was written immediately after said paragraph)

And the comment was not logical.

>> Second,
>> I fail to see how you can use a fixpack and not rely on it. As soon as you
>> install it, you are reliant on the quality of the fixpack.
>
>We are not discussing reliance on current fixpacks, but on future ones
>(or would you like to change the subject again?).

We were dicussing your interests in fixpacks. Your contradictions are
confusing
you.

>> >> >You can do something with NEEDING to do it.  Why is this a conceptual
>> >> >problem?
>> >>
>> >> Is this why you installed so many fixpacks? Just to do it?
>> >
>> >You got it.  You catch on real fast.
>>
>> And you, it seems, are quite the lemming. How ironic. This not the very
>> upgrade-itis that your fellow OS/2'ers subscribe to Windows users.
>
>Don't put their words in my mouth.  We're all individuals here (except
>for the sock puppets).

David:"Is this why you installed so many fixpacks? Just to do it?"
Marty:"You got it.  You catch on real fast."

In otherwords, according to *your* words, you install fixpacks to do it. That
is a lemming according to your fellow OS/2 users.

>Even still, as I have <repeatedly> pointed out, I have no need of
>further fixpacks, yet I choose to install them when they are available
>to see what they do and how smoothly they install.  The fixpacks are
>free and have been thoroughly tested before they are released.  I can't
>see how downloading and installing it qualifies me to be a lemming.

Installing fixpacks just to do it would qualify anyone as a lemming according
to your fellow OS/2 users.

Now, I'll ask *again*. When you installed any of the following fixpacks "FP1,
FP2, FP3, FP5, FP8, FP9, FP11, FP12" did you anticipate needed its successor?
Also, if your system was running so smoothly, why all the fixpacks?

>Now what may I ask (<yawn>), is the point of this, other than attempting
>to show what a fraud and lemming I am?
>
>- Marty
>

Again, you are drawing the wrong conclusion. You seem to do this quite often.

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             13-Oct-99 03:30:09
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 03:37:02
Subj: Re: [README] New banners available

From: [e-mail] ()

On Wed, 13 Oct 1999 02:25:28 GMT, Amiga User <[e-mail]> wrote:
>In article <[e-mail]>,
>  "Philippe Duchenne" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> New banners uploaded:
>>
>>  SBill078 : "Microsoft acquired: Hotmail, LinkExchange, ...
>>              Who wants to break Microsoft's Freedom to Innovate ?"
>>  SBill079 : "Sorry Bill, I'm a computer user, not a Crash Test Dummy"
>
>  Why are you so envious of Bill Gates and Microsoft?

    50 Billion of unearned income is enough to make anyone resentful.

[deletia]

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               13-Oct-99 00:02:24
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 03:37:02
Subj: Re: McCoy Digest

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

[various snippage]

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> > We are not discussing reliance on current fixpacks, but on future ones
> > (or would you like to change the subject again?).
>
> We were dicussing your interests in fixpacks. Your contradictions are
confusing
> you.

Ah, so you did want to change the subject again.  Now if you'd like to
point out some contradictions, I'd be glad to acknowledge them.

> In otherwords, according to *your* words, you install fixpacks to do it.
That
> is a lemming according to your fellow OS/2 users.

Did I ever purport to care what other OS/2 users think about my
installation of fixpacks?  Is this supposed to be damning evidence
against my credibility?  I must be drawing an incorrect conclusion by
saying so, however.  So what, pray tell, is the purpose of such a
statement?

> Now, I'll ask *again*. When you installed any of the following fixpacks
"FP1,
> FP2, FP3, FP5, FP8, FP9, FP11, FP12" did you anticipate needed its
successor?

And I'll answer *again*.  Did I *need* any of them at the time they were
installed?  No.  Do I currently have any problems that I need resolved,
and thus rely on a future fixpack?  No.  Am I going to install future
free fixpacks if they are available?  Certainly.  Is this illogical,
contradictory, or inconsistent?  No.

> Also, if your system was running so smoothly, why all the fixpacks?

I've already answered that.

> >Now what may I ask (<yawn>), is the point of this, other than attempting
> >to show what a fraud and lemming I am?
> >
> >- Marty
>
> Again, you are drawing the wrong conclusion. You seem to do this quite
often.

Yeah, that was a really far-fetched conclusion based on your statement
to which I was responding:
> > > And you, it seems, are quite the lemming. How ironic. This not the very
> > > upgrade-itis that your fellow OS/2'ers subscribe to Windows users.

Don't know where I could have gotten that idea from.

So what is <the> conclusion?  [ie. cut to the chase, this has gone on
long enough]

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                     12-Oct-99 22:05:04
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 03:37:03
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


Mike Timbol wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]>, Joseph  <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> >OS/2 Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality.  Bummer, bummer.
>
> It's also bullshit.  Download something like NetBeans, that requires
> JDK 1.2.  Try to run it on OS/2.  No dice.
>
> JDK 1.1.x -> JDK 1.2 is a major upgrade; it's not something that
> IBM snuck in when going from 1.1.7 -> 1.1.8.
>

What I wrote stands in its entirety.  I cannot speak to the meaning of a
selected snippet.


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

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            13-Oct-99 07:56:00
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 06:16:02
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Tue, 12 Oct 1999 19:34:41, Roberto Alsina <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> In article <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-lIrUPhcxPNgo@localhost>,
>   jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) wrote:
> > On Sun, 10 Oct 1999 17:11:06, [e-mail] wrote:
> > > Bottom line, Linux doesn't even have _one_ decent editor - 15 year
> old
> > > Kedit still beats 'em all!
> > >
> >
> > I thought Kedit was part of the KDE-package.
>
> I think he meant another Kedit. At least KDE's Kedit is nowhere near
> 15 years old :-)
>
Oh, there are two Kedits?

> > It ain't half nice, though. I only wish I could find a character mode
> > editor a la DOS "edit" (I'm a CUA-junk; <CTRL>+<KEY> sequences tend to
> > unleash homicidal fits for me). The Pine editor is sort of okay, but
> > still not it. I'm now mainly doing mcedit (the editor in Midnight
> > Commander).
>
> You may want to take a look at FTE, or perhaps my KDE port KFTE.
> All keybindings are configurable, and the default is quite sane.
>
> In fact, there is even a OS/2 port, I believe.
>
> You can find them all in freshmeat.net
>
Thanks. I'll have a peek. I don't need one for OS/2, though. In Warp I
spend all my time in the WPS, and the Enhanced Editor is extremely
kewl.


Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net

|---------------------------------------------------|
|                  NT boot options                  |
|                                                   |
|               Please choose from list             |
|                                                   |
|       <crash>         <OS/2>        <linux>       |
|---------------------------------------------------|

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

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            13-Oct-99 07:56:00
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 06:16:02
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Tue, 12 Oct 1999 12:00:22, Joe <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> >> Win9x isn't secure, but companies use it. Why? It is
> >> supported. If something goes wrong, you can hold
> >> someone accountable.
>
> > Huh??? Very lovely logic.
>
> > Suicide is not very good for you, but people do it.
> > Why? It is supported.
>
> > If something goes wrong, you can turn around and
> > sue somebody....
>
> Gads, your analogy doesn't even make sense, let alone accurately
> summarize the situation.  Suicide is NOT supported - point me to the
> office of suicidal thoughts in each state and province and maybe I'll
> take that back.  And how can you sue anybody (well, you can sue anybody
> for anything, I suppose, but explain how you expect to win)?  Boy, you
> sure need to work on your understanding of analogous thinking!
>
> Meanwhile, David's comment (above) still rings true.
>
I'm still waiting for an answer to my question: Who exactly *do* you
hold accountable for NT's insecurity? Microsoft? If you believe that,
I have some pills here that change water into fuel; wanna buy?

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net

|---------------------------------------------------|
|                  NT boot options                  |
|                                                   |
|               Please choose from list             |
|                                                   |
|       <crash>         <OS/2>        <linux>       |
|---------------------------------------------------|

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                   14-Oct-99 01:19:24
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 10:22:20
Subj: No Future

From: [e-mail] (R Thomas)

In stardock.os2 Brad Wardell wrote:
> But for those of us who have stayed with OS/2 to some extent in the hopes
> that it had a future have little reason to stay.  Professionally speaking,
>writing code for OS/2 is not much different than learning how to write code
>for CP/M.  There's no future.
>
> Brad Wardell
> Product Manager: Object Desktop & The Corporate Machine

Point your news reader at news.stardock.com.
There is some very interesting stuff going on there.
----------------------------------
Keep two truths in your pocket and take them out according to the need of the
moment.
Let one be: " For my sake was the world created".
And the other: " I am dust and ashes".
Chasidic, 18th Century

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: none (1:109/42)

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            13-Oct-99 08:33:19
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 10:22:20
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Tue, 12 Oct 1999 23:11:31, Hobbyist <alliem@ *nospam* wtjam.net>
wrote:
[snip]

> Yes I do. I think, however, that you aren't very familiar with windows
> explorer and that's the problem. Do you at least agree that it's useful
> to have templates in other places apart from in the templates folder. I
> used to find it particularly annoying to have to visit the templates
> folder whenever I needed to create one.
>
>
[snip]

Shadow the templates folder to your desktop and set the taskbar to be
on top of maximised windows. The shadow will be in the "Warp" menu of
the Warpcenter taskbar.

OK, I know you don't need the info anymore, but maybe someone else was
wondering...

Incidentally, the way Warpcenter automagically shadows your desktop
folders and objects in the startmenu is majorly intuitive.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net

|---------------------------------------------------|
|                  NT boot options                  |
|                                                   |
|               Please choose from list             |
|                                                   |
|       <crash>         <OS/2>        <linux>       |
|---------------------------------------------------|

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                13-Oct-99 10:14:28
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 10:22:20
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: [e-mail] (David Frank)

In article
<[e-mail]>, "Kim
Cheung" <[e-mail]> writes:

>
>If IBM stood firm with their enterprise only plan, W95 could have never made
>any headway in the enterprise.   They called the bluff - and IBM crumbled.
>

After thinking about what you true-blue fans are saying,
in retrospect, it does seem that IBM missed the boat by not
sticking with OS/2 preloads  IF  (and its a big if)

THEY SWALLOWED THEIR BIG BLUE PRIDE AND SLAVED OS/2 TO
WIN95's FEATURES,
this means that they had to
1. buy a  full Win32 license  (Gates was willing, but IBM was not)
2. doing WHATEVER needed to maintain disk compatibility with Win95
3. etc.

If they were currently offering such a OS/2 microsoft compatible client
it would perhaps have 15% of the desktops instead of the
current 0.2% repeat 0.2%

Dave



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

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

From: [e-mail]                     13-Oct-99 10:17:10
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 10:22:20
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: [e-mail]

Eric Bennett writes:

>> That's not the "actual ballot".  You're ignoring the ballot that
>> contains Wayne Strang.  Gee, more than one ballot???  Obviously
>> these people can't even get their own acts together.

> Illogical.

Nonsense.

> I could create a second ballot for the 2000 U.S. Presidential
> election but that would not mean that the real election organizers
> "can't even get their own acts together".

Demonstrate that the person or persons who put together the ballot
you're referring to are the "real election organizers".  If you
can't, your analogy must be considered as inappropriate.

>>>> And from Eric Bennett:
>>>>
>>>> ] The other poll (csma KOTM) was not well protected against vote fraud.
I
>>>> ] had an amusing evening playing with their vote counting system to see
if
>>>> ] I could get around their belatedly instituted safeguards (which I
did...

>>> You fail to note, however, that I also said I didn't register any votes
>>> for you.

>> Irrelevant.  It suffices to note that the poll was not protected against
>> fraud.

> But it also leaves a slight implication that I ran up votes for you.

Yet another person who doesn't understand the difference between
inference and implication.  I made no such "slight implication".
That you made such a "slight inference" is your problem.  My intent
was to demonstrate that the poll was not protected against fraud.
The quotation I used was sufficient for that purpose.  Nothing more
should be read into it, but that didn't stop you from doing so.

>>> You may have a strong claim on the Kook title over here in cooa

>> Incorrect.

> Incorrect.  You may.

Evidence, please.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                            13-Oct-99 11:29:25
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 10:22:20
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: Tim Timmins <[e-mail]>

This is rubbish. They already mimicked W95 in the Warp 4 initial desktop
layout.

There is a reason why they abandoned Warp preinstalls on consumer machines.
Please remember that they were the LAST to license W95 preloads.

Regards,
Tim

David Frank wrote:

> In article
> <[e-mail]>, "Kim
> Cheung" <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> >
> >If IBM stood firm with their enterprise only plan, W95 could have never
made
> >any headway in the enterprise.   They called the bluff - and IBM crumbled.
> >
>
> After thinking about what you true-blue fans are saying,
> in retrospect, it does seem that IBM missed the boat by not
> sticking with OS/2 preloads  IF  (and its a big if)
>
> THEY SWALLOWED THEIR BIG BLUE PRIDE AND SLAVED OS/2 TO
> WIN95's FEATURES,
> this means that they had to
> 1. buy a  full Win32 license  (Gates was willing, but IBM was not)
> 2. doing WHATEVER needed to maintain disk compatibility with Win95
> 3. etc.
>
> If they were currently offering such a OS/2 microsoft compatible client
> it would perhaps have 15% of the desktops instead of the
> current 0.2% repeat 0.2%
>
> Dave

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

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

From: [e-mail]                     13-Oct-99 10:35:09
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 10:22:20
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: [e-mail]

Eric Bennett writes:

> Jason S. wrote:

>> I wrote:

>>> Incorrect.  You and Edwin both had thousands of votes that disappeared.

>> ..and the technical problems with the polling were straightened out
>> by the people who run that site.

> Umm, well, sort of.

Evidence that they were straightened out, even sort of, please.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                           13-Oct-99 06:51:12
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 10:22:20
Subj: Re: IBM catalog gives hint to end of fix packs

From: Bob Germer <[e-mail]>

On <7t52so$[e-mail]>, on 10/02/99 at 08:55 AM,
   "Kelly Robinson" <[e-mail]> said:

> 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.

First of all, your analogy fails because you didn't buy a product. You
bought a license to use someone else's product. No matter how much you
whine, complain, moan, lie, spread FUD, etc. that is the underlying fact.

> 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?

When I bought my cars, I was guaranteed repairs for approximately 1/6 of
the useful life of a car provided I gave it required maintenance. The
seller was required to repair or replace any part which failed during the
limited warranty period and (by law, not company policy) to remedy any
hazard to life found in the product for a somewhat longer period.

When I bought my cars, I bought a PRODUCT. When I paid for OS/2 I bought a
LICENSE to use IBM's product.  That is a HUGE difference.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [e-mail]
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 9
MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

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

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

From: [e-mail]                        13-Oct-99 12:05:05
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 10:22:20
Subj: Re: [README] New banners available

From: Paul Vigay <[e-mail]>

In article <7u0qic$qm0$[e-mail]>,
   Amiga User <[e-mail]> wrote:
> In article <[e-mail]>,
>   "Philippe Duchenne" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > New banners uploaded:
> >
> >  SBill078 : "Microsoft acquired: Hotmail, LinkExchange, ...
> >              Who wants to break Microsoft's Freedom to Innovate ?"
> >  SBill079 : "Sorry Bill, I'm a computer user, not a Crash Test Dummy"

>   Why are you so envious of Bill Gates and Microsoft?

I don't think it's a case of being envious (although I wouldn't mind some of
his money...) but more a case of valuing one's freedom, choice and
independence.

--
Paul Vigay (speaking personally)
     _                       _________________________________
    /_| _ _. _  /| /_ _/_  /'      ANT Technical Support
   /  || (_|(_)/ |/(/_/_  /   mailto:[e-mail]
________ (_) ___________./     http://www.argonet.co.uk/ant/

Microsoft: Where do you want to crash today?

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

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

From: [e-mail]                           13-Oct-99 07:08:06
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 10:22:20
Subj: Re: I am GLAD IBM wants some money!

From: Bob Germer <[e-mail]>

On <[e-mail]>, on 09/30/99 at 03:46 PM,
   "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]> said:

> Oh, I don't know...You demanded payment be made on the very same day
> that IBM announced this new plan.  In the business world, a one-day
> period is considered quite fast.  I STILL have not received a callback
> from IBM.  I doubt if IBM will even be set up to go with this for
> several more WEEKS.  And the program does not actually even BEGIN until
> January 1, 2000.  So yes, you rushed to judgment.  Admit it.

No, it is you who rushed to judgement my dear sir. Moreover, you rushed to
judgement without having your facts straight. Your reckless disregard of
facts renders you opinion valueless.

Software choice has been around for some time. It is readily available
from IBM resellers such as Indelible Blue. It includes for $100 a year
software I otherwise would have to pay well over $200. The subscription
includes TCP/IP for OS/2 version 4.1 which costs more as a standalone
($269) than a two year subscription.

IBM isn't going to sell to you or me directly. IBM sells through
resellers, period. The PC company is a subsidiary of IBM, not the
corporation. The PC company may well be sold off, left to die, closed. IBM
sells to BUSINESSES. If individuals want to buy, use, etc. IBM products
they must go through an authorized reseller.

You cannot go to Damlier-Chrysler, General Motors, Ford, etc. and buy a
car, parts, etc. You must go through dealers if you are an individual, a
small company, a local government agency, etc. However, if you are big
enough like Avis, Hertz, etc. you can indeed deal directly with the
manufacturer.

You cannot go to Wyeth and buy their latest drug directly. You go to a
pharmacist. Your pharmacist cannot go directly to Wyeth and buy their
latest drug. He must go to a wholesaler. But if you are Eckards you CAN go
directly to Wyeth.

The B in IBM stands for Business.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [e-mail]
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 9
MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                     13-Oct-99 06:13:17
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 14:36:18
Subj: Re: No Future

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


R Thomas wrote:

> In stardock.os2 Brad Wardell wrote:
> > But for those of us who have stayed with OS/2 to some extent in the hopes
> > that it had a future have little reason to stay.  Professionally speaking,
> >writing code for OS/2 is not much different than learning how to write code
> >for CP/M.  There's no future.
> >
> > Brad Wardell
> > Product Manager: Object Desktop & The Corporate Machine

Embedded systems use Z80 and CPM.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                13-Oct-99 15:25:29
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 14:36:18
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: [e-mail] (rj friedman)

On Tue, 12 Oct 1999 23:30:28, Cameron Hughes
<[e-mail]> wrote:


εThe problem is not where OS/2 is at this exact moment.  The problem
εis where it will be when IA-64 is released...

IA-64 is for huge server farm type computers. Anyone who
thinks that an IA-64 is going to be useful on the desktop
anytime in our lifetimes has no idea as to what the IA-64 is
about.

εHow will it compare after
εCorel Corp has put some finishing touches on K...

We'll just have to wait and see what Corel brings to the
table at the time and make an evaluation on real product,
not on marketing hype. In the meantime, the sky is not
falling, and there is no logical reason to panic and run and
tell the king.


εAfter Borland (Inprise)
εhas finished porting its latest development suite to Linux...

How does Borland (Inprise) porting its latest development
suite to Linux have the slightest effect on my ability to
earn my living as a small business user with OS/2?

εHow does
εOS/2 look when a developer is trying to load it on one of those
εsnazzy HP Pavillions that SIS530, SIS630...

How does one of those snazzy HP Pavillions that SIS530,
SIS630 (whatever you meant to say by that), have the
slightest effect on my ability to earn my living as a small
business user with OS/2?

εHow does OS/2 look when one
εis trying to run the latest Object Oriented Development Tools i.e. UML
εtools?

From the standpoint of the small business user, it looks
just beautiful.

εFor those who don't do state of the art development or who
εcome from a user's perspective, OS/2 has about 3 years of usefulness...

Says you. Even so, a lot of changes are going to be coming
down over the next three years - I imagine that the state of
end user computing will by quite a bit beyond what most
people can even imagine, today. In the meantime, the sky is
not falling, and there is no logical reason to panic and run
and tell the king.

εFor those who require the latest RAD, Case, latest hardware, OS/2
εis not an option.

So, let them use whatever it is they think they need.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             13-Oct-99 10:56:22
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 16:43:24
Subj: 10 Dumb Things NT users do!

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>

Slashdot had a link to this hilarious article on MSN.

http://www.computingcentral.msn.com/Topics/windowsnt/dumbthings.asp

It starts out with: "It's no big secret that Windows NT isn't an
                 easy operating system to set up and configure (although
                 it's miles ahead of Linux, OS/2, or even BeOS)."

My favorites are Nos. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and...especially...10 "Cloning
Windows NT"  which describes how NT puts a unique serial number in every
NT installation.  Now there's a comforting thought...heh, heh, heh.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                13-Oct-99 14:07:08
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 16:43:24
Subj: Re: 10 Dumb Things NT users do!

From: "Mike Ruskai" <[e-mail]>

On Wed, 13 Oct 1999 10:56:45 -0400, David T. Johnson wrote:

>Slashdot had a link to this hilarious article on MSN.
>
>http://www.computingcentral.msn.com/Topics/windowsnt/dumbthings.asp
>
>It starts out with: "It's no big secret that Windows NT isn't an
>                 easy operating system to set up and configure (although
>                 it's miles ahead of Linux, OS/2, or even BeOS)."
>
>My favorites are Nos. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and...especially...10 "Cloning
>Windows NT"  which describes how NT puts a unique serial number in every
>NT installation.  Now there's a comforting thought...heh, heh, heh.

My favorite is how he tries to make NT's poor hardware and software
compatibility seem like an advanced feature.



 - Mike

Remove 'spambegone' to send e-mail.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                             13-Oct-99 11:18:29
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 16:43:24
Subj: Re: I am GLAD IBM wants some money!

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>


Bob Germer wrote:
>
> On <[e-mail]>, on 09/30/99 at 03:46 PM,
>    "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]> said:
>
> > Oh, I don't know...You demanded payment be made on the very same day
> > that IBM announced this new plan.  In the business world, a one-day
> > period is considered quite fast.  I STILL have not received a callback
> > from IBM.  I doubt if IBM will even be set up to go with this for
> > several more WEEKS.  And the program does not actually even BEGIN until
> > January 1, 2000.  So yes, you rushed to judgment.  Admit it.
>
> No, it is you who rushed to judgement my dear sir. Moreover, you rushed to
> judgement without having your facts straight. Your reckless disregard of
> facts renders you opinion valueless.

If you are addressing me, exactly what "facts" did I recklessly
disregard?

>
> Software choice has been around for some time. It is readily available
> from IBM resellers such as Indelible Blue. It includes for $100 a year
> software I otherwise would have to pay well over $200. The subscription
> includes TCP/IP for OS/2 version 4.1 which costs more as a standalone
> ($269) than a two year subscription.
>
> IBM isn't going to sell to you or me directly. IBM sells through
> resellers, period. The PC company is a subsidiary of IBM, not the
> corporation. The PC company may well be sold off, left to die, closed. IBM
> sells to BUSINESSES. If individuals want to buy, use, etc. IBM products
> they must go through an authorized reseller.

IBM offers a number on their website to call them directly
1-800-CALL-IBM.  IBM sells a great deal of software directly on various
IBM websites.  And what makes you think I am NOT a business?

>
> You cannot go to Damlier-Chrysler, General Motors, Ford, etc. and buy a
> car, parts, etc. You must go through dealers if you are an individual, a
> small company, a local government agency, etc. However, if you are big
> enough like Avis, Hertz, etc. you can indeed deal directly with the
> manufacturer.
>
> You cannot go to Wyeth and buy their latest drug directly. You go to a
> pharmacist. Your pharmacist cannot go directly to Wyeth and buy their
> latest drug. He must go to a wholesaler. But if you are Eckards you CAN go
> directly to Wyeth.
>
> The B in IBM stands for Business.

I am tempted to tell you what the I stands for.  But I'm trying to be
nice.

>
> --
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
> Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [e-mail]
> Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 9
> MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
> Aut Pax Aut Bellum
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                  13-Oct-99 14:06:04
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 16:43:24
Subj: Re: I am GLAD IBM wants some money!

From: [e-mail] (John Brock)

In article <38046ab3$2$obot$[e-mail]>,
Bob Germer  <[e-mail]> wrote:

>IBM isn't going to sell to you or me directly. IBM sells through
>resellers, period. The PC company is a subsidiary of IBM, not the
>corporation. The PC company may well be sold off, left to die, closed. IBM
>sells to BUSINESSES. If individuals want to buy, use, etc. IBM products
>they must go through an authorized reseller.

FWIW, I bought my PC direct from IBM in 1995, through an operation
called IBM PC Direct (which has since been closed down).  If you look
at their web site though you'll see that there are still plenty of
items you can buy directly from IBM (and I've heard talk that they
might start selling PCs that way again sometime soon).
--
John Brock
[e-mail]

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               13-Oct-99 15:06:22
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 16:43:24
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Tim Timmins wrote:
>
> This is rubbish. They already mimicked W95 in the Warp 4 initial desktop
layout.

Only they did it right.  The Start menu is one of the most revolting
features IMHO of the Win9x shell.  It's a fairy-land view of what's on
your computer.  It could be completely out of date and inaccurate.  The
pop-up menu bar in Warp 4's Warpcenter is just a menu of all of the
objects on your desktop.  Always up-to-date, never a broken link.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                             13-Oct-99 19:52:20
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 19:52:20
Subj: Re: There is a future for OS/2

From: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
  alliem@ *nospam* wtjam.net wrote:
> On comp.os.os2.advocacy, [e-mail] posted :

-- snip --

> > > Try drag'n'dropping a colour to your windows. They remain the same
> > > grey color.
> >
> > Wrong.  D'n'd colors work the same as d'n'd fonts.
>
> As I said, try to change the colour of your window from the default
> gray by drag'n'drop.
>
> > At least, they do for me. Are we discussing the same OS/2?  Did you
> > use the right mouse button?
> >
> > Are you really an ex-OS/2-user?
>
> Yup, and an avid one at that. This is why I know that I can't change
> the grey colour of the windows. Never could when I used OS/2. Mind you
> I could change the colour of most other things with drag'n'drop. :)

I'm not sure I understand -- do you mean grey dialog boxes? If so, then
you would need to create a new Theme template in order to change a
dialog box' face color, as well as highlight and shadow colors. Pretty
much everything else is available through direct d'n'd.

And yes, setting up a new Template does revert back to the uninspired
selection of colors through drop-down lists. I guess there are only so
many levels of indirection that the builders of OS/2 were willing to
implement. But once you have the new Theme, you can d'n'd it to the
Desktop and everything changes to match the Theme's color and font
selections.

> > > From the same customisation applet that you so dislike I can
> > > customise the whole windows interface, i.e., window colors, font
> > > sizes specific to menus, icons, pop-up windows. You can change
> > > screen resolution on the fly and activate screen savers.
> >
> > Did I ever say that I *disliked* the applet? No, it just strikes me
> > as being . . . uninspired, coming from a company that whines so much
> > about how Big Bad Government stifles their ability to "innovate."
> > The OS/2 method *is* innovative. The MS-Windows method isn't.
>
> Drag'n'dropping to customise is innovative and hence better than
> customising from a central customisation applet as in windows, even
> though your customising ability are in many ways easier and more
> flexible than in OS/2. The only thing that I miss about OS/2 is that I
> could individually customise the folder backgrounds and behaviour.
> Windows changes in this regard tend to be global. Interesting that you
> claim that OS/2's way is superior since it happens to be different and
> perhaps innovative. Sounds like you hate M$ too much. It clouds your
> judgement making you lose objectivity.

Actually, I try to use critical, yet object terminology, such as
"uninspired." You admit that d'n'd font/color selection is innovative,
but then you read in "superiority." No, I never claimed that OS/2 was
"superior" in this regard, only innovative. Whether "innovative" equates
to "superior" is up to the end user to decide. Like I keep saying, it
boils down to user preference.

And, yes, some actually prefer it, and be willing to endure some of
OS/2's other shortcomings in order to have it, even though it isn't
"indespensible."

OTOH, some users may hate d'n'd color selection with a passion, so, even
though it may be *innovative* it's still *inferior* to the users in
question.

> > Not that it ultimately matters. For all their crowing about
> > innovation, the MS-Contigent seem quite happy with uninspired
> > interfaces and tools.
>
> As I said, you hate M$ too much. I know, I used to share the same
> feelings about windows. It's a mindset that I personally had to
> outgrow and as a result learn to be more pragmatic.

Considering that I use MS products on a daily basis, and know their
workings better than most of my associates, I feel that I am being
pragmatic enough. OTOH, how much "hat[ing of] M$" is "too much?" For
example, I always refer to Microsoft as either MIcrosoft or MS. I never
use pejoratives for MS itself; I don't even use "M$,"  and I never refer
to Windows as "Windoze" or "WinBlows."

So, in spite of my admitted hatred of that which is mediocre, yet
stifling of choices in the marketplace, I feel that I successfully
maintain some level of objectivity.

> > Gaudy, yes. But uninspired, nonetheless.
>
> Gaudy. Hah. I mean really now.

Yes, really. When copying files, do we *really* need the bitmap
animation of documents flying from one folder to another? When deleting
files, do we *really* need the bitmap animation of documents flying out
of a folder and vanishing in a cloud of smoke?  When performing a search
operation, do we *really* need a bitmap animation of a revolving
magnifying glass while a train of folders marches by underneath?

Do we really need an Office Assistant that acts cutesy (by writing on a
clipboard while the user enters his/her query, for example) and winks
and generally distracts?

To me, these things represent gaudiness. Feel free to disagree.

-- snip --

> > These two statements contradict each other -- if you really are an
> > ex-OS/2-user, you would understand that selecting a new file type
> > from a context menu has little to do with duplicating the
> > functionality of a template.
>
> Certainly, with the ways that I personally used templates, it does
> offer a similar functionality.

Okay, then. Since you didn't really exploit Templates of their full
potential, it stands to reason that you wouldn't miss them much, making
the transition to Template-less Windows that much easier. But do respect
those who would miss Templates, and therefore chose to remain in an
environment that provides them.

-- snip --

> > > Do you have a send to menu that is activatable where ever you are.
> >
> > No, but I honestly don't consider the ability to e-mail my desktop
> > to someone an "indespensible" piece of funtionality.
>
> <sarcasm> That's really a sensible statement. </sarcasm> Firstly, you
> may send any file as an e-mail attachment invoking your e-mail client
> via the send to menu. Your e-mail client however is not the only item
> in the send to menu. The send to menu is a nice convenience feature,
> that's all.

I must repeat my mantra again -- it boils down to user preference.

As I indicated (in my not-so-sensible statement), having immediate
access to my e-mail client via the context menu doesn't hold much value
to me. If I wanted, I could indeed provide such convenience in OS/2
(it's context menu is customizable), but I never did.

Just as you didn't see exceptional value in Templates, I don't see
exceptional value in this menu feature.

Consult my mantra again.

-- snip --

> > Why use a Ferrari to mimic a Honda? And, again, do you really
> > know what templates are?
>
> Yes I do. I think, however, that you aren't very familiar with windows
> explorer and that's the problem. Do you at least agree that it's
> useful to have templates in other places apart from in the templates
> folder.  I used to find it particularly annoying to have to visit the
> templates folder whenever I needed to create one.

You could have created shadows of the Templates folder, and placed them
wherever it was convenient.  Again, it boils down to exploiting features
to their fullest. If you don't do this, then obviously you won't miss
the features much when they're gone.

But those who do exploit them will miss them. This is my point.

> > What I have usually done with templates is create a folder full of
> > PM-FTP icons, each of which logged onto a different FTP site, using
> > the password I plugged into the object, and navigateed to the
> > appropriate subdirectories on both the remote and local machines.
> >
> > Similarly, when doing MVS programming, I may have several TN-3270
> > objects configured for different screen sizes (27 x 132 for TSO/ISPF
> > sessions, 25 x 80 for CICS regions, etc), which also log on
> > automatically.
> >
> > And that's just scratching the surface. Yes, I have used NT for a
> > couple of years, now, and no, it doesn't offer anything even close.
>
> Yes, you indeed have outlined some specific uses of templates I hadn't
> really thought of or needed to use them for and I concede that AFAIK I
> couldn't do such things with windows explorer.:)

Precisely. For what I do, OS/2 simply provides *me* with a more
suitable environment, regardless of OS/2's shortcomings.

Unfortunately, few in the Windows crowd seem able to respect this.

> > So, then, you admit that one has to "accomodate" NT's interface,
> > rather than the interface accomodate the user?
>
> Actually I meant accommodating in the sense that I was being closed
> minded about it and just plain complaining. I had to learn OS/2's WPS
> you see and was very accommodating in that regard. I made my share of
> concessions with it, don't you for once believe otherwise. In a
> similar sense windows explorers functionality has to be learnt as well
> to be taken advantage of.

Again, consult my mantra.

Basically, we are in agreement, conceptually, although not in terms of
OS choice.

Which is okay. AS long as one person in USENET-Land has become
enlightened as to why some people still use OS/2, it's been a valuable
exchange.


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: [e-mail]                13-Oct-99 16:58:00
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 19:52:20
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: "Mike Ruskai" <[e-mail]>

On Wed, 13 Oct 1999 15:06:44 -0400, Marty wrote:

>Tim Timmins wrote:
>>
>> This is rubbish. They already mimicked W95 in the Warp 4 initial desktop
layout.
>
>Only they did it right.  The Start menu is one of the most revolting
>features IMHO of the Win9x shell.  It's a fairy-land view of what's on
>your computer.  It could be completely out of date and inaccurate.  The
>pop-up menu bar in Warp 4's Warpcenter is just a menu of all of the
>objects on your desktop.  Always up-to-date, never a broken link.

It might be appropriate to point out that the "start" button concept
originated on OS/2, via Lotus's SmartCenter enhancement.  Win95 copied the
idea from there.

Warp 4 merely changed SmartCenter to WarpCenter, and made a few changes.



 - Mike

Remove 'spambegone' to send e-mail.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                  13-Oct-99 17:04:26
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 19:52:20
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: "Joe Malloy" <[e-mail]>

Something masquerading as a <[e-mail]> tholened:

> > Illogical.
>
> Nonsense.

Illogical.

You're a duly elected kook, a Kook of the Month, Tholen!


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

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

From: [e-mail]                              13-Oct-99 21:42:25
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 19:52:20
Subj: Re: [README] New banners available

From: Amiga User <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>,
  [e-mail] () wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Oct 1999 02:25:28 GMT, Amiga User <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >In article <[e-mail]>,
> >  "Philippe Duchenne" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >> New banners uploaded:
> >>
> >>  SBill078 : "Microsoft acquired: Hotmail, LinkExchange, ...
> >>              Who wants to break Microsoft's Freedom to Innovate ?"
> >>  SBill079 : "Sorry Bill, I'm a computer user, not a Crash Test Dummy"
> >
> >  Why are you so envious of Bill Gates and Microsoft?
>
>     50 Billion of unearned income is enough to make anyone resentful.

  Are you saying you somehow deserve a part of it?


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: [e-mail]                               13-Oct-99 17:25:20
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 19:52:20
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Cameron Hughes wrote:
>
> The problem is not where OS/2 is at this exact moment.  The problem
> is where it will be when IA-64 is released. How will it compare after
> Corel Corp has put some finishing touches on K.  After Borland (Inprise)
> has finished porting its latest development suite to Linux.  How does
> OS/2 look when a developer is trying to load it on one of those
> snazzy HP Pavillions that SIS530, SIS630.  How does OS/2 look when one
> is trying to run the latest Object Oriented Development Tools i.e. UML
> tools?  For those who don't do state of the art development or who
> come from a user's perspective, OS/2 has about 3 years of usefulness.
> For those who require the latest RAD, Case, latest hardware, OS/2
> is not an option.

Just a side point here.  I have been employed by 3 Fortune 500 companies
as a software engineer (SIAC (who produces the software that runs the
New York Stock Exchange), Northern Telecom, and IBM), and I have yet to
encounter any CASE tools, UML tools, or any such thing.  Has anyone seen
these items actually deployed in industry anywhere?  From my experience,
these such tools are deployed in an academic environment only.  I'm
curious if others have seen otherwise.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                             13-Oct-99 22:30:28
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 21:24:24
Subj: Re: [README] New banners available

From: [e-mail] ()

On Wed, 13 Oct 1999 21:42:51 GMT, Amiga User <[e-mail]> wrote:
>In article <[e-mail]>,
>  [e-mail] () wrote:
>> On Wed, 13 Oct 1999 02:25:28 GMT, Amiga User <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> >In article <[e-mail]>,
>> >  "Philippe Duchenne" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> >> New banners uploaded:
>> >>
>> >>  SBill078 : "Microsoft acquired: Hotmail, LinkExchange, ...
>> >>              Who wants to break Microsoft's Freedom to Innovate ?"
>> >>  SBill079 : "Sorry Bill, I'm a computer user, not a Crash Test Dummy"
>> >
>> >  Why are you so envious of Bill Gates and Microsoft?
>>
>>     50 Billion of unearned income is enough to make anyone resentful.
>
>  Are you saying you somehow deserve a part of it?

    You have an overactive imagination.



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

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

From: [e-mail]                            13-Oct-99 23:16:03
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 21:24:24
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: Tim Timmins <[e-mail]>

Not just the start menu can be out of date. The whole shortcuts implementation
can
point to broken links. Why MS forced this into NT is beyond me. Just to get
away from
Presentation Manager ?

Marty wrote:

> Tim Timmins wrote:
> >
> > This is rubbish. They already mimicked W95 in the Warp 4 initial desktop
layout.
>
> Only they did it right.  The Start menu is one of the most revolting
> features IMHO of the Win9x shell.  It's a fairy-land view of what's on
> your computer.  It could be completely out of date and inaccurate.  The
> pop-up menu bar in Warp 4's Warpcenter is just a menu of all of the
> objects on your desktop.  Always up-to-date, never a broken link.
>
> - Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            13-Oct-99 20:28:16
  To: All                                               13-Oct-99 21:24:24
Subj: Re: McCoy Digest

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>[various snippage]
>
>"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>>
>> > We are not discussing reliance on current fixpacks, but on future ones
>> > (or would you like to change the subject again?).
>>
>> We were dicussing your interests in fixpacks. Your contradictions are
confusing
>> you.
>
>Ah, so you did want to change the subject again.  Now if you'd like to
>point out some contradictions, I'd be glad to acknowledge them.

As soon as the subject of fixpacks arose in the "Linux Myths" thread, the
subject was changed. I'm afraid I only extended what you begun.

But it would be amusing to see you point out contradictions. Do so.

>> In otherwords, according to *your* words, you install fixpacks to do it.
That
>> is a lemming according to your fellow OS/2 users.
>
>Did I ever purport to care what other OS/2 users think about my
>installation of fixpacks?  Is this supposed to be damning evidence
>against my credibility?  I must be drawing an incorrect conclusion by
>saying so, however.  So what, pray tell, is the purpose of such a
>statement?

I cast no judgements on your credibility based on these statements. Your other

posts provide all the information I need to form my opinion of your
credibility. However, it does seem evident to me that based on the opinions of

your fellows, you are indeed, a lemming.

>> Now, I'll ask *again*. When you installed any of the following fixpacks
"FP1,
>> FP2, FP3, FP5, FP8, FP9, FP11, FP12" did you anticipate needed its
successor?
>
>And I'll answer *again*.  Did I *need* any of them at the time they were
>installed?  No.  Do I currently have any problems that I need resolved,
>and thus rely on a future fixpack?  No.  Am I going to install future
>free fixpacks if they are available?  Certainly.  Is this illogical,
>contradictory, or inconsistent?  No.

But it is robot-like. To install software solely on the basis of availability
instead of need is something to be view with scorn and derision based on your
opinions as well as those of your fellow OS/2 users.

>> Also, if your system was running so smoothly, why all the fixpacks?
>
>I've already answered that.

Indeed. Because they were there.

>> >Now what may I ask (<yawn>), is the point of this, other than attempting
>> >to show what a fraud and lemming I am?
>> >
>> >- Marty
>>
>> Again, you are drawing the wrong conclusion. You seem to do this quite
often.
>
>Yeah, that was a really far-fetched conclusion based on your statement
>to which I was responding:
>> > > And you, it seems, are quite the lemming. How ironic. This not the very
>> > > upgrade-itis that your fellow OS/2'ers subscribe to Windows users.
>
>Don't know where I could have gotten that idea from.
>
>So what is <the> conclusion?  [ie. cut to the chase, this has gone on
>long enough]
>
>- Marty
>

That even the noble users of the mighty OS/2 are subject to the whims of the
dreaded disease known as upgrade-itis.

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               13-Oct-99 20:51:20
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 03:59:07
Subj: Re: McCoy Digest

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >[various snippage]
> >
> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >>
> >> > We are not discussing reliance on current fixpacks, but on future ones
> >> > (or would you like to change the subject again?).
> >>
> >> We were dicussing your interests in fixpacks. Your contradictions are
confusing
> >> you.
> >
> >Ah, so you did want to change the subject again.  Now if you'd like to
> >point out some contradictions, I'd be glad to acknowledge them.
>
> As soon as the subject of fixpacks arose in the "Linux Myths" thread, the
> subject was changed. I'm afraid I only extended what you begun.
>
> But it would be amusing to see you point out contradictions. Do so.

Now who's confused?  You were the one discussing my alleged
contradictions (see above) but you'd like me to point them out?  Sorry,
but I can't point out my own contradictions because I don't believe
there are any.

> >> In otherwords, according to *your* words, you install fixpacks to do it.
That
> >> is a lemming according to your fellow OS/2 users.
> >
> >Did I ever purport to care what other OS/2 users think about my
> >installation of fixpacks?  Is this supposed to be damning evidence
> >against my credibility?  I must be drawing an incorrect conclusion by
> >saying so, however.  So what, pray tell, is the purpose of such a
> >statement?
>
> I cast no judgements on your credibility based on these statements. Your
other
> posts provide all the information I need to form my opinion of your
> credibility.

Likewise.

> However, it does seem evident to me that based on the opinions of
> your fellows, you are indeed, a lemming.

And if I were a true lemming, I'd care.  However, I don't.

> >> Now, I'll ask *again*. When you installed any of the following fixpacks
"FP1,
> >> FP2, FP3, FP5, FP8, FP9, FP11, FP12" did you anticipate needed its
successor?
> >
> >And I'll answer *again*.  Did I *need* any of them at the time they were
> >installed?  No.  Do I currently have any problems that I need resolved,
> >and thus rely on a future fixpack?  No.  Am I going to install future
> >free fixpacks if they are available?  Certainly.  Is this illogical,
> >contradictory, or inconsistent?  No.
>
> But it is robot-like.

So it's robot-like to be curious and try something out?  Is it
robot-like to climb Mt. Everest because it is there?

> To install software solely on the basis of availability
> instead of need is something to be view with scorn and derision based on
your
> opinions as well as those of your fellow OS/2 users.

And just what are my opinions that are in conflict with this?  And how
do you know what "my fellow OS/2 users" think?  Even if your perceptions
are correct, I do not share their opinions, only their choice of
operating system.  Are you declaring me a lemming, and then forcing me
to fit the mold by assuming my opinions are the same as those whom you
declare are my peers?  How convenient.

> >> >Now what may I ask (<yawn>), is the point of this, other than attempting
> >> >to show what a fraud and lemming I am?
> >> >
> >> >- Marty
> >>
> >> Again, you are drawing the wrong conclusion. You seem to do this quite
often.
> >
> >Yeah, that was a really far-fetched conclusion based on your statement
> >to which I was responding:
> >> > > And you, it seems, are quite the lemming. How ironic. This not the
very
> >> > > upgrade-itis that your fellow OS/2'ers subscribe to Windows users.
> >
> >Don't know where I could have gotten that idea from.
> >
> >So what is <the> conclusion?  [ie. cut to the chase, this has gone on
> >long enough]
> >
> >- Marty
> >
>
> That even the noble users of the mighty OS/2 are subject to the whims of the
> dreaded disease known as upgrade-itis.

Upgrade-itis is something which is done out of perceived necessity.  My
actions do not fit this description.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            13-Oct-99 21:58:23
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 03:59:07
Subj: Re: McCoy Digest

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>>
>> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>> >[various snippage]
>> >
>> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > We are not discussing reliance on current fixpacks, but on future ones
>> >> > (or would you like to change the subject again?).
>> >>
>> >> We were dicussing your interests in fixpacks. Your contradictions are
confusing
>> >> you.
>> >
>> >Ah, so you did want to change the subject again.  Now if you'd like to
>> >point out some contradictions, I'd be glad to acknowledge them.
>>
>> As soon as the subject of fixpacks arose in the "Linux Myths" thread, the
>> subject was changed. I'm afraid I only extended what you begun.
>>
>> But it would be amusing to see you point out contradictions. Do so.
>
>Now who's confused?  You were the one discussing my alleged
>contradictions (see above) but you'd like me to point them out?  Sorry,
>but I can't point out my own contradictions because I don't believe
>there are any.

And that is why I say that you are confused. People on the inside rarely see
it.

>> >> In otherwords, according to *your* words, you install fixpacks to do it.
That
>> >> is a lemming according to your fellow OS/2 users.
>> >
>> >Did I ever purport to care what other OS/2 users think about my
>> >installation of fixpacks?  Is this supposed to be damning evidence
>> >against my credibility?  I must be drawing an incorrect conclusion by
>> >saying so, however.  So what, pray tell, is the purpose of such a
>> >statement?
>>
>> I cast no judgements on your credibility based on these statements. Your
other
>> posts provide all the information I need to form my opinion of your
>> credibility.
>
>Likewise.
>
>> However, it does seem evident to me that based on the opinions of
>> your fellows, you are indeed, a lemming.
>
>And if I were a true lemming, I'd care.  However, I don't.

Lemmings, generally speaking, don't care. They just do.

>> >> Now, I'll ask *again*. When you installed any of the following fixpacks
"FP1,
>> >> FP2, FP3, FP5, FP8, FP9, FP11, FP12" did you anticipate needed its
successor?
>> >
>> >And I'll answer *again*.  Did I *need* any of them at the time they were
>> >installed?  No.  Do I currently have any problems that I need resolved,
>> >and thus rely on a future fixpack?  No.  Am I going to install future
>> >free fixpacks if they are available?  Certainly.  Is this illogical,
>> >contradictory, or inconsistent?  No.
>>
>> But it is robot-like.
>
>So it's robot-like to be curious and try something out?  Is it
>robot-like to climb Mt. Everest because it is there?

Don't shoot the messenger, Marty. Your peer have said that the blindly install

software is the mark of a lemming. I'm just telling you what I've read.

>> To install software solely on the basis of availability
>> instead of need is something to be view with scorn and derision based on
your
>> opinions as well as those of your fellow OS/2 users.
>
>And just what are my opinions that are in conflict with this?  And how
>do you know what "my fellow OS/2 users" think?  Even if your perceptions
>are correct, I do not share their opinions, only their choice of
>operating system.  Are you declaring me a lemming, and then forcing me
>to fit the mold by assuming my opinions are the same as those whom you
>declare are my peers?  How convenient.

I'm not declaring you a lemming. I'm just telling you what I've read on this
group. If you don't believe that this is the case, tell your fellows.

>> >> >Now what may I ask (<yawn>), is the point of this, other than
attempting
>> >> >to show what a fraud and lemming I am?
>> >> >
>> >> >- Marty
>> >>
>> >> Again, you are drawing the wrong conclusion. You seem to do this quite
often.
>> >
>> >Yeah, that was a really far-fetched conclusion based on your statement
>> >to which I was responding:
>> >> > > And you, it seems, are quite the lemming. How ironic. This not the
very
>> >> > > upgrade-itis that your fellow OS/2'ers subscribe to Windows users.
>> >
>> >Don't know where I could have gotten that idea from.
>> >
>> >So what is <the> conclusion?  [ie. cut to the chase, this has gone on
>> >long enough]
>> >
>> >- Marty
>> >
>>
>> That even the noble users of the mighty OS/2 are subject to the whims of
the
>> dreaded disease known as upgrade-itis.
>
>Upgrade-itis is something which is done out of perceived necessity.  My
>actions do not fit this description.
>
>- Marty
>

Of course they do. Satisfying your curiosity is your perceived necessity.

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

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

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

From: alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net                          13-Oct-99 21:06:17
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 03:59:07
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: Hobbyist <alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Tim Timmins posted :

> Not just the start menu can be out of date. The whole shortcuts
implementation can
> point to broken links. Why MS forced this into NT is beyond me. Just to get
away from
> Presentation Manager ?

This doesn't occur in a sensible administered system.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net                          13-Oct-99 21:05:18
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 03:59:08
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: Hobbyist <alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :

> Tim Timmins wrote:
> >
> > This is rubbish. They already mimicked W95 in the Warp 4 initial desktop
layout.
>
> Only they did it right.  The Start menu is one of the most revolting
> features IMHO of the Win9x shell.  It's a fairy-land view of what's on
> your computer.  It could be completely out of date and inaccurate.  The
> pop-up menu bar in Warp 4's Warpcenter is just a menu of all of the
> objects on your desktop.  Always up-to-date, never a broken link.

There's definitely some truth to what you say there. The shortcuts in
win9x/NT4 aren't updated automatically to reflect any movements of the
target executable if you so choose to move it.

If, however double click on the broken shortcut, a search automatically
starts for the executable and an offer is made to update it.

Cranky indeed but fixed in win2K.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net                          13-Oct-99 21:12:13
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 03:59:08
Subj: Re: McCoy Digest

From: Hobbyist <alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :

> > That even the noble users of the mighty OS/2 are subject to the whims of
the
> > dreaded disease known as upgrade-itis.
>
> Upgrade-itis is something which is done out of perceived necessity.  My
> actions do not fit this description.

That's great weaselling there Marty. I gotta hand it to yah. I thought
David had you there with a blaring double standard.

So let me get this straight:

A lemming upgrades because he feels that he needs to when in reality he
doesn't really need to.

You who add fixpacks for no good reason and in fact doesn't really need
to, is not a lemming, because you do appreciate that you are adding the
FP for no good reason and that you don't really need to.

Very good.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               13-Oct-99 22:41:23
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 03:59:08
Subj: Re: McCoy Digest

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >>
> >> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >> >[various snippage]
> >> >
> >> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > We are not discussing reliance on current fixpacks, but on future
ones
> >> >> > (or would you like to change the subject again?).
> >> >>
> >> >> We were dicussing your interests in fixpacks. Your contradictions are
confusing
> >> >> you.
> >> >
> >> >Ah, so you did want to change the subject again.  Now if you'd like to
> >> >point out some contradictions, I'd be glad to acknowledge them.
> >>
> >> As soon as the subject of fixpacks arose in the "Linux Myths" thread, the
> >> subject was changed. I'm afraid I only extended what you begun.
> >>
> >> But it would be amusing to see you point out contradictions. Do so.
> >
> >Now who's confused?  You were the one discussing my alleged
> >contradictions (see above) but you'd like me to point them out?  Sorry,
> >but I can't point out my own contradictions because I don't believe
> >there are any.
>
> And that is why I say that you are confused. People on the inside rarely see
> it.

Nice try at saving face, but you screwed up.  Be man enough to admit
that you misunderstood, "Now if you'd like to point out some
contradictions, I'd be glad to acknowledge them.", without insulting me
this time.

So truth by declaration, I've contradicted myself because David said
so.  My actions may have contradicted the statements of other alleged
OS/2 users in this group, but I don't see how that qualifies as me
contradicting myself.  You're too ready to file me off into a convenient
category that suits you.

> >> >> In otherwords, according to *your* words, you install fixpacks to do
it. That
> >> >> is a lemming according to your fellow OS/2 users.
> >> >
> >> >Did I ever purport to care what other OS/2 users think about my
> >> >installation of fixpacks?  Is this supposed to be damning evidence
> >> >against my credibility?  I must be drawing an incorrect conclusion by
> >> >saying so, however.  So what, pray tell, is the purpose of such a
> >> >statement?
> >>
> >> I cast no judgements on your credibility based on these statements. Your
other
> >> posts provide all the information I need to form my opinion of your
> >> credibility.
> >
> >Likewise.
> >
> >> However, it does seem evident to me that based on the opinions of
> >> your fellows, you are indeed, a lemming.
> >
> >And if I were a true lemming, I'd care.  However, I don't.
>
> Lemmings, generally speaking, don't care. They just do.

Right.  They have the crowd's mentality.  I don't share the mentality
(or lack thereof in some cases) of many OS/2 users posting here.

> >> >> Now, I'll ask *again*. When you installed any of the following
fixpacks "FP1,
> >> >> FP2, FP3, FP5, FP8, FP9, FP11, FP12" did you anticipate needed its
successor?
> >> >
> >> >And I'll answer *again*.  Did I *need* any of them at the time they were
> >> >installed?  No.  Do I currently have any problems that I need resolved,
> >> >and thus rely on a future fixpack?  No.  Am I going to install future
> >> >free fixpacks if they are available?  Certainly.  Is this illogical,
> >> >contradictory, or inconsistent?  No.
> >>
> >> But it is robot-like.
> >
> >So it's robot-like to be curious and try something out?  Is it
> >robot-like to climb Mt. Everest because it is there?
>
> Don't shoot the messenger, Marty. Your peer have said that the blindly
install
> software is the mark of a lemming. I'm just telling you what I've read.

Would you identify the windoze using public as your peers David?  The 12
year olds playing 3D games, the businessmen using their office suites,
the disfunctional nerds who spend all of their lives on IRC... are they
all your peers, just because they use windoze?

Also, you might want to don your "I'm Presenting Someone Else's Opinion"
hat when you're acting as a messenger.  Your response ("But it is
robot-like.") sounded like it came from you.

> >> To install software solely on the basis of availability
> >> instead of need is something to be view with scorn and derision based on
your
> >> opinions as well as those of your fellow OS/2 users.
> >
> >And just what are my opinions that are in conflict with this?  And how
> >do you know what "my fellow OS/2 users" think?  Even if your perceptions
> >are correct, I do not share their opinions, only their choice of
> >operating system.  Are you declaring me a lemming, and then forcing me
> >to fit the mold by assuming my opinions are the same as those whom you
> >declare are my peers?  How convenient.
>
> I'm not declaring you a lemming. I'm just telling you what I've read on this
> group. If you don't believe that this is the case, tell your fellows.

If it's not your opinion then what is your purpose in presenting it?
Let those that feel this way present their opinion to me, otherwise you
run the risk of having to defend their arguments.  I've noted that none
have done so as of yet.

> >> >> >Now what may I ask (<yawn>), is the point of this, other than
attempting
> >> >> >to show what a fraud and lemming I am?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >- Marty
> >> >>
> >> >> Again, you are drawing the wrong conclusion. You seem to do this quite
often.
> >> >
> >> >Yeah, that was a really far-fetched conclusion based on your statement
> >> >to which I was responding:
> >> >> > > And you, it seems, are quite the lemming. How ironic. This not the
very
> >> >> > > upgrade-itis that your fellow OS/2'ers subscribe to Windows users.
> >> >
> >> >Don't know where I could have gotten that idea from.
> >> >
> >> >So what is <the> conclusion?  [ie. cut to the chase, this has gone on
> >> >long enough]
> >> >
> >> >- Marty
> >> >
> >>
> >> That even the noble users of the mighty OS/2 are subject to the whims of
the
> >> dreaded disease known as upgrade-itis.
> >
> >Upgrade-itis is something which is done out of perceived necessity.  My
> >actions do not fit this description.
> >
> >- Marty
> >
>
> Of course they do. Satisfying your curiosity is your perceived necessity.

That's quite a stretch.  If my computer blew itself up 10 minutes from
now, life would go on.  I'd be pissed off no doubt, but my insatiable
curiousity won't so consume me that I can't resume a normal life.

It's amusing in a way to see you trying to tell me what my perceptions
of necessity are.  Since you know so much about me, tell me what you
feel my favorite color should be.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               13-Oct-99 22:55:11
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 03:59:08
Subj: Re: McCoy Digest

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Hobbyist wrote:
>
> On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :
>
> > > That even the noble users of the mighty OS/2 are subject to the whims of
the
> > > dreaded disease known as upgrade-itis.
> >
> > Upgrade-itis is something which is done out of perceived necessity.  My
> > actions do not fit this description.
>
> That's great weaselling there Marty. I gotta hand it to yah. I thought
> David had you there with a blaring double standard.

I learned from the best.

BTW, who's double-standard?  Did I ever talk about upgrade-itis before
this thread?  You can't put the opinions of other posters in my mouth
just because we use the same OS.

> So let me get this straight:
>
> A lemming upgrades because he feels that he needs to when in reality he
> doesn't really need to.

He/she/it may need to, he/she/it may not.  He/she/it feels he/she/it
needs to.  That perception may ring true and may not.

> You who add fixpacks for no good reason and in fact doesn't really need
> to, is not a lemming, because you do appreciate that you are adding the
> FP for no good reason and that you don't really need to.

I add the fixpack because I want to see what it does.  Does that qualify
as "no good reason"?  Does it qualify as necessity?  No on both counts.
Why does one do anything they consider recreational or educational?  For
no good reason?  Out of necessity?

> Very good.

Likewise.

- Marty

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

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

From: alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net                          13-Oct-99 22:29:12
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 03:59:08
Subj: Re: McCoy Digest

From: Hobbyist <alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :

> I add the fixpack because I want to see what it does.  Does that qualify
> as "no good reason"?  Does it qualify as necessity?  No on both counts.
> Why does one do anything they consider recreational or educational?  For
> no good reason?  Out of necessity?

Well then, if you aren't directly involved, would you please tell your
OS/2 buddies to stop telling us to leave COOA because we are here for no
good reason though we post here out of fun and cyber-recreation. :-)

> > Very good.
>
> Likewise.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                14-Oct-99 03:26:15
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 03:59:08
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: [e-mail] (Jim Burke)

If you use os/2 for business, what do you use for accounting?
Seems to be some sort of a gap in the market here.
At least, I haven't been able to find anything in this area.


[e-mail] (rj friedman) wrote:

>On Tue, 12 Oct 1999 23:30:28, Cameron Hughes
><[e-mail]> wrote:


>»The problem is not where OS/2 is at this exact moment.  The problem
>»is where it will be when IA-64 is released...

>IA-64 is for huge server farm type computers. Anyone who
>thinks that an IA-64 is going to be useful on the desktop
>anytime in our lifetimes has no idea as to what the IA-64 is
>about.

>»How will it compare after
>»Corel Corp has put some finishing touches on K...

>We'll just have to wait and see what Corel brings to the
>table at the time and make an evaluation on real product,
>not on marketing hype. In the meantime, the sky is not
>falling, and there is no logical reason to panic and run and
>tell the king.


>»After Borland (Inprise)
>»has finished porting its latest development suite to Linux...

>How does Borland (Inprise) porting its latest development
>suite to Linux have the slightest effect on my ability to
>earn my living as a small business user with OS/2?

>»How does
>»OS/2 look when a developer is trying to load it on one of those
>»snazzy HP Pavillions that SIS530, SIS630...

>How does one of those snazzy HP Pavillions that SIS530,
>SIS630 (whatever you meant to say by that), have the
>slightest effect on my ability to earn my living as a small
>business user with OS/2?

>»How does OS/2 look when one
>»is trying to run the latest Object Oriented Development Tools i.e. UML
>»tools?

>From the standpoint of the small business user, it looks
>just beautiful.

>»For those who don't do state of the art development or who
>»come from a user's perspective, OS/2 has about 3 years of usefulness...

>Says you. Even so, a lot of changes are going to be coming
>down over the next three years - I imagine that the state of
>end user computing will by quite a bit beyond what most
>people can even imagine, today. In the meantime, the sky is
>not falling, and there is no logical reason to panic and run
>and tell the king.

>»For those who require the latest RAD, Case, latest hardware, OS/2
>»is not an option.

>So, let them use whatever it is they think they need.



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

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

From: [e-mail]                                14-Oct-99 03:23:27
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 03:59:08
Subj: Re: I am GLAD IBM wants some money!

From: [e-mail] (Jim Burke)

I bought warp 3, warp connect, warp 4, a computer, a lexmark printer, and
lotus smartsuite from a
company pretending to be IBM. The invoices said IBM, the phone number I called
was IBM, and the checks I
wrote were made payable to IBM. Most, if not all of this, was presented to me
directly in the form of
special offers for stockholders.

I got the feeling after a time they were dumping some slow-moving inventory,
but I guess it is a
cruel world and caveat emptor.

I've written them a note lately about purchasing more than one software choice
licenses, but they
haven't responded to my email asking for the price breaks.

But I'll learn. At least I hope I will learn.

Bob Germer <[e-mail]> wrote:

>On <[e-mail]>, on 09/30/99 at 03:46 PM,
>   "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]> said:

>> Oh, I don't know...You demanded payment be made on the very same day
>> that IBM announced this new plan.  In the business world, a one-day
>> period is considered quite fast.  I STILL have not received a callback
>> from IBM.  I doubt if IBM will even be set up to go with this for
>> several more WEEKS.  And the program does not actually even BEGIN until
>> January 1, 2000.  So yes, you rushed to judgment.  Admit it.

>No, it is you who rushed to judgement my dear sir. Moreover, you rushed to
>judgement without having your facts straight. Your reckless disregard of
>facts renders you opinion valueless.

>Software choice has been around for some time. It is readily available
>from IBM resellers such as Indelible Blue. It includes for $100 a year
>software I otherwise would have to pay well over $200. The subscription
>includes TCP/IP for OS/2 version 4.1 which costs more as a standalone
>($269) than a two year subscription.

>IBM isn't going to sell to you or me directly. IBM sells through
>resellers, period. The PC company is a subsidiary of IBM, not the
>corporation. The PC company may well be sold off, left to die, closed. IBM
>sells to BUSINESSES. If individuals want to buy, use, etc. IBM products
>they must go through an authorized reseller.

>You cannot go to Damlier-Chrysler, General Motors, Ford, etc. and buy a
>car, parts, etc. You must go through dealers if you are an individual, a
>small company, a local government agency, etc. However, if you are big
>enough like Avis, Hertz, etc. you can indeed deal directly with the
>manufacturer.

>You cannot go to Wyeth and buy their latest drug directly. You go to a
>pharmacist. Your pharmacist cannot go directly to Wyeth and buy their
>latest drug. He must go to a wholesaler. But if you are Eckards you CAN go
>directly to Wyeth.

>The B in IBM stands for Business.


>--
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------
>Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [e-mail]
>Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 9
>MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
>Aut Pax Aut Bellum
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------



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

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

From: [e-mail]                            13-Oct-99 23:56:21
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 03:59:08
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>>
>> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>> >> >[various snippage]
>> >> >
>> >> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > We are not discussing reliance on current fixpacks, but on future
ones
>> >> >> > (or would you like to change the subject again?).
>> >> >>
>> >> >> We were dicussing your interests in fixpacks. Your contradictions are
confusing
>> >> >> you.
>> >> >
>> >> >Ah, so you did want to change the subject again.  Now if you'd like to
>> >> >point out some contradictions, I'd be glad to acknowledge them.
>> >>
>> >> As soon as the subject of fixpacks arose in the "Linux Myths" thread,
the
>> >> subject was changed. I'm afraid I only extended what you begun.
>> >>
>> >> But it would be amusing to see you point out contradictions. Do so.
>> >
>> >Now who's confused?  You were the one discussing my alleged
>> >contradictions (see above) but you'd like me to point them out?  Sorry,
>> >but I can't point out my own contradictions because I don't believe
>> >there are any.
>>
>> And that is why I say that you are confused. People on the inside rarely
see
>> it.

>Nice try at saving face, but you screwed up.  Be man enough to admit
>that you misunderstood, "Now if you'd like to point out some
>contradictions, I'd be glad to acknowledge them.", without insulting me
>this time.

Again, you misunderstand. I changed no subject. The thread is "Linux Myths".
You started talking about fixpacks. I say that you are confused by the
contradiction inherent in claiming that you are not reliant on IBM, yet you
install most, if not all of their fixpacks with clearly demostrates the very
reliance you seek to deny.

Your confusion over this inherent contradiction is why you accuse believe that

I am changing the subject when in fact, you did by writing about fixpacks.

>So truth by declaration, I've contradicted myself because David said
>so.  My actions may have contradicted the statements of other alleged
>OS/2 users in this group, but I don't see how that qualifies as me
>contradicting myself.  You're too ready to file me off into a convenient
>category that suits you.

Not at all. I think that your actions fit right into the box that is OS/2 cooa

advocate. You knock Windows based on incomplete knowledge. You seem to feel
that most people cannot make intelligent computer hardware and software
purchases, presumably based on their use of Windows, and that your selections
are somehow superior, presumably because of your use of OS/2. When confront
with the numerous gaps in OS/2's offerings, you claim on the one hand that
such
items aren't needed, but on the other that despite this lack of need, such
items will be delivered in the future such as our discussion of Scitech. You
are then vague on details such as when these items will arrive and what shape
they will take, again, reference our Scitech dicussion.

But remember, this is a big box. While you are in it, you are clearly in the
center of the box, in that you are reasonable to a marvelous degree(if not
prone to making wrong conclusions :-)). You are not on the fringe of the box
like the more...excitable elements.

>> >> However, it does seem evident to me that based on the opinions of
>> >> your fellows, you are indeed, a lemming.
>> >
>> >And if I were a true lemming, I'd care.  However, I don't.
>>
>> Lemmings, generally speaking, don't care. They just do.

>Right.  They have the crowd's mentality.  I don't share the mentality
>(or lack thereof in some cases) of many OS/2 users posting here.

I didn't say you did. The reason I bought this up is because any Windows
person
said that they installed a service pack for just to do it, ten posts would
follow calling this person a lemming. I'm just wondering that since your
fixpack use clearly fits this definition, why these guys aren't stepping up?

>> >> But it is robot-like.
>> >
>> >So it's robot-like to be curious and try something out?  Is it
>> >robot-like to climb Mt. Everest because it is there?
>>
>> Don't shoot the messenger, Marty. Your peer have said that the blindly
install
>> software is the mark of a lemming. I'm just telling you what I've read.

>Would you identify the windoze using public as your peers David?  The 12
>year olds playing 3D games, the businessmen using their office suites,
>the disfunctional nerds who spend all of their lives on IRC... are they
>all your peers, just because they use windoze?

See "windoze". Perhaps you aren't as different as you may think. But to answer

your question, they are fellow Windows users.

>Also, you might want to don your "I'm Presenting Someone Else's Opinion"
>hat when you're acting as a messenger.  Your response ("But it is
>robot-like.") sounded like it came from you.

Cheerfully withdrawn. :-)

>> >> To install software solely on the basis of availability
>> >> instead of need is something to be view with scorn and derision based on
your
>> >> opinions as well as those of your fellow OS/2 users.
>> >
>> >And just what are my opinions that are in conflict with this?  And how
>> >do you know what "my fellow OS/2 users" think?  Even if your perceptions
>> >are correct, I do not share their opinions, only their choice of
>> >operating system.  Are you declaring me a lemming, and then forcing me
>> >to fit the mold by assuming my opinions are the same as those whom you
>> >declare are my peers?  How convenient.
>>
>> I'm not declaring you a lemming. I'm just telling you what I've read on
this
>> group. If you don't believe that this is the case, tell your fellows.

>If it's not your opinion then what is your purpose in presenting it?
>Let those that feel this way present their opinion to me, otherwise you
>run the risk of having to defend their arguments.  I've noted that none
>have done so as of yet.

Why is my point? Shouts of upgrade-itis ring through these halls, but none in
your direction despite actions that clearly meet the definition of "windoze
lemmings" offered by some OS/2 users in this group.

It's the lack of response that I find interesting, but not susprising. After
all, people who teamed with John Ominor in times past now attack. As long as
you use OS/2 (and are not Tim Martin) anything goes.

> >> >> >Now what may I ask (<yawn>), is the point of this, other than
attempting
> >> >> >to show what a fraud and lemming I am?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >- Marty
> >> >>
> >> >> Again, you are drawing the wrong conclusion. You seem to do this quite
often.
> >> >
> >> >Yeah, that was a really far-fetched conclusion based on your statement
> >> >to which I was responding:
> >> >> > > And you, it seems, are quite the lemming. How ironic. This not the
very
> >> >> > > upgrade-itis that your fellow OS/2'ers subscribe to Windows users.
> >> >
> >> >Don't know where I could have gotten that idea from.
> >> >
> >> >So what is <the> conclusion?  [ie. cut to the chase, this has gone on
> >> >long enough]
> >> >
> >> >- Marty
> >> >
> >>
> >> That even the noble users of the mighty OS/2 are subject to the whims of
the
> >> dreaded disease known as upgrade-itis.
>> >
>> >Upgrade-itis is something which is done out of perceived necessity.  My
>> >actions do not fit this description.
>> >
>> >- Marty
>> >
>>
>> Of course they do. Satisfying your curiosity is your perceived necessity.

>That's quite a stretch.  If my computer blew itself up 10 minutes from
>now, life would go on.  I'd be pissed off no doubt, but my insatiable
>curiousity won't so consume me that I can't resume a normal life.

What stretch? Your fellows seem to feel that Windows users upgrade just to do
it. According to your own words, this is why you install fixpacks. You say
that
Windows users don't need to upgrade, but do so out of a perceived necessity.
By
your own admission, your machine is this smooth running beast to be patch by
fixpacks to satisfy your curiousity. That is your perceived need.

>It's amusing in a way to see you trying to tell me what my perceptions
>of necessity are.  Since you know so much about me, tell me what you
>feel my favorite color should be.

You tell me.  Your words are all I have to go by.

>- Marty


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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            14-Oct-99 00:01:13
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 03:59:08
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] says...
>Your confusion over this inherent contradiction is why you accuse believe
that
>I am changing the subject when in fact, you did by writing about fixpacks.
>

????? Let's try that again.
"Your confusion over this inherent contradiction is why you *believe* that I
am
changing the subject when in fact, you did by writing about fixpacks.



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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          14-Oct-99 03:37:23
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 03:59:08
Subj: Re: McCoy Digest

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>Hobbyist <alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net>

>On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :
>
>> > That even the noble users of the mighty OS/2 are subject to the whims of
the
>> > dreaded disease known as upgrade-itis.
>>
>> Upgrade-itis is something which is done out of perceived necessity.  My
>> actions do not fit this description.
>
>That's great weaselling there Marty. I gotta hand it to yah. I thought
>David had you there with a blaring double standard.
>
>So let me get this straight:
>
>A lemming upgrades because he feels that he needs to when in reality he
>doesn't really need to.
>
>You who add fixpacks for no good reason and in fact doesn't really need
>to, is not a lemming, because you do appreciate that you are adding the
>FP for no good reason and that you don't really need to.

HAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!

You know, *every* time one of these niche OS advocates starts to do
the chest-beating thing and rambles on about how everyone else is a
fool and/or a lemming, etc, the advocate makes an utter fool out of
himself and often even ends up coming off as a hypocrite who can be
easily esposed to be at least as guilty of whatever "crimes" he's
accusing everyone else of perpetrating.

You'd think that, after awhile, they'd learn not to resort to this
questionable advocacy tactic. You'd think that, by now, they'd have
discovered what people like Brad Wardell discovered -- the only truly
good and effective thing you can do for a niche market product is to
offer some sort of add-on value to it. In the case of an operating
system, it would have greatly behooved OS/2 for many of the "Team
OS/2" folks to have shut up, and just picked up a C compiler and
learned how to actually write some code. Then, they may have actually
been useful instead of ultimately harmful

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            14-Oct-99 00:07:22
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 03:59:08
Subj: (1/3) Re: Time to move on

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> > In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> > "David H. McCoy" wrote:
>>
>> >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.

What planet are you from? Dos and Windows 9x have little or no security and
have been heartily embraced. OS/2 has no security, but according to some, it
has a halfway corporation presence.

>> >> 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.

A droplet is not a river but both are still wet. Are do you feel that there
are
some OS/2 users that ARE NOT computer users?

>> However, YOU, Marty, a person who claims to be independent of support,

>-- further future support.

Until the next fixpack.

>> are in a minority, whether that minority is computer users or OS/2 users.

>I disagree.

Your choice. It is the right of every man to be wrong(and stubborn) despite
overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Of course, you also think an unsecure,
support operating system cannot make corporate headway despite the existence
of
DOS and Win9x.

>> 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.

Then you would not have installed any fixpacks, would you? Your statements are

at odds with your actions, Marty.

>
>> >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.

You don't like to answer questions. Did you ask her why? Did you TRY to
explain
or did you just tell her in a condescending manner> My in-law was absolutely
computer illiterate, yet had no problems making a decision. I'll bet your
mother could do the same.

>> >> 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.

I wonder. I've yet to run into any computer illiterate person who couldn't
make
a wise decision based on a good explanation.  EVERY person who was a computer
newbie who asked my advice took my advice 100% of the time. I asked a couple
of
friends and they had the same hit ratio.
Now, why would a mother ignore the advice of her son let alone someone more
knowledgable than herself and presumably, someone she trusts?

I suspect that your advice was ignored for reasons other than your mother's
"cluelessness".  Perhaps you noticed that you were using OS/2 decided your
advice was...questionable? :-)

>> >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.

Okay.  I wonder how many people anticipated the Internet or this IT job
market?

>> 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?  :-)

Installs with the driver! :-)

>> >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.

Fine. This was just one example to show an overall problem.

>> >> 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.

Indeed. But the truck that can tow that load and play that CD is even better,
isn't it?

>> >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.

Once can indeed always wait for 6 months "it" will be faster and cheaper.
However, eventually the plunge will be made and even you, Marty, will try to
pick the most flexible solution available. It has nothing to do with trying to

keep up. It has everything to do with finding the most bang for the buck.

>> >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.

And you feel that rebooting to use a single features is more efficient than
using the tool that gives you all under a single umbrella?


>> >> >> 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.

Again, it is your right to go into a car dealership and tell someone that the
AC is optional no matter how many times they tell you that it is standard. It
doesn't make you right. Just difficult.

>> 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.

But yet, they are features that CAN be used. What you consider necessary isn't

relevent in this context. What is relevent is that you are forced to pay for
features you CANNOT use.

>> >> 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.

Well, let's see it.

>> 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.

Without looking at a line of their code I can guarantee you that if they
support those advance features, they will not be the same codebase.

That is not possible. Either they will bring all their other drivers down to
the lowest common denominator, all they will be forced to have different code
for the myriad of advanced features that OS/2 doesn't support.

>> >> 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?

Because in the hear and now, I may want to use something in the future that I
don't use today. It can already exist and not be installed on my machine.

>> 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.

And that is why OS/2's user base is shrinking.

>> >> >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.

Then Scitech is pretty useless unless you wish to use two year old cards or
the
S4.

>> 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.

You would be refering to Nvidia's Gradd drivers. These are the same ones that
force OS/2 users to run at 640x480 and 60mhz.

>> 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.

How do you figure? With hoards of people like yourself(no offense) who don't
plan on using any new cards, how is it in their best interest to support them?

>> >> 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?

Maybe the millions of people who've purchased new machines less than one year
ago.

>> 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:
>[deleted]

And what exactly does that have to do with the fact that SciTech doesn't have
an OS/2 version of GLDirect dispite your proclaimations of once and future
OS/2
support?


>> >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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            14-Oct-99 00:07:22
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 03:59:08
Subj: (2/3) Re: Time to move on

>> 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.

> Right.  Drop SOM because other less capable platforms are more popular.

Half right. Drop some because OS/2 is less popular and show the world the
state
of OS/2 development.

>> >> 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.

I've read Warpcast. Now, we've gone from EDM/2 making a comeback to
irrelevent.
Interesting. And your statement still doesn't address what I said about OS/2
development, namely that it is falling off. Amiga has some developers, but no
one believes that it is a hotbed of software development. In OS/2, there just
isn't much happening on the development front.

> >> 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.

You HAVE to in OS/2. And all the while, programming advancements will pass you

by.

>> >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.

Well, what rally?

>> >> 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.

I'm not disputing that. It just seems that we don't know what it means.

>> 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.

Indeed for clearly mine did. You would not have found a harder sell than I. NT

won me over by working better than OS/2 did, for me, on the same hardware.
Even
the first week, when I changed drive letters and OS/2 failed to boot with a
"can't find country.sys" and NT boot successfully. For me, it simply
outperformed OS/2.

>> 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 don't think you are being realistic, that is how. I think that you will do
something. For example, did you anticipate installing fixpack 12? Did you
install earlier fixpacks?

> >> >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.

I had such thing while using OS/2. For example, until Warp 4, I couldn't play
AVIs and move the mouse without locking the system. Easy to avoid? You bet.
Would I consider that smooth? No, after all, I couldn't move the mouse.

Currently, I don't have any "Patient: My left arm hurts when I move it.
Doctor:Don't move it." problems. Now, this is not the same as problem-free.
For
example, I just installed an Acer 4x4x32 CD-RW. When I started using DirectCD,

Win2k would crash. That's the price of mixing bleeding edge and low level
software,but Adaptec is on the ball by having a patch fixes that problem. Now,

to me, a workaround, would clearly be not using DirectCD, but I wouldn't
considered that a smoothly running system.

BTW, can OS/2 use DirectCD?

[snip]

>> >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.

But we are talking about one's options when using OS/2. It would seem to me
that one shouldn't have to dump and OS, to do such a thing. A more optimal
solution would be an OS that allowed you to do as much as possible.

>> >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.

Of course. But if you needed that feature and it forced you to reboot, that
would be annoying, wouldn't it?


>> >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.

How many fixpacks have you installed? When you installed any, did you
anticipate needing another?

>> >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.  ;-)

I'd rather view a live horse's ass than beat a dead horse. Like you. :-)

>> >> 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.

Well, my mistake for one. That "486 than can" should be "486 that CANNOT".
Also, my point is that people in this group seem to feel that using OS/2
proves
they are knowledgable and using Windows proves someone else is not. My point
is
that smart people choose fast machines and Windows and deny OS/2.

>> >> 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.

Depends on where you buy it. I purchased the OS/2 Warp 4 upgrade for $129. The

full blown is $189. I've seen NT for as much as $249. I purchased the full-
blown for $72. If you don't shop around, your statement would be correct.

>> >> 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.

First, I've got a fast machine, so a small speed hit is irrelevent. Second,
like compression, you can encrypt individual files or folders. For example,
you
can easily make a directory and an files in it would be encrypted. No need to
encrypt programs, just your data. Third, since you don't know that the
encryption is paltry, why make such a comment? Why not instead, make one that
you can back up? Finally, there is the option create a recovery key if you so
wish, but of course, a recovery key is a security risk.

Any thing else you wish to add?

>> >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.

You seem to feel that people can't make decisions. All of my static payments
go
out electronically with no intervention on my part. This saves time and effort

and makes tracking payments easier. Time is money. Some companies even give
you
a discount for electronic payments. Again, however, you show that OS/2 user
characteristic of condemning what you don't have and "attacking" your fellows
that do want such a feature.

>> >>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.

First, HPFS Zip drive support on the PP version is iffy at best. Second,
protection bits is not even in the same universe as a disk that can have
read/write/password protection. I cannot believe that you would even offer
that
as a substitute. Third, under OS/2, the zip drive takes the next available,
lowest available drive letter. What this means is that the zip drive will
change if you change partitions. Under Windows, I made my CDROM Z: and my
ZipDrive Y. No matter what, they don't change.

You cannot do this under OS/2.

>> >> 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.

Not an alternative to people who want cheaper PP and don't have SCSI cards.
You, the "take my hand-me-down 486" want people do drop $100 on a SCSI card,
$250 on a SCSI scanner instead of spending $70 on a PP 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

Well, my personal was only $170 when I bought it. Very useful.

>> >> 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.

I suspect that someone making animated gifs wouldn't want to do so on the
command-line.

>> >> 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.
>>

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            14-Oct-99 00:07:22
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 03:59:08
Subj: (3/3) Re: Time to move on

>> 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.

Of course. Let me help. The answer would be no.

>> >> 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.

Simple methods sometimes provide simple results. Purify is an Unix and Windows

standard, but I understand how OS/2 forces one to make do.

>> >> OpenGL?
>>
>> >What about it?
>>
>> Hardware support.

>On the way.  Software support is already there.

"On the way". That would be NO.

>> >> 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.

Indeed, people who want the widest array of software and hardware possible.

>> 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?

Corel Office? Right. A dog that was dropped. You are probably the only man in
America using Corel Office. I suspect that you use it to say you can, instead
of for real work. As for the features, new Java developing is moving towards
Java2. If you want to be a Java developer who is behind practically every
other
OS and thus be non-competitive while making inferior Java products, by all
means, stick to OS/2.

>> 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


Truly, a rich use Marty, and similar to my own. I just have more fun. :-)

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                14-Oct-99 04:39:16
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 03:59:08
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: [e-mail] (Jack Troughton)

On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 02:06:35, Hobbyist <alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net>
wrote:

ΩOn comp.os.os2.advocacy, Tim Timmins posted :
█
Ω> Not just the start menu can be out of date. The whole shortcuts
implementation can
Ω> point to broken links. Why MS forced this into NT is beyond me. Just to get
away from
Ω> Presentation Manager ?
█
ΩThis doesn't occur in a sensible administered system.
█

It doesn't occur in any warp system, sensibly administered or not.

Jack Troughton   ICQ:7494149
http://jakesplace.dhs.org
jack.troughton at videotron.ca
jake at jakesplace.dhs.org
Montr┌al PQ Canada

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               14-Oct-99 02:10:21
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 03:59:08
Subj: Re: McCoy Digest

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Hobbyist wrote:
>
> On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :
>
> > I add the fixpack because I want to see what it does.  Does that qualify
> > as "no good reason"?  Does it qualify as necessity?  No on both counts.
> > Why does one do anything they consider recreational or educational?  For
> > no good reason?  Out of necessity?
>
> Well then, if you aren't directly involved, would you please tell your
> OS/2 buddies to stop telling us to leave COOA because we are here for no
> good reason though we post here out of fun and cyber-recreation. :-)

No problem.

Attention all OS/2 "buddies":
Stop telling people to leave COOA because they are there for no good
reason though they post here out of fun and cyber-recreation.

You think it did any good?  ;-)

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               14-Oct-99 02:16:07
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 03:59:08
Subj: Re: McCoy Digest

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Jeff Glatt wrote:
>
> >Hobbyist <alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net>
>
> >On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :
> >
> >> > That even the noble users of the mighty OS/2 are subject to the whims
of the
> >> > dreaded disease known as upgrade-itis.
> >>
> >> Upgrade-itis is something which is done out of perceived necessity.  My
> >> actions do not fit this description.
> >
> >That's great weaselling there Marty. I gotta hand it to yah. I thought
> >David had you there with a blaring double standard.
> >
> >So let me get this straight:
> >
> >A lemming upgrades because he feels that he needs to when in reality he
> >doesn't really need to.
> >
> >You who add fixpacks for no good reason and in fact doesn't really need
> >to, is not a lemming, because you do appreciate that you are adding the
> >FP for no good reason and that you don't really need to.
>
> HAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!
>
> You know, *every* time one of these niche OS advocates starts to do
> the chest-beating thing and rambles on about how everyone else is a
> fool and/or a lemming, etc, the advocate makes an utter fool out of
> himself and often even ends up coming off as a hypocrite who can be
> easily esposed to be at least as guilty of whatever "crimes" he's
> accusing everyone else of perpetrating.

Have I done this, or are you just stating in general?  If so, please
show me where I've accused anyone of any "crime" and I'll cheerfully
retract it.

> You'd think that, after awhile, they'd learn not to resort to this
> questionable advocacy tactic. You'd think that, by now, they'd have
> discovered what people like Brad Wardell discovered -- the only truly
> good and effective thing you can do for a niche market product is to
> offer some sort of add-on value to it. In the case of an operating
> system, it would have greatly behooved OS/2 for many of the "Team
> OS/2" folks to have shut up, and just picked up a C compiler and
> learned how to actually write some code. Then, they may have actually
> been useful instead of ultimately harmful

I <know> you're not talkin about me here.  If you were intending to,
then I suggest you do a little research before you start flappin your
jaw and neatly classify someone in a convenient, yet completely
incorrect category.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               14-Oct-99 02:18:20
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 03:59:08
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> [some stuff that he wants a response to]

Almost forgot about this thread.  I'll get to it tomorrow.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               14-Oct-99 02:45:09
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 05:36:08
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >>
> >> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
> >> >> >[various snippage]
> >> >> >
> >> >> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > We are not discussing reliance on current fixpacks, but on future
ones
> >> >> >> > (or would you like to change the subject again?).
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> We were dicussing your interests in fixpacks. Your contradictions
are confusing
> >> >> >> you.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Ah, so you did want to change the subject again.  Now if you'd like
to
> >> >> >point out some contradictions, I'd be glad to acknowledge them.
> >> >>
> >> >> As soon as the subject of fixpacks arose in the "Linux Myths" thread,
the
> >> >> subject was changed. I'm afraid I only extended what you begun.
> >> >>
> >> >> But it would be amusing to see you point out contradictions. Do so.
> >> >
> >> >Now who's confused?  You were the one discussing my alleged
> >> >contradictions (see above) but you'd like me to point them out?  Sorry,
> >> >but I can't point out my own contradictions because I don't believe
> >> >there are any.
> >>
> >> And that is why I say that you are confused. People on the inside rarely
see
> >> it.
>
> >Nice try at saving face, but you screwed up.  Be man enough to admit
> >that you misunderstood, "Now if you'd like to point out some
> >contradictions, I'd be glad to acknowledge them.", without insulting me
> >this time.
>
> Again, you misunderstand. I changed no subject. The thread is "Linux Myths".
> You started talking about fixpacks. I say that you are confused by the
> contradiction inherent in claiming that you are not reliant on IBM, yet you
> install most, if not all of their fixpacks with clearly demostrates the very
> reliance you seek to deny.

So what was the whole, "But it would be amusing to see you point out
contradictions. Do so." if not a misunderstanding on your part?

> Your confusion over this inherent contradiction is why you accuse believe
that
> I am changing the subject when in fact, you did by writing about fixpacks.

Now I'm confused.  ;-)

> >So truth by declaration, I've contradicted myself because David said
> >so.  My actions may have contradicted the statements of other alleged
> >OS/2 users in this group, but I don't see how that qualifies as me
> >contradicting myself.  You're too ready to file me off into a convenient
> >category that suits you.
>
> Not at all. I think that your actions fit right into the box that is OS/2
cooa
> advocate.

So the average COOA poster writes freeware applications and assists
others in porting applications to OS/2?

> You knock Windows based on incomplete knowledge.

I've done GUI, Netscape Plugin, and device driver programming in Windows
NT.  While I would never claim "complete knowledge," that ain't bad.

> You seem to feel that most people cannot make intelligent computer hardware
> and software purchases,

I felt that my mother had not done so, and that there are potentially
many like her.

> presumably based on their use of Windows,

Nope.  Based on their perceived need for powerful computers to do some
not very compute-demanding tasks.

> and that your selections are somehow superior, presumably because of your
> use of OS/2.

My selection is superior for my use.  I would not limit myself to a
given tool if it didn't meet my needs well.  I have no brand loyalty.

> When confront with the numerous gaps in OS/2's offerings, you claim on the
> one hand that such items aren't needed,

Always qualified with, "for my own use."

> but on the other that despite this lack of need, such items will be
delivered
> in the future such as our discussion of Scitech. You are then vague on
details
> such as when these items will arrive and what shape they will take, again,
> reference our Scitech dicussion.

Sorry.  I don't work for Scitech.  I know only what I've heard and seen.

> But remember, this is a big box. While you are in it, you are clearly in the
> center of the box, in that you are reasonable to a marvelous degree(if not
> prone to making wrong conclusions :-)).  You are not on the fringe of the
box
> like the more...excitable elements.

I guess that's a compilment.  ;-)

> >> >> However, it does seem evident to me that based on the opinions of
> >> >> your fellows, you are indeed, a lemming.
> >> >
> >> >And if I were a true lemming, I'd care.  However, I don't.
> >>
> >> Lemmings, generally speaking, don't care. They just do.
>
> >Right.  They have the crowd's mentality.  I don't share the mentality
> >(or lack thereof in some cases) of many OS/2 users posting here.
>
> I didn't say you did. The reason I bought this up is because any Windows
person
> said that they installed a service pack for just to do it, ten posts would
> follow calling this person a lemming.

And not one would be from me.

> I'm just wondering that since your fixpack use clearly fits this definition,

> why these guys aren't stepping up?

Many here do have double standards.  I could name a few names, but that
would only summon them into this discussion which we'd both agree is
undesirable.

> >> >> But it is robot-like.
> >> >
> >> >So it's robot-like to be curious and try something out?  Is it
> >> >robot-like to climb Mt. Everest because it is there?
> >>
> >> Don't shoot the messenger, Marty. Your peer have said that the blindly
install
> >> software is the mark of a lemming. I'm just telling you what I've read.
>
> >Would you identify the windoze using public as your peers David?  The 12
> >year olds playing 3D games, the businessmen using their office suites,
> >the disfunctional nerds who spend all of their lives on IRC... are they
> >all your peers, just because they use windoze?
>
> See "windoze".

Force of habit.  If you like, you can respond using 1/2 OS.  ;-)

> Perhaps you aren't as different as you may think. But to answer
> your question, they are fellow Windows users.

Do you feel any particular kinsmanship to them or that your thoughts and
ideas line up with theirs based on their OS choice?

> >> >> To install software solely on the basis of availability
> >> >> instead of need is something to be view with scorn and derision based
on your
> >> >> opinions as well as those of your fellow OS/2 users.
> >> >
> >> >And just what are my opinions that are in conflict with this?  And how
> >> >do you know what "my fellow OS/2 users" think?  Even if your perceptions
> >> >are correct, I do not share their opinions, only their choice of
> >> >operating system.  Are you declaring me a lemming, and then forcing me
> >> >to fit the mold by assuming my opinions are the same as those whom you
> >> >declare are my peers?  How convenient.
> >>
> >> I'm not declaring you a lemming. I'm just telling you what I've read on
this
> >> group. If you don't believe that this is the case, tell your fellows.
>
> >If it's not your opinion then what is your purpose in presenting it?
> >Let those that feel this way present their opinion to me, otherwise you
> >run the risk of having to defend their arguments.  I've noted that none
> >have done so as of yet.
>
> Why is my point? Shouts of upgrade-itis ring through these halls, but none
in
> your direction despite actions that clearly meet the definition of "windoze
> lemmings" offered by some OS/2 users in this group.

My fault.  I'll try to be more blatent about it next time.  ;-)

> It's the lack of response that I find interesting, but not susprising.

Personally, I don't even find it interesting.  In fact, entirely too
predictable.

> After all, people who teamed with John Ominor in times past now attack. As
> long as you use OS/2 (and are not Tim Martin) anything goes.

You mean you didn't receive a License To Do and Say Whatever You Want
and Always Be Right in the box when you bought OS/2?  You must not have
gotten the Purple Spine edition like the rest of us.  ;-)

> > >> >> >Now what may I ask (<yawn>), is the point of this, other than
attempting
> > >> >> >to show what a fraud and lemming I am?
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Again, you are drawing the wrong conclusion. You seem to do this
quite often.
> > >> >
> > >> >Yeah, that was a really far-fetched conclusion based on your statement
> > >> >to which I was responding:
> > >> >> > > And you, it seems, are quite the lemming. How ironic. This not
the very
> > >> >> > > upgrade-itis that your fellow OS/2'ers subscribe to Windows
users.
> > >> >
> > >> >Don't know where I could have gotten that idea from.
> > >> >
> > >> >So what is <the> conclusion?  [ie. cut to the chase, this has gone on
> > >> >long enough]
> > >>
> > >> That even the noble users of the mighty OS/2 are subject to the whims
of the
> > >> dreaded disease known as upgrade-itis.
> >> >
> >> >Upgrade-itis is something which is done out of perceived necessity.  My
> >> >actions do not fit this description.
> >>
> >> Of course they do. Satisfying your curiosity is your perceived necessity.
>
> >That's quite a stretch.  If my computer blew itself up 10 minutes from
> >now, life would go on.  I'd be pissed off no doubt, but my insatiable
> >curiousity won't so consume me that I can't resume a normal life.
>
> What stretch? Your fellows seem to feel that Windows users upgrade just to
do
> it. According to your own words, this is why you install fixpacks.

Ok.

> You say that Windows users don't need to upgrade, but do so out of a
> perceived necessity.

Have I?  Are you employing the collective "you"?

> By your own admission, your machine is this smooth running beast to be patch
by
> fixpacks to satisfy your curiousity. That is your perceived need.

I still disagree that this demonstrates any "need".  My world will not
collapse if I'm deprived of this "joy".

> >It's amusing in a way to see you trying to tell me what my perceptions
> >of necessity are.  Since you know so much about me, tell me what you
> >feel my favorite color should be.
>
> You tell me.  Your words are all I have to go by.

No dime-shop psycho-analysis for this?  Aggression would point to a
red... cunning and cold wit would point to a blue... However, I
anticipate you saying perhaps a brown for fairly obvious reasons.  ;-)

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            14-Oct-99 08:38:08
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 05:36:08
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: Tim Timmins <[e-mail]>

I guess you mean 'fixed' as in fixed, yeah right.

Regards,
Tim

Hobbyist wrote:

> On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :
>
> > Tim Timmins wrote:
> > >
> > > This is rubbish. They already mimicked W95 in the Warp 4 initial desktop
layout.
> >
> > Only they did it right.  The Start menu is one of the most revolting
> > features IMHO of the Win9x shell.  It's a fairy-land view of what's on
> > your computer.  It could be completely out of date and inaccurate.  The
> > pop-up menu bar in Warp 4's Warpcenter is just a menu of all of the
> > objects on your desktop.  Always up-to-date, never a broken link.
>
> There's definitely some truth to what you say there. The shortcuts in
> win9x/NT4 aren't updated automatically to reflect any movements of the
> target executable if you so choose to move it.
>
> If, however double click on the broken shortcut, a search automatically
> starts for the executable and an offer is made to update it.
>
> Cranky indeed but fixed in win2K.

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

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            14-Oct-99 08:50:20
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 10:29:21
Subj: Re: McCoy Digest

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 06:10:43, Marty <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hobbyist wrote:
> >
> > On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :
> >
> > > I add the fixpack because I want to see what it does.  Does that qualify
> > > as "no good reason"?  Does it qualify as necessity?  No on both counts.
> > > Why does one do anything they consider recreational or educational?  For
> > > no good reason?  Out of necessity?
> >
> > Well then, if you aren't directly involved, would you please tell your
> > OS/2 buddies to stop telling us to leave COOA because we are here for no
> > good reason though we post here out of fun and cyber-recreation. :-)
>
> No problem.
>
> Attention all OS/2 "buddies":
> Stop telling people to leave COOA because they are there for no good
> reason though they post here out of fun and cyber-recreation.
>
Okelidokeli, Marty.

> You think it did any good?  ;-)
>
Duh?


Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net

|---------------------------------------------------|
|                  NT boot options                  |
|                                                   |
|               Please choose from list             |
|                                                   |
|       <crash>         <OS/2>        <linux>       |
|---------------------------------------------------|

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

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

From: [e-mail]                     14-Oct-99 10:51:08
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 10:29:21
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: [e-mail]

Mike Timbol writes:

> Joseph wrote:

>> OS/2 Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality.  Bummer, bummer.

> It's also bullshit.

Incorrect.  OS/2 Java 1.1.8 does implement Java 1.2 functionality.

> Download something like NetBeans, that requires
> JDK 1.2.  Try to run it on OS/2.  No dice.

Irrelevant, given that Joseph did not say that OS/2 Java 1.1.8
implements ALL of Java 1.2 functionality.  It does implement SOME
of it, however.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                     14-Oct-99 11:06:17
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 10:29:21
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: [e-mail]

Jason S. writes:

>>> Tholen was *twice* nominated for Usenet Kook of the Month -- the first
>>> time by Roberto Alsina back in 1997,

>> Alsina is the person who accused me of posting an average of 134 articles
>> every day, which was ludicrous.  When he pointed to his alleged evidence,
>> it became obvious that he didn't even bother to check the range of dates.
>> Even then, he continued to insist that he was right, until others started
>> getting on his case.  How ironic that he nominated me rather than himself.

> None of this changes the fact that you were nominated in 1997.

It does demonstrate that person responsible did not have his facts
straight and wasn't interested in getting them straight.  Rather
coincidentally, you also relied on false information in the nomination
that you prepared.

>>> 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

>> Actually, that's the wake of your notorious attempts to "get a rise" out
>> of me.  Put the onus where it belongs, Jason:  on you, not me.

> Typical Tholen attempt to obfuscate the *real* issue.

Noting an important historical fact that you left out is not
obfuscation.

>>> There was no evidence of tampering

>> Incorrect.  The voting deadline was extended,

> ..which is not evidence of tampering...

Prove that the outcome was not affected by the deadline extension.

>> and I know that at least one vote wasn't counted.

> ..for a person who wasn't nominated,

Which makes the fact that you received a vote even more significant.

> so the alleged vote was a nullity.

On the contrary, your actions earned you that vote.  Too bad the
significance is lost on you.

>>> Tholen claimed that someone named "Wayne Strang" (who was not even
>>> nominated)

>> Incorrect.  Consult deja.com for proof.

> Dave, the ballot has been reposted repeatedly.

The result showing Wayne Strang's election was reposted.

> "Wayne Strang" (whoever that is) was not on it.

Incorrect.

> Now, it is possible that a nomination was made,

More than just possible.  One was indeed made.

> but the rules require a second, and it appears that no second was made --
> thus, he was not properly nominated under the rules.

Then how did he manage to win?

>>> won the election and complained that a vote cast by some unnamed person
>>> allegedly for me was not counted.

>> You want actual names, Jason?

> Provide it, if you think you can.

I said "names", Jason, not "name", thus your use of "it" is
inappropriate.

>> Check the people who criticized you for
>> your "campaigning" in sci.astro.

> Are you alleging that these alleged people voted for me, Dave?

The people are not alleged, Jason.  You quickly left sci.astro after
you were criticized multiple times.  Consult deja.com if you can't
remember their names.

>> As for the person who contacted me
>> privately to say that he voted for you, just what do you think the
>> word "privately" means?

> I imagine that it means that this alleged person allegedly sent you
> an email.

It means that I won't betray a confidence, Jason.

>>> Tholen conveniently disregarded the fact that I was not nominated in
>>> making this complaint.

>> Doesn't change the fact that you received at least one vote, and quite
>> possibly more, perhaps even the most.

> And perhaps you were on the grassy knoll in Dallas in 1963, Dave.

Non sequitur.

>>> The second KOTM title that Dave won

>> I haven't won any, Jason.

> Incorrect.

Still trying to foist your unofficial, "tongue-in-cheek", tampered
results on the unsuspecting reader, eh Jason?

>>> 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.

>> Incorrect.  You and Edwin both had thousands of votes that disappeared.

> ..and the technical problems with the polling were straightened out
> by the people who run that site.

Evidence, please.

>> And from Eric Bennett:
>>
>> ] The other poll (csma KOTM) was not well protected against vote fraud.  I

>> ] had an amusing evening playing with their vote counting system to see if
I
>> ] could get around their belatedly instituted safeguards (which I did...

> ..and Eric voted for Nathan A. Hughes, not for you, Dave.

Irrelevant, Jason.  It demonstrates that the poll was not protected
against fraud.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                     14-Oct-99 11:22:21
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 10:29:21
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: [e-mail]

Roberto Alsina writes:

> I wrote:

>> Jason S. wrote:

>>> Tholen was *twice* nominated for Usenet Kook of the Month -- the
>>> first time by Roberto Alsina back in 1997,

>> Alsina is the person who accused me of posting an average of 134
>> articles every day, which was ludicrous.  When he pointed to his
>> alleged evidence, it became obvious that he didn't even bother to
>> check the range of dates.  Even then, he continued to insist that
>> he was right, until others started getting on his case.  How
>> ironic that he nominated me rather than himself.

> Well, Dave, that should show you that you are not universally seen
> as the beacon of pure reason and thought you apparently think you are.

Illogical, given that the above historical account doesn't do
anything to contradict any assumption about what people see.

> BTW: you were nominated for being stupid enough to argue with Eliza.

Incorrect.  I wasn't stupid enough to argue with Eliza.  I was
responding to a real person who was inserting responses generated
by an Eliza program.  I realized that.  Others realized that I
realized that.  You did not.  How ironic that you should mention
being "stupid enough".  Exactly how do you explain your math error
and the long delay in admitting to it?

> Anyway, you still haven't groen out of this?

Still having those reading comprehension problems, Roberto?  Check
the thread more carefully again.  I didn't bring you up.  Jason S.
did.

> Man, are you a grudgy old fellow!

You must be referring to Jason S., given that he's the one who brought
you up.

> PS: they weren't 134 a day,

Then why did you claim there were, and why did you persist with your
claim, even after your error was clearly pointed out?

> but they sure felt like it.

That wasn't your argument at the time.  You insisted on actual
numbers back then, not feelings.

> PPS: preemptive Tholen argument response: they felt like that to me,

Irrelevant, given that you didn't refer to feelings back then, but
instead actual numbers.

> that's subjective, personal opinion,

The numbers you referred to are not.

> you have no way of proving I didn't feel that way,

I do have a way of proving your reference to actual numbers.

> so save it for the winter.

I'll deal with you whenever you choose to respond, Roberto.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                     14-Oct-99 11:48:05
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 10:29:21
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: [e-mail]

Marty writes:

> David H. McCoy wrote:

>> These statements do nothing to address your flawed conclusion.

> Thanks professor Tholen.

You're responding to David McCoy, not me.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               14-Oct-99 09:04:04
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 14:36:08
Subj: Re: No Future

From: Cameron <[e-mail]>


Joseph wrote:

> R Thomas wrote:
>
> > In stardock.os2 Brad Wardell wrote:
> > > But for those of us who have stayed with OS/2 to some extent in the
hopes
> > > that it had a future have little reason to stay.  Professionally
speaking,
> > >writing code for OS/2 is not much different than learning how to write
code
> > >for CP/M.  There's no future.
> > >
> > > Brad Wardell
> > > Product Manager: Object Desktop & The Corporate Machine
>
> Embedded systems use Z80 and CPM.


Support a  OS/2 guest operating system under VMWARE.  www.vmware.com.  Linux +
Vmware + OS/2  is a future for OS/2 in the new world.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                14-Oct-99 13:18:20
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 14:36:08
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: [e-mail] (David Frank)

In article <[e-mail]>, Tim Timmins
<[e-mail]>
writes:

>
>This is rubbish. They already mimicked W95 in the Warp 4 initial desktop
>layout.
>


It makes no nevermind one way or the other,
desktop GUI features are NOT the reason why OS/2 is
incompatible with Win9x/NT,
and why OS/2 now commands a minuscule 0.2% of desktops...

After all, the present NT4 GUI  doesnt inhibit it from executing
a Win32 application created on a Win9x system..

Dave


>There is a reason why they abandoned Warp preinstalls on consumer machines.
>Please remember that they were the LAST to license W95 preloads.
>


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               14-Oct-99 09:36:01
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 14:36:08
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Cameron <[e-mail]>


[e-mail] wrote:

> In <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-nPpU9vdPhxnZ@localhost>, jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel
Jansens) writes:
> |On Fri, 8 Oct 1999 21:42:14, Cameron <[e-mail]> 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
>
> KDE is OK; but, like most of Linux, very immature.
>
> Bottom line, Linux doesn't even have _one_ decent editor - 15 year old
> Kedit still beats 'em all!
>
> Guido

  How do you measure immature?
  How do you measure very immature?


To say that Linux does not have a decent editor causes me to wonder what your
level of
experience with Linux is.  Certainly if there is an over abundance of anything
in the Unix/Linux
world it is editors.  If you are referring to word processors try Applixware.
It has a rock
solid word processor. Try Wordperfect or  Star Office.

Sometimes users refer to the immaturity of Linux because they are unfamiliar
with the open
source movement and how things like device drivers are distributed and
installed.  Many users
are unfamiliar with the whole concept of  'make'. The Linux environment is
very mature for those
that understand the Unix/Linux mode of software distribution and installation.
 For users that
have grown accustomed to the 'Setup.exe' program or the 'Install.exe' program
the immaturity
statement is understandable.

That 'Setup.exe' and 'Install.exe'  work so nice because the environment they
are used in is
closed and predictable, and constrained.  Unix/Linux runs on all kinds of
hardware for all
kinds of vendors.  The user has the ultimate flexibility to configure a system
that is tailored
to their specific needs and hardware. This model is probably difficult and on
the surface
appears 'immature' to the users that are used to Plug N Play, 'Setup.exe' and
'Install.exe'.

'Environment X is immature '  usually means 'I don't know how to do Y in
environment X therefore
environment X has a long way to go.  From a user's point of view it is
understandable.  From a
software developer or software engineer's point of view it is unacceptable.

Before you bash Linux, take the time to learn the Unix/Linux software
distribution and
installation model. Visit WWW.linux.org, or some other basic Linux websites.

Linux is probably the only hope for OS/2.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               14-Oct-99 09:44:29
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 14:36:08
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Cameron <[e-mail]>


rj friedman wrote:

> On Sun, 10 Oct 1999 17:11:06, [e-mail] wrote:
>
> ε|I've played around with KDE. I found it looked nice, but was a system
> ε|hog and really more on par with the Windows desktop (which it tries to
> ε|mimick) than the WPS environment. I'm now using Xfce as my window
> ε|manager in Linux (is much nicer towards RAM), but I'm still in OS/2
> ε|most of the time.
> ε|
> ε|GNOME is even worse than KDE.
>
> εKDE is OK; but, like most of Linux, very immature.
> »
> εBottom line, Linux doesn't even have _one_ decent editor - 15 year old
> εKedit still beats 'em all!
>
> I've been playing around with Linux off and on for better
> than a year now. Just about two weeks ago I installed the
> Mandrake version (which is KDE on Red Hat, pretty much).
> It's ok - I can't really fault it all that much, but, just
> like all the other times in the past, there is NOTHING there
> that I would want to give up OS/2 for. And KDE - while
> pretty looking enough - doesn't come within a mile of the
> WPS.
>
> ________________________________________________________
>
> [RJ]                 OS/2 - Live it, or live with it.
> rj friedman          Team ABW
> Taipei, Taiwan       [e-mail]
>
> To send email - remove the `yyy'
> ________________________________________________________

The question is how will WPS look on IA-64?  How will you be able to access
SOM in an environment (IA-64) that does not have video-adapters for OS/2.
What will WPS look like on a 50 gig hard drive, if OS/2 doesn't recognize
50 gig drives.  What about new adapter buses that will inevitably be created
for IA-64 that OS/2 will not support.

In order for WPS  to be miles ahead of the competition it has to be able to
run on the same systems that the competion runs on.  Linux will run on
64-bit,  Linux will run on 128-bit.  Linux will run on 256-bit machines.
This is true because Linux is open source and we will be able to port it
when the new machines become available.  WPS is not open source it is
binary. Binary code only lives as long as the processor is was defined for
lives.  WPS is tied to 32-bit intel machines.   Sorry 32-bit intel machines
are not the future of computing.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               14-Oct-99 09:55:06
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 14:36:08
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Cameron <[e-mail]>


rj friedman wrote:

> On Tue, 12 Oct 1999 23:30:28, Cameron Hughes
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> εThe problem is not where OS/2 is at this exact moment.  The problem
> εis where it will be when IA-64 is released...
>
> IA-64 is for huge server farm type computers. Anyone who
> thinks that an IA-64 is going to be useful on the desktop
> anytime in our lifetimes has no idea as to what the IA-64 is
> about.
>
> εHow will it compare after
> εCorel Corp has put some finishing touches on K...
>
> We'll just have to wait and see what Corel brings to the
> table at the time and make an evaluation on real product,
> not on marketing hype. In the meantime, the sky is not
> falling, and there is no logical reason to panic and run and
> tell the king.
>
> εAfter Borland (Inprise)
> εhas finished porting its latest development suite to Linux...
>
> How does Borland (Inprise) porting its latest development
> suite to Linux have the slightest effect on my ability to
> earn my living as a small business user with OS/2?
>
> εHow does
> εOS/2 look when a developer is trying to load it on one of those
> εsnazzy HP Pavillions that SIS530, SIS630...
>
> How does one of those snazzy HP Pavillions that SIS530,
> SIS630 (whatever you meant to say by that), have the
> slightest effect on my ability to earn my living as a small
> business user with OS/2?
>
> εHow does OS/2 look when one
> εis trying to run the latest Object Oriented Development Tools i.e. UML
> εtools?
>
> From the standpoint of the small business user, it looks
> just beautiful.
>
> εFor those who don't do state of the art development or who
> εcome from a user's perspective, OS/2 has about 3 years of usefulness...
>
> Says you. Even so, a lot of changes are going to be coming
> down over the next three years - I imagine that the state of
> end user computing will by quite a bit beyond what most
> people can even imagine, today. In the meantime, the sky is
> not falling, and there is no logical reason to panic and run
> and tell the king.
>
> εFor those who require the latest RAD, Case, latest hardware, OS/2
> εis not an option.
>
> So, let them use whatever it is they think they need.

  I understand your point. I agree with it in many ways.  However, 32-bit
computing was trumpeted as server computing when it was first introduced.
Now you would be hard pressed to buy a brand new 386, or 486.

Think about it we have Ma and Pa Kettle buying 400 mhz Pentium machines
today from Best buy.  The Hubble Space Telescope doesn't not have a Pentium
class processor. Therefore if you think that  IA-64 will not be the basic
desktop in about 2-3 years, just look back  on what  constituted  'desktop'
and 'server'  back in the days of the 8086, and 8088.

The Ostrich approach although comfortable will ultimately cause your small
business problems.  Since you have a small business you have be even more
careful about how you deploy your technology.  Large businesses can  F*ck
multiple times and they have the capital to recover.  Small business can't
afford to make to many mistakes.  If you have based your business and its
survivability around OS/2, you have some longevity problems.  That is of
course unless you have access to OS/2 source code, and access to the skill
required to update and maintain it for new hardware platforms.

I'm sorry this is the case. But it is.  OS/2 is one of my favorite
environments. But due to IBM inaction it is becoming more obsolete every
day.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               14-Oct-99 10:03:12
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 14:36:08
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Cameron <[e-mail]>


Marty wrote:

> Cameron Hughes wrote:
> >
> > The problem is not where OS/2 is at this exact moment.  The problem
> > is where it will be when IA-64 is released. How will it compare after
> > Corel Corp has put some finishing touches on K.  After Borland (Inprise)
> > has finished porting its latest development suite to Linux.  How does
> > OS/2 look when a developer is trying to load it on one of those
> > snazzy HP Pavillions that SIS530, SIS630.  How does OS/2 look when one
> > is trying to run the latest Object Oriented Development Tools i.e. UML
> > tools?  For those who don't do state of the art development or who
> > come from a user's perspective, OS/2 has about 3 years of usefulness.
> > For those who require the latest RAD, Case, latest hardware, OS/2
> > is not an option.
>
> Just a side point here.  I have been employed by 3 Fortune 500 companies
> as a software engineer (SIAC (who produces the software that runs the
> New York Stock Exchange), Northern Telecom, and IBM), and I have yet to
> encounter any CASE tools, UML tools, or any such thing.  Has anyone seen
> these items actually deployed in industry anywhere?  From my experience,
> these such tools are deployed in an academic environment only.  I'm
> curious if others have seen otherwise.
>
> - Marty


Marty  this is not a crticism. It's only a statement.  Its very hard to
generalize from 3 fortune 500 companies to the entire software develop
community world wide.  If you continue to move around you will encounter
software development efforts that use case tools, RAD, artificial intelligence
and the rest of those fancy dancy concepts.  Actually the academic world tends
not to deploy the latest and greatest software development technology.
Although they introduce the concepts to the commercial sector they are often
the last to deploy their own research.

I'm sure you realize that like other kinds of engineering, software
engineering can be found on a continuum.  It moves from the basic paper and
pencil approach on the low end to smart agent architecture recommendations on
the high end.  Good software engineering can be done across the entire
continuum.



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

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

From: [e-mail]                                  14-Oct-99 09:56:05
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 14:36:08
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: "Joe Malloy" <[e-mail]>

Something sorta like a <[e-mail]> tholened:

> > None of this changes the fact that you were nominated in 1997.
>
> It does demonstrate that person responsible did not have his facts
> straight and wasn't interested in getting them straight.  Rather
> coincidentally, you also relied on false information in the nomination
> that you prepared.

The facts were straight enough and you should acknowledge provable facts,
viz., you were duly elected Kook Of The Month.

Congratulations, Kook!


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               14-Oct-99 10:18:16
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 14:36:09
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Cameron <[e-mail]>


John Hong wrote:

> Cameron Hughes ([e-mail]) wrote:
>
> : With Vmware under Linux you can have all the Windows 32bit/16bit and Dos
> : that you want.
>
>         At $299 a pop.
>
> : You don't have to choose between Linux and Windoze.  When I say
> : superior, I mean that it gives you everything that OS/2 gives you and
> : more. Since VMWARE can run Win2000 and below and Linux
> : runs VMWARE you can bring the entire Windows world into a Xwindows
> : window. This cannot be done with OS/2.
>
>         Still, at $299 a pop.
>
> : Linux has more Native applications than does OS/2.  I realize from a
> : user's perspective that Linux is a bit rough (Corel and IBM are fixing
> : that right now!) but from a programmers or software engineer's
> : perspective Linux rules.
>
>         I'm curious, Camaron...why bother?  Do you really think most of
> us haven't *already* tried Linux or BeOS or something else?  I looked
> into Linux back in 1998, and it wasn't ready for me then.  I tried it again
> this year, and it's still no go.
>         In a few months time, you probably won't care anymore since the
> "Golly gee everyone, look what I found" attitude will be long gone.  It's
> been out of my system since late 1998.  The sad thing is, I'm still
> *waiting* on it.  Sigh.

  John I understand your frustration.  Don't forget I am and have been a avid
OS/2 user  since OS2 1.3.  Also  I started evaluating, using, and contributing
to Linux in 1992 and have participated in the Linux movement from that time.
Linux is not simply a look what I found for me.  My recent position on OS/2
obsolescence is simply a matter of logic and arithmetic.  IA-64 or some other
64 bit technology is in the immediate future of computing.  In the same
fashion
that 8086's and 8088s are not on the shelves at your local appliance or
computer store the 386, 486, pentium 90,  are effectively antiquated.

I don't like it.  But that's the way it is.  Unless IBM makes OS/2 open
source,  sells to some other company, or ports it to IA-64, it will be
extremely difficult to even load it  on a new system in 3 years.  Its a
mathmatical thing.  The new bus architectures, the new video adapter
technologies, the new storage device technology will not be written for OS/2.
Without open source we cannot maintain OS/2 indefinitely.  Linux running OS/2
as a guest operating system under VMware is at least a legitimate future for
OS/2.  Since Linux is open source it will be ported to 64-bit, 128-bit,
256-bit
computing.  OS/2 is not open source.  Currently it is not a cash cow for IBM
and therefore how much R&D is going into porting OS/2 to any new hardware
platforms?

You ask the question why bother?   I am a computer scientist and software
engineer I have a ethical responsibility to my work not to become obsolete. My
colleagues told me not to bother with OS/2 in the first place since it was
proprietary.  I wish I had taken their advice.  I have a lot of intellectual
investment in OS/2 but I simply cannot afford to put any more stock in it.  I
believe it was Kenny Rogers who sung

                  'You've got to know when to hold em, and know when to fold
em'

My friend, at least for me OS/2 has served its purpose, and its time to move
on.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               14-Oct-99 10:25:17
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 14:36:09
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Cameron <[e-mail]>


Karel Jansens wrote:

> On Sun, 10 Oct 1999 16:37:20, Hobbyist <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > Remember that your primary reason for using an OS is to run apps in a
> > stable, reliable, robust environment. What's with the obsession with the
> > WPS vs Linux window managers vs Windows explorer?
> >
> This is actually a bit hard to explain to a Windows user. You see, we
> OS/2 users have become accustomed to stability and robustness, so
> we're looking at secundary features like ease of use. In that area,
> the WPS is aeons ahead of the rest. (those who consider the WPS
> unstable really should look at the kind of beating it will take before
> it will start complaining)
>
> Linux users of course know about stability, but they have yet a long
> way to go in the field of usability.
>
> Windows (pick any flavour of the day) really has neither, but it's
> users *think* it has everything. This will one day in the future
> become the archetypal example of twentieth century mass-psychosis.
> Don't you feel proud you're part of history already?
>
> [snip]
>
> Karel Jansens
> jansens_at_ibm_dot_net
>
> |---------------------------------------------------|
> | Windows NT has detected that there were no errors |
> | for the past 10 minutes. The system will now try  |
> | to restart or crash. Click the OK button to       |
> | continue.                                         |
> |                      < Ok >                       |
> |---------------------------------------------------|
>
> (sigline nicked from Jayan M on comp.os.linux.misc)

  Open source operating systems are the future of computing.  Unless OS/2 is
made open source,  it has a very, very, very short future.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               14-Oct-99 10:27:17
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 14:36:09
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Cameron <[e-mail]>


Mike Trettel wrote:

> On Sun, 10 Oct 1999 14:53:37 -0500, Hobbyist <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >On comp.os.os2.advocacy, jansens_at_ibm_dot_net posted :
>
> >
> >The WPS is not aeons ahead. That's a backward statement. Please remember
> >that while the OS/2 WPS is being neglected by IBM, all the other OS's
> >user interfaces have not been and have been being developed.
>
> Not looking for a fight here, but exactly what enhancements have been
> done by Microsoft to the Windows GUI outside of the "integration" with
> IE5?  The Windows desktop looks pretty stagnant to me-the only way MS
> seems to "improve" (sarcasm, of course) it is when their monopoly is
> threatened.  Also, simply because the WPS is not being further
> developed does not equate to "no longer advanced".  I can just as
> easily say that the WPS was so far ahead in the first place that MS
> still hasn't come close to the feature set of the WPS.  Of course, this
> is no longer important to MS with the removal of OS/2 as a realistic
> competitor.
>
> If you really want to see true development in user interfaces one
> should look at the KDE and Gnome projects.  Both started off with
> essentially *nothing*, and in two years time have come up quite usable
> interfaces that are still in the exponential stage of development.
>
> --
> ===========
> 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.


Ditto,  Look at the enlightenment window manager under X Windows.  Awesome.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                    14-Oct-99 16:32:09
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 14:36:09
Subj: Re: McCoy Digest

From: Gerben Bergman <[e-mail]>

I am jansens_at_ibm_dot_net of Borg. You will be assimilated.

> |---------------------------------------------------|
> |                  NT boot options                  |
> |                                                   |
> |               Please choose from list             |
> |                                                   |
> |       <crash>         <OS/2>        <linux>       |
> |---------------------------------------------------|

Now isn't that a cute signature. Have you ever tried NT, Karel?

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          14-Oct-99 10:35:02
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 14:36:09
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

David Frank wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, Tim Timmins
<[e-mail]>
> writes:
>
> >
> >This is rubbish. They already mimicked W95 in the Warp 4 initial desktop
> >layout.
> >
>
> It makes no nevermind one way or the other,
> desktop GUI features are NOT the reason why OS/2 is
> incompatible with Win9x/NT,
> and why OS/2 now commands a minuscule 0.2% of desktops...
>
> After all, the present NT4 GUI  doesnt inhibit it from executing
> a Win32 application created on a Win9x system..

Win9x and NT are not cut from the same cloth.  They are two
different architectures.  NT provides some backwards compatibility
for older programs.  Furthermore, the Win32 specifications have at
least one major dichotomy:  if a Win 32 executable requires a VxD
driver, then it will not execute on NT.

>
> Dave
>
> >There is a reason why they abandoned Warp preinstalls on consumer machines.
> >Please remember that they were the LAST to license W95 preloads.

There was a reason for that.  Microsoft withheld the Win 95 license until the
day
of Win 95's release.  Why?  MS was stipulating that IBM stop preloads of OS/2
as a precondition for receiving the Win 95 preload agreement.  IBM would not
cave on that point.

Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                14-Oct-99 15:13:25
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 14:36:09
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: [e-mail] (rj friedman)

On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 03:26:30, [e-mail] (Jim Burke)
wrote:

εIf you use os/2 for business, what do you use for accounting?

Lotus 123


εSeems to be some sort of a gap in the market here.

Not that I've noticied.


εAt least, I haven't been able to find anything in this area.

What kind of program are you looking for (specifically
speaking)?



________________________________________________________

[RJ]                 OS/2 - Live it, or live with it.
rj friedman          Team ABW
Taipei, Taiwan       [e-mail]

To send email - remove the `yyy'
________________________________________________________

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                14-Oct-99 15:16:29
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 14:36:09
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: [e-mail] (rj friedman)

On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 16:55:12, Cameron <[e-mail]>
wrote:

ε  I understand your point. I agree with it in many ways.  However, 32-bit
εcomputing was trumpeted as server computing when it was first introduced.
εNow you would be hard pressed to buy a brand new 386, or 486.

There was a blurb in The Register citing an Intel assessment
that it would be 10 years before 64 bit computing would make
any kind of impact on the desktop. 10 years from now I don't
expect that any of us will be doing the kind of desktop
computing that we do today - so basically the whole concept
is moot as far as I'm concerned.




________________________________________________________

[RJ]                 OS/2 - Live it, or live with it.
rj friedman          Team ABW
Taipei, Taiwan       [e-mail]

To send email - remove the `yyy'
________________________________________________________

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             14-Oct-99 15:24:27
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 14:36:09
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]>, Hobbyist <[e-mail]>
writes:
|On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :
|
|| Hobbyist wrote:
|| >
|| > Now this is where windows comes in. OS/2 is left in a cloud of smoke
|| > where application support is concerned. There's always better on the
|| > windows side. This OS/2 apps is better than any other OS's anthem is as
|| > outdated as hell.
||
|| That's a remarkably close-minded and completely unsupportable statement.
|
|How so?
|
|| > > OS/2 users aren't exactly unknowledgeble people who don't try out
|| > > alternatives.
|| >
|| > <rant> They are however largely closed minded and stubbornly loyal to
|| > their obsolete cause. </end rant> That's a generalisation of course.
||
|| Remove obsolete and now you have a "generalization" of the windoze
|| advocate.  Is it a correct one?
|
|Agreed. At least they aren't stubbornly loyal to an obsolete cause.;-)
|
|Personally, I advocate the best OS for whatever purpose. I'm not a
|windows advocate per se though NT happens to work best for me.
|--
|-=Ali=-

With MS products, obsolete is what you get the day you take delivery.

How many upgrades have you been forced through for your 'up-to-date'
OS? As a developer, MS's dizzying replacement, renaming and repositioning
of their products is a major pain.

Guido

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               14-Oct-99 15:25:01
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 14:36:09
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: Roberto Alsina <[e-mail]>

In article <7u4ee2$8v6$[e-mail]>,
  [e-mail] wrote:
> Roberto Alsina writes:
>
> > I wrote:
>
> >> Jason S. wrote:
>
> >>> Tholen was *twice* nominated for Usenet Kook of the Month -- the
> >>> first time by Roberto Alsina back in 1997,
>
> >> Alsina is the person who accused me of posting an average of 134
> >> articles every day, which was ludicrous.  When he pointed to his
> >> alleged evidence, it became obvious that he didn't even bother to
> >> check the range of dates.  Even then, he continued to insist that
> >> he was right, until others started getting on his case.  How
> >> ironic that he nominated me rather than himself.
>
> > Well, Dave, that should show you that you are not universally seen
> > as the beacon of pure reason and thought you apparently think you
are.
>
> Illogical, given that the above historical account doesn't do
> anything to contradict any assumption about what people see.

As long as you claim I am not people, what you just said may make sense.

> > BTW: you were nominated for being stupid enough to argue with Eliza.
>
> Incorrect.  I wasn't stupid enough to argue with Eliza.  I was
> responding to a real person who was inserting responses generated
> by an Eliza program.  I realized that.  Others realized that I
> realized that.  You did not.  How ironic that you should mention
> being "stupid enough".  Exactly how do you explain your math error
> and the long delay in admitting to it?

I need not explain anything to you. That you are still pissed about it
2 years after the fact shows you are indeed a grudgy old fellow, and
that you have indeed not grown out of it.

> > Anyway, you still haven't groen out of this?
>
> Still having those reading comprehension problems, Roberto?  Check
> the thread more carefully again.  I didn't bring you up.  Jason S.
> did.

But you did bring up that specific incident, didn't you Dave?
Of course your response needs not have any connection to what you
are replying to, as per your usual "discussion" methodology.

> > Man, are you a grudgy old fellow!
>
> You must be referring to Jason S., given that he's the one who brought
> you up.

No, I meant you, who still have a grudge about that ancient story.

> > PS: they weren't 134 a day,
>
> Then why did you claim there were,

Because I was wrong, Dave, just as I admitted years ago.

> and why did you persist with your
> claim, even after your error was clearly pointed out?

For the reasons I gave in 1997.

> > but they sure felt like it.
>
> That wasn't your argument at the time.  You insisted on actual
> numbers back then, not feelings.

It is my argument of today. You obviously still live in 1997.

> > PPS: preemptive Tholen argument response: they felt like that to me,
>
> Irrelevant, given that you didn't refer to feelings back then, but
> instead actual numbers.

In case you haven't noticed, the date of this thread is 1999.
I expected a response about the events of this thread.
What are you, some sort of librarian of ancient anger?

> > that's subjective, personal opinion,
>
> The numbers you referred to are not.

Who's talking about that?

> > you have no way of proving I didn't feel that way,
>
> I do have a way of proving your reference to actual numbers.

And who's talking about that?

> > so save it for the winter.
>
> I'll deal with you whenever you choose to respond, Roberto.

I'll deal with you whenever I have no need to be useful to society.

--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)


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: [e-mail]                             14-Oct-99 15:39:02
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 14:36:09
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]>, David H. McCoy
<[e-mail]> writes:
|In article <uNcM3.7926$[e-mail]>,
|[e-mail] says...
||
||Hobbyist <[e-mail]> wrote in message
||news:[e-mail]...
||| On comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy, [e-mail] posted :
|||
||| > You miss the point (hobbyists often do): OS/2 has numerous fixpacks for
||| > two major reasons:
||| >
||| > 1) IBM does not force OS/2 users thru the annual upgrade blood-letting
|||
||| What annual upgrade blood-letting? Please stop exaggerating. When was
||| NT4 released. Is it's next major upgrade yet released.
||
||[snip]
||
||I find Guido's argument interesting.  While most people accuse NT of falling
||behind, he is exaggerating the upgrade path of Windows.  It can't be both
||ways.
||
||-B
||
||
||
|
|It can be here where revisionism and distortion are tools of the OS/2
advocacy
|trade.
|
|David H. McCoy

Revisionism and distortion?

Oh yeah, like people who post from an alter-ego omnipotent userid?
Or maybe, people who 'fake' their domain names?

Ain't cooa grand?

regards,

Guido

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               14-Oct-99 15:30:07
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 14:36:09
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: Roberto Alsina <[e-mail]>

In article <7u4dfq$89c$[e-mail]>,
  [e-mail] wrote:
> Jason S. writes:
>
> >>> Tholen was *twice* nominated for Usenet Kook of the Month -- the
first
> >>> time by Roberto Alsina back in 1997,
>
> >> Alsina is the person who accused me of posting an average of 134
articles
> >> every day, which was ludicrous.  When he pointed to his alleged
evidence,
> >> it became obvious that he didn't even bother to check the range of
dates.
> >> Even then, he continued to insist that he was right, until others
started
> >> getting on his case.  How ironic that he nominated me rather than
himself.
>
> > None of this changes the fact that you were nominated in 1997.
>
> It does demonstrate that person responsible did not have his facts
> straight and wasn't interested in getting them straight.  Rather
> coincidentally, you also relied on false information in the nomination
> that you prepared.

Your lack of logic is astounding. You were not nominated because of
the fact you present, but because of another. That I was wrong in
A doesn't prove I was wrong in B, much less that you are not a kook,
which everyone who has read your drivel already knows you are.

The award would have been just a cherry on the cake, a "official"
acknowledgement of your nuttiness. Fear not, you're still a kook
in my heart.

--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)


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: [e-mail]                             14-Oct-99 15:58:11
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 14:36:09
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (David
Frank) writes:
|In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
|
||
||In the last 6-7 yrs, the IBM PC Co has lost billions for IBM by pursuing
||a 'Microsoft' first strategy - their demise is overdue.
||
|
|At the time MS released what turned out to be the warp-killer OS.
|that is... Win95  in aug 95,
|IBM was offering OS/2 pre-loads and was a little tardy offering Win95
|pre-load option to buyers, but immediately IBM's win95 sales so
|swamped OS/2 buyer preload sales, that by '97? IBM had dropped
|offering  warp pre-loaded..
|
|It seems you are suggesting IBM PC company should have gone
|down the drain with OS/2 rather than give buyers what they wanted?
|
|Dave

Get serious. IBM PC Company fought OS/2 pre-load tooth & nail after their
poor experience with 2.1. Fact is, they were trying to use Gateway's
model of 'parts du-jour' (read cheap) and it just wasn't working.

BTW if PC Co's strategy was "give buyers what they wanted", how did
they lose those $$ billions? Sorry if you (especially if you worked there)
don't like it; but, PC Co did themselves in. Big Louie has given them
far more rope than was rolled out for OS/2; and, PC Co climbed up the
tree and hung themselves. You can hardly blame Lou for wanting to cut
down the swinging corpse. Say what you like; but, OS/2 makes money.

So, OS/2 has out lived another of its major detractors.

Where do you want to go today,

Guido

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             14-Oct-99 16:09:29
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 16:31:18
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: [e-mail]

Most likely it means 'fixed' as in 'changed, no longer applies'.  After
all, something like 70% of W2K is new code, eh?  I'm sure we won't find
any bugs in any of that, now that Balmer is their quality champion.
How preposterous, the man weasled out of eating that floppy...

;) Guido

In <[e-mail]>, Tim Timmins <[e-mail]>
writes:
|I guess you mean 'fixed' as in fixed, yeah right.
|
|Regards,
|Tim
|
|Hobbyist wrote:
|
|| On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Marty posted :
||
|| > Tim Timmins wrote:
|| > >
|| > > This is rubbish. They already mimicked W95 in the Warp 4 initial
desktop layout.
|| >
|| > Only they did it right.  The Start menu is one of the most revolting
|| > features IMHO of the Win9x shell.    It's a fairy-land view of what's on
|| > your computer.  It could be completely out of date and inaccurate.  The
|| > pop-up menu bar in Warp 4's Warpcenter is just a menu of all of the
|| > objects on your desktop.  Always up-to-date, never a broken link.
||
|| There's definitely some truth to what you say there. The shortcuts in
|| win9x/NT4 aren't updated automatically to reflect any movements of the
|| target executable if you so choose to move it.
||
|| If, however double click on the broken shortcut, a search automatically
|| starts for the executable and an offer is made to update it.
||
|| Cranky indeed but fixed in win2K.
|



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

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

From: [e-mail]                                   14-Oct-99 15:47:18
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 16:31:18
Subj: FP for Warp 3.0

From: [e-mail] (Charles M Lewis)

What is the current FPO for Warp 3 and where I can get it?

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             14-Oct-99 16:34:15
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 16:31:18
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: [e-mail]

In article <jToFOOvT2yOC7=[e-mail]>,
  alliem@_nospam_ wtjam.net wrote:
> On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Tim Timmins posted :
>
> > Not just the start menu can be out of date. The whole shortcuts
> > implementation can point to broken links. Why MS forced this into
> > NT is beyond me. Just to get away from Presentation Manager ?
>
> This doesn't occur in a sensible administered system.

But, with all due respect, what does "sensibly administered" really
mean? In the context of the currect discussion, it seems to me that it
can only mean "kow-towing to the shortcomings of the interface's
implementation."

Granted, we all kow-tow to whichever interface/environment/OS we decide
to use, at least on some level, and at least to a degree.  I guess I
just have a hard time with euphamisms.


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: alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net                          14-Oct-99 12:55:11
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 16:31:18
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: Hobbyist <alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, [e-mail] posted :

> > > Not just the start menu can be out of date. The whole shortcuts
> > > implementation can point to broken links. Why MS forced this into
> > > NT is beyond me. Just to get away from Presentation Manager ?
> >
> > This doesn't occur in a sensible administered system.
>
> But, with all due respect, what does "sensibly administered" really
> mean? In the context of the currect discussion, it seems to me that it
> can only mean "kow-towing to the shortcomings of the interface's
> implementation."

Yes?

> Granted, we all kow-tow to whichever interface/environment/OS we decide
> to use, at least on some level, and at least to a degree.  I guess I
> just have a hard time with euphamisms.

Thank you very much sir. That's exactly the point behind my comment.

There are quite a few things about the Windows explorer that is nagging
that I *cannot* fix or make better. Now those unchangeable or not
remediable shortcomings are things to really whine about. Broken
shortcut links in Windows Explorer are rather uncommon (users generally
don't go moving their program executables from where they were
originally installed) and easily fixable if they do occur.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net                          14-Oct-99 12:57:10
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 16:31:18
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: Hobbyist <alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, [e-mail] posted :

> Most likely it means 'fixed' as in 'changed, no longer applies'.  After
> all, something like 70% of W2K is new code, eh?  I'm sure we won't find
> any bugs in any of that, now that Balmer is their quality champion.
> How preposterous, the man weasled out of eating that floppy...

Jesus man, I'm only speaking about the fixing of the problem with broken
shortcut links in explorer. I'm not speaking about win2k being perfect
in general. Sheesh.

You are being so half-cocked.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                          14-Oct-99 18:19:23
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 16:31:18
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>>Jason S.
>>This second nomination
>>came in the wake of Tholen's notorious "kook and a queer" comment

>Ian Tholen
>Actually, that's the wake of your notorious attempts to "get a rise" out
>of me.  Put the onus where it belongs, Jason:  on you, not me.

Typical bigot. Tholen is blaming Jason for the fact that Tholen is a
homophobe who equates "queers" (as he calls them) to kooks. (Indeed,
he's such a deluded homophobe that he actually accused a straight guy
of being a queer. That's a hallmark of a juvenile mind. But then, we
all know by now that Tholen is *not* an intelligent person. He lacks
even minimal common sense as is readily apparent to anyone who reads
his bigotted tripe)

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          14-Oct-99 18:24:11
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 20:03:12
Subj: Re: McCoy Digest

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>Gerben Bergman <[e-mail]>

>I am jansens_at_ibm_dot_net of Borg. You will be assimilated.
>
>> |---------------------------------------------------|
>> |                  NT boot options                  |
>> |                                                   |
>> |               Please choose from list             |
>> |                                                   |
>> |       <crash>         <OS/2>        <linux>       |
>> |---------------------------------------------------|
>
>Now isn't that a cute signature. Have you ever tried NT, Karel?

I'm sure that his "experience" with it is on a par with his "buddy"
Tholen's "experience" with NT -- woefully inadequate to have anything
but the obviously naive, uninformed "opinions" (typically based upon
heresay) that people like Karel and Tholen routinely spout.

And that's why he often comes off as seeming so naive and misguided

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          14-Oct-99 18:31:07
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 20:03:12
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>Bennie Nelson
>the Win32 specifications have at
>least one major dichotomy:  if a Win 32 executable requires a VxD
>driver, then it will not execute on NT.

Huh?? What Win32 executables require a VxD driver? You don't link
Win32 apps with drivers. you know. It's not like a DLL.

Oh christ, I'm talking programming issues with a typical OS/2 enduser.
It's hopeless, I know. They *never* learn any of this stuff. They just
spout half-baked nonsense based upon other uninformed hearsay.

>MS was stipulating that IBM stop preloads of OS/2
>as a precondition for receiving the Win 95 preload agreement.  IBM would not
>cave on that point.

No, what *really* happened was that IBM withheld payment for the
Windows 95 licenses until the last minute. IBM wasn't sure that it was
going to license Win95 until after IBM saw that a number of its
competitors had already signed up for it. It was only then that IBM
agreed to MS's asking price

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

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            14-Oct-99 18:32:07
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 20:03:12
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 17:25:34, Cameron <[e-mail]> wrote:

>
>   Open source operating systems are the future of computing.  Unless OS/2 is
> made open source,  it has a very, very, very short future.
>
You're sort of preaching to the pope here.
Unfortunately, the chances of OS/2 ever getting open source are very
dim.
Bummer.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net

|---------------------------------------------------|
|                  NT boot options                  |
|                                                   |
|               Please choose from list             |
|                                                   |
|       <crash>         <OS/2>        <linux>       |
|---------------------------------------------------|

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

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            14-Oct-99 18:32:06
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 20:03:12
Subj: Re: McCoy Digest

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 14:32:18, Gerben Bergman <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I am jansens_at_ibm_dot_net of Borg. You will be assimilated.
>
> > |---------------------------------------------------|
> > |                  NT boot options                  |
> > |                                                   |
> > |               Please choose from list             |
> > |                                                   |
> > |       <crash>         <OS/2>        <linux>       |
> > |---------------------------------------------------|
>
> Now isn't that a cute signature. Have you ever tried NT, Karel?
>

I pushed the first button once.
Guess what: it did exactly what it promised. I'll give that to NT: the
buttons do what they say. <G>

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net

Incidentally, this is the screen you get after pressing <crash>.
|---------------------------------------------------|
|                                                   |
|               Welcome to Windows NTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT|
|TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT|
|TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT|
|TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT|
|---------------------<reboot>----------------------|

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               14-Oct-99 14:39:27
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 20:03:12
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Cameron <[e-mail]>


rj friedman wrote:

> On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 16:55:12, Cameron <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
> ε  I understand your point. I agree with it in many ways.  However, 32-bit
> εcomputing was trumpeted as server computing when it was first introduced.
> εNow you would be hard pressed to buy a brand new 386, or 486.
>
> There was a blurb in The Register citing an Intel assessment
> that it would be 10 years before 64 bit computing would make
> any kind of impact on the desktop. 10 years from now I don't
> expect that any of us will be doing the kind of desktop
> computing that we do today - so basically the whole concept
> is moot as far as I'm concerned.
>

This is not meant as a criticism.  But think about it.  Think about the
advancement of microprocessors since 1989 (basically the last 10 years) from
16-bit to 64-bit. from
64k as base memory to 64mb as base memory.  Do you really believe that it will
take
10 years from now before 64bit computing is adopted on the desktop? Do you
really believe that?  In ten years we will have 128-bit maybe 256-bit
technology.

For the group of folks in OS2.advocacy who don't develop software my
apologies, my post is not really directed toward you.  For the goup of folks
in OS/2.advocacy who do develop software:

Open source operating systems are the future (regardless to the hardware
platform)

Support open source

Join the penguin stampede

Install a Current Linux Installation

Take control over your operating system




> ________________________________________________________
>
> [RJ]                 OS/2 - Live it, or live with it.
> rj friedman          Team ABW
> Taipei, Taiwan       [e-mail]
>
> To send email - remove the `yyy'
> ________________________________________________________



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

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

From: [e-mail]                          14-Oct-99 14:37:19
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 20:03:12
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Jeff Glatt wrote:
>
> >Bennie Nelson
> >the Win32 specifications have at
> >least one major dichotomy:  if a Win 32 executable requires a VxD
> >driver, then it will not execute on NT.
>
> Huh?? What Win32 executables require a VxD driver? You don't link
> Win32 apps with drivers. you know. It's not like a DLL.
>
> Oh christ, I'm talking programming issues with a typical OS/2 enduser.
> It's hopeless, I know. They *never* learn any of this stuff. They just
> spout half-baked nonsense based upon other uninformed hearsay.

Win32 software written for hardware that is supported by VxD drivers
will not work in NT.

>
> >MS was stipulating that IBM stop preloads of OS/2
> >as a precondition for receiving the Win 95 preload agreement.  IBM would
not
> >cave on that point.
>
> No, what *really* happened was that IBM withheld payment for the
> Windows 95 licenses until the last minute. IBM wasn't sure that it was
> going to license Win95 until after IBM saw that a number of its
> competitors had already signed up for it. It was only then that IBM
> agreed to MS's asking price

Nope.  Not according to the testimony in DOJ vs MS trial.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            14-Oct-99 20:19:09
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 20:03:12
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: Tim Timmins <[e-mail]>

You said:

'They just spout half-baked nonsense based upon other uninformed hearsay.'

And then you went and did the same:

Jeff Glatt wrote:

> No, what *really* happened was that IBM withheld payment for the
> Windows 95 licenses until the last minute. IBM wasn't sure that it was
> going to license Win95 until after IBM saw that a number of its
> competitors had already signed up for it. It was only then that IBM
> agreed to MS's asking price


I guess you meant 'really', as in really, yeah right.

Regards,
Tim

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

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

From: [e-mail]                    14-Oct-99 16:14:25
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 20:03:12
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: [e-mail] (Jason S.)

Tholen tholened the following first-level quoted material to
comp.os.os2.advocacy:

>I wrote:

>>>> Tholen was *twice* nominated for Usenet Kook of the Month -- the first
>>>> time by Roberto Alsina back in 1997,

>>> Alsina is the person who accused me of posting an average of 134 articles
>>> every day, which was ludicrous.  When he pointed to his alleged evidence,
>>> it became obvious that he didn't even bother to check the range of dates.
>>> Even then, he continued to insist that he was right, until others started
>>> getting on his case.  How ironic that he nominated me rather than himself.

>> None of this changes the fact that you were nominated in 1997.

>It does demonstrate that person responsible did not have his facts
>straight and wasn't interested in getting them straight.

The critical fact -- your kookiness -- was correctly noted, Dave.

>Rather
>coincidentally, you also relied on false information in the nomination
>that you prepared.

I relied on actual posts of yours, for the most part. Is that "false
information," Dave?

>>>> 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

>>> Actually, that's the wake of your notorious attempts to "get a rise" out
>>> of me.  Put the onus where it belongs, Jason:  on you, not me.

>> Typical Tholen attempt to obfuscate the *real* issue.

>Noting an important historical fact that you left out is not
>obfuscation.

Dave, the issue is your kookiness.

>>>> There was no evidence of tampering

>>> Incorrect.  The voting deadline was extended,

>> ..which is not evidence of tampering...

>Prove that the outcome was not affected by the deadline extension.

The burden to prove that the extension affected the outcome lies on
your shoulders, Dave. You made a claim: back it up.

>>> and I know that at least one vote wasn't counted.

>> ..for a person who wasn't nominated,

>Which makes the fact that you received a vote even more significant.

Which explains why it wasn't counted.

>> so the alleged vote was a nullity.

>On the contrary, your actions earned you that vote.  Too bad the
>significance is lost on you.

Even assuming arguendo that someone did vote for me, you got more
than enough votes to win.

>>>> Tholen claimed that someone named "Wayne Strang" (who was not even
>>>> nominated)

>>> Incorrect.  Consult deja.com for proof.

>> Dave, the ballot has been reposted repeatedly.

>The result showing Wayne Strang's election was reposted.

Do you mean the post by the December 1997 Kook of the Month that
declared "Wayne Strang" to be the unanimous winner? Odd, since
you claim that I got a vote, and I know that you got at least one
vote yourself.

>> "Wayne Strang" (whoever that is) was not on it.

>Incorrect.

Reference?

>> Now, it is possible that a nomination was made,

>More than just possible.  One was indeed made.

Prove it, if you think you can.

>> but the rules require a second, and it appears that no second was made --
>> thus, he was not properly nominated under the rules.

>Then how did he manage to win?

He didn't, Dave.

>>>> won the election and complained that a vote cast by some unnamed person
>>>> allegedly for me was not counted.

>>> You want actual names, Jason?

>> Provide it, if you think you can.

>I said "names", Jason, not "name", thus your use of "it" is
>inappropriate.

Provide them, if you think you can.

>>> Check the people who criticized you for
>>> your "campaigning" in sci.astro.

>> Are you alleging that these alleged people voted for me, Dave?

>The people are not alleged, Jason.  You quickly left sci.astro after
>you were criticized multiple times.  Consult deja.com if you can't
>remember their names.

I was never subscribed to sci.astro, Dave, so it is illogical to
claim that I "left" that group.

>>> As for the person who contacted me
>>> privately to say that he voted for you, just what do you think the
>>> word "privately" means?

>> I imagine that it means that this alleged person allegedly sent you
>> an email.

>It means that I won't betray a confidence, Jason.

..preferring to make typical Tholen unsubstantiated claims.

>>>> Tholen conveniently disregarded the fact that I was not nominated in
>>>> making this complaint.

>>> Doesn't change the fact that you received at least one vote, and quite
>>> possibly more, perhaps even the most.

>> And perhaps you were on the grassy knoll in Dallas in 1963, Dave.

>Non sequitur.

Whatever.

>>>> The second KOTM title that Dave won

>>> I haven't won any, Jason.

>> Incorrect.

>Still trying to foist your unofficial, "tongue-in-cheek", tampered
>results on the unsuspecting reader, eh Jason?

I simply refer to the poll that was taken by someone other than me
in CSMA earlier this year. They're not "my" results.

>>>> 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.

>>> Incorrect.  You and Edwin both had thousands of votes that disappeared.

>> ..and the technical problems with the polling were straightened out
>> by the people who run that site.

>Evidence, please.

The fact that the persons who were tampering with the vote (running up
thousands of votes for me and Edwin) apparently could no longer run
up the vote to such an extent speaks for itself.

>>> And from Eric Bennett:

>>> ] The other poll (csma KOTM) was not well protected against vote fraud.  I

>>> ] had an amusing evening playing with their vote counting system to see if
I
>>> ] could get around their belatedly instituted safeguards (which I did...

>> ..and Eric voted for Nathan A. Hughes, not for you, Dave.

>Irrelevant, Jason.  It demonstrates that the poll was not protected
>against fraud.

No vote is completely protected against fraud, Dave.

--
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)

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

From: [e-mail]                14-Oct-99 16:21:24
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 20:03:13
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: [e-mail] (tholenbot)

In article <7tmf1m$45b$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:


> Impossible, given that deja.com does prove that I am correct.

Prove it, if you think you can.

> That's not the "actual ballot".

Incorrect.

> Incorrect.

Taking reading comprehension lessons from Eric Bennett again, Dave?

--
I do not "approve" phrases.
-Dave Tholen

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

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

From: [e-mail]...               14-Oct-99 16:42:04
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 20:03:13
Subj: Re: McCoy Digest

Message sender: [e-mail]

From: "Drestin Black" <[e-mail]>

gee, guess at least you have a choice, Linux just crashes as soon as you
press the power on button.

(I mean, if we are going to believe your pathetic silliness, then we gotta
believe mine too right?)

 Incidentally, this is the screen you get after pressing power button:

Loading Linu............ click, machine off.



<jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)> wrote in message
news:L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-1bxH2gZZY6yB@localhost...
> On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 14:32:18, Gerben Bergman <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> > I am jansens_at_ibm_dot_net of Borg. You will be assimilated.
> >
> > > |---------------------------------------------------|
> > > |                  NT boot options                  |
> > > |                                                   |
> > > |               Please choose from list             |
> > > |                                                   |
> > > |       <crash>         <OS/2>        <linux>       |
> > > |---------------------------------------------------|
> >
> > Now isn't that a cute signature. Have you ever tried NT, Karel?
> >
>
> I pushed the first button once.
> Guess what: it did exactly what it promised. I'll give that to NT: the
> buttons do what they say. <G>
>
> Karel Jansens
> jansens_at_ibm_dot_net
>
> Incidentally, this is the screen you get after pressing <crash>.
> |---------------------------------------------------|
> |                                                   |
> |               Welcome to Windows NTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT|
> |TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT|
> |TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT|
> |TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT|
> |---------------------<reboot>----------------------|
>


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                     14-Oct-99 22:51:26
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 20:03:13
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Mirage Media <[e-mail]>


Jim Burke wrote:
>
> If you use os/2 for business, what do you use for accounting?
> Seems to be some sort of a gap in the market here.
> At least, I haven't been able to find anything in this area.
>

Hmmm. My wife just opened the European office of a Taiwanese computer
company doing about $25,000,000US in annual sales (in Europe).
Her all OS/2 office runs Star Office 5.1a. She finally switched over
after her Winboze system crashed taking all her data along with it.

Corey
Mirage Media
Eindhoven, The Netherlands

Fine Art Nudes Kyoto
http://web.kyoto-inet.or.jp/people/photos/gallery/C_SHADOW/index.html
Polaroid Transfer Art
http://www.frii.com/~uliasz/photoart/polaroid/t_gallery/corey.htm

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Internet Access Eindhoven, the Netherlands (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                    14-Oct-99 22:50:03
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 20:03:13
Subj: Re: McCoy Digest

From: Gerben Bergman <[e-mail]>

On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 18:24:23 GMT, Jeff Glatt's evil twin Skippy wrote:

| >Now isn't that a cute signature. Have you ever tried NT, Karel?
|
| I'm sure that his "experience" with it is on a par with his "buddy"
| Tholen's "experience" with NT -- woefully inadequate to have anything
| but the obviously naive, uninformed "opinions" (typically based upon
| hearsay) that people like Karel and Tholen routinely spout.

I have no problem with people being uninformed -- nobody knows everything.
What I do have a problem with is people being so proud of their ignorance
that they choose to broadcast it to the world, even going so far as to put
it in their signatures.

Karel, what's your experience with NT? Have you used it for any length of
time? How often did it crash on you?

To put things in perspective: I've used OS/2 for 2.5 years (Jan 1996-May
1998), I've used NT for 1.5 years (May 1998-present), and I can tell you
that NT has crashed/hung/frozen an order of magnitude less often than OS/2.
With this kind of first-hand experience, what do you expect me to think when
some self-righteous OS/2 advocate tells me that NT crashes by merely looking
at it? That it's synonymous with BSOD? That it's a toy OS nobody should take
seriously?

Yup, I think he's full of it.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                    14-Oct-99 20:59:20
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 20:03:13
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: [e-mail] (John Hong)

Cameron ([e-mail]) wrote:

: obsolescence is simply a matter of logic and arithmetic.  IA-64 or some
other
: 64 bit technology is in the immediate future of computing.  In the same
fashion

    Define 'immediate'.  3 years?  5 years?  IA-64 certainly won't be
making much headway in the consumer desktop arena next year, and not even
the year after.  Besides, for IA-64 to take off it will, ironically
enough, need a Microsoft operating system.  Does anyone even know if
Microsoft will be putting anything on Merced?  If IA-64 does not have a
Microsoft consumer operating system, IA-64 will not be going anywhere in
the consumer desktop arena (as much as I hate to admit it).

: I don't like it.  But that's the way it is.  Unless IBM makes OS/2 open
: source,  sells to some other company, or ports it to IA-64, it will be
: extremely difficult to even load it  on a new system in 3 years.

    What makes you so certain that IA-64 will be a factor for the
consumer market in 3 years?

: computing.  OS/2 is not open source.  Currently it is not a cash cow for IBM
: and therefore how much R&D is going into porting OS/2 to any new hardware
: platforms?

    I gather that OS/2 is making enough money for IBM, enough to in
exceed their own expectations.

: You ask the question why bother?   I am a computer scientist and software
: engineer I have a ethical responsibility to my work not to become obsolete.

    Ok.  Now what does that have to do with me?

:                   'You've got to know when to hold em, and know when to fold
: em'

: My friend, at least for me OS/2 has served its purpose, and its time to move
: on.

    Ok.  Good bye, now.  I'll expect to see your attentions shift
from the OS/2 newsgroups to the Linux related ones.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: St. John's InfoNET (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                          14-Oct-99 22:05:20
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 20:03:13
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>> >Bennie Nelson
>> >the Win32 specifications have at
>> >least one major dichotomy:  if a Win 32 executable requires a VxD
>> >driver, then it will not execute on NT.

>> Huh?? What Win32 executables require a VxD driver? You don't link
>> Win32 apps with drivers. you know. It's not like a DLL.

>> Oh christ, I'm talking programming issues with a typical OS/2 enduser.
>> It's hopeless, I know. They *never* learn any of this stuff. They just
>> spout half-baked nonsense based upon other uninformed hearsay.

>Win32 software written for hardware that is supported by VxD drivers
>will not work in NT.

It is not part of the "Win32 specifications" to produce "software
[specifically] written for hardware [drivers]". (Not that I believe
that you even have the slightest idea what you're talking about. I'm
sure that you're simply tossing around some buzz phrases that you once
heard some other OS/2 nutcase rambling about Windows, and thought that
it made for lovely sounding FUD). Indeed, it is part of the "Win32
specifications" to produce software that is hardware independent. The
reason why there are things called "drivers" is to make that so.
Obviously, this most basic programming concept has gone completely
over your head.

As a person who has written both Win32 application software as well as
drivers, I could explain to you how this all works, but I have
absolutely no confidence that you'd be able to understand much of it,
and worse, I strongly believe that your somewhat-unnatural "love" for
OS/2 will blind you into believing nothing but the worst possible,
least realistic FUD about Windows, some of which you're spewing right
now.

By all means, feel free to get as technical as you'd like on the
subject of Win32 applications interfacing to VxD's. I have absolutely
no doubt that I'll be able to debunk any specific statements you make
(not that I expect you to get any more specific than your laughably
nebulous, unsubstantiated claim that there is something "eerie" about
the "Win32 specification" regarding VxDs). And I'll likely make you
look like the technically illiterate fool that so many OS/2 zealots
are nowadays

>>>MS was stipulating that IBM stop preloads of OS/2
>>>as a precondition for receiving the Win 95 preload agreement.  IBM would
not
>>>cave on that point.

>>No, what *really* happened was that IBM withheld payment for the
>>Windows 95 licenses until the last minute. IBM wasn't sure that it was
>>going to license Win95 until after IBM saw that a number of its
>>competitors had already signed up for it. It was only then that IBM
>>agreed to MS's asking price

>Nope.  Not according to the testimony in DOJ vs MS trial.

I never heard any MS spokesman testify before the DOJ that "MS
stipulated IBM stop preloads of OS/2 as a precondition for receiving
the Win95 preload agreement". In fact, MS denied any such "demand",
despite your indication otherwise

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          14-Oct-99 22:11:26
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 20:03:13
Subj: Re: McCoy Digest

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>>>Gerben Bergman
>| >Now isn't that a cute signature. Have you ever tried NT, Karel?

>>jglatt
>| I'm sure that his "experience" with it is on a par with his "buddy"
>| Tholen's "experience" with NT -- woefully inadequate to have anything
>| but the obviously naive, uninformed "opinions" (typically based upon
>| hearsay) that people like Karel and Tholen routinely spout.

>I have no problem with people being uninformed -- nobody knows everything.
>What I do have a problem with is people being so proud of their ignorance
>that they choose to broadcast it to the world, even going so far as to put
>it in their signatures.

I agree 100%. Take Bennie Nelson in another thread, claiming that the
Win32 specification is about applications that are written only to
work with particular drivers. Now that is typical OS/2 zealot
technical ignorance.

>Karel, what's your experience with NT? Have you used it for any length of
>time? How often did it crash on you?

>To put things in perspective: I've used OS/2 for 2.5 years (Jan 1996-May
>1998), I've used NT for 1.5 years (May 1998-present), and I can tell you
>that NT has crashed/hung/frozen an order of magnitude less often than OS/2.
>With this kind of first-hand experience, what do you expect me to think when
>some self-righteous OS/2 advocate tells me that NT crashes by merely looking
>at it? That it's synonymous with BSOD? That it's a toy OS nobody should take
>seriously?

>Yup, I think he's full of it.

And that is indeed the problem with OS/2 Advocacy circa 1999. It's
full of self-righteous, religiously zealous endusers who don't know
much about not only technical issues (and yet display their ignorance
at the drop of a hat when spreading FUD), but also who have inadequate
experience to make the claims that they're making about various
products/issues.

And nobody takes them seriously any more, as a result

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            14-Oct-99 15:21:09
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 20:03:13
Subj: Communicator 4.7 vs Communicator/2

From: josco <[e-mail]>

http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/stories/news/0,4153,2352372,00.html

What's new in Communicator 4.7? Well, it's
officially Y2K compliant and there are a few
security fixes. Netscape has also added a new
version of AOL Instant Messenger and a
Shop@Netscape button, ....

Communicator 4.6 is notoriously buggy and
widely considered less stable than previous
versions. Does 4.7 fix this? In a week and a
half of tests on several different Windows
systems, Communicator 4.7 crashed or froze
several times. Netscape has also had to
release a workaround to solve a bug that was
preventing the browser from launching at all.
The browser didn't crash on Unix and Mac OS,
but we didn't work it as hard as we did in
Windows.



-- joseph

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

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

From: alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net                          14-Oct-99 17:17:25
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 21:38:24
Subj: Re: McCoy Digest

From: Hobbyist <alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net>

On comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy, Gerben Bergman posted :

> On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 18:24:23 GMT, Jeff Glatt's evil twin Skippy wrote:
>
> | >Now isn't that a cute signature. Have you ever tried NT, Karel?
> |
> | I'm sure that his "experience" with it is on a par with his "buddy"
> | Tholen's "experience" with NT -- woefully inadequate to have anything
> | but the obviously naive, uninformed "opinions" (typically based upon
> | hearsay) that people like Karel and Tholen routinely spout.
>
> I have no problem with people being uninformed -- nobody knows everything.
> What I do have a problem with is people being so proud of their ignorance
> that they choose to broadcast it to the world, even going so far as to put
> it in their signatures.
>
> Karel, what's your experience with NT? Have you used it for any length of
> time? How often did it crash on you?
>
> To put things in perspective: I've used OS/2 for 2.5 years (Jan 1996-May
> 1998), I've used NT for 1.5 years (May 1998-present), and I can tell you
> that NT has crashed/hung/frozen an order of magnitude less often than OS/2.
> With this kind of first-hand experience, what do you expect me to think when
> some self-righteous OS/2 advocate tells me that NT crashes by merely looking
> at it? That it's synonymous with BSOD? That it's a toy OS nobody should take
> seriously?
>
> Yup, I think he's full of it.

I saw the signature and made a lot of similar inferences about the user
of the signature and decided that it wasn't really worth a comment.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               14-Oct-99 18:39:21
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 21:38:24
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Cameron wrote:
>
> My friend, at least for me OS/2 has served its purpose, and its time to move
> on.

Are you also ready to move on from OS/2 advocacy or is your evangelism
going to continue?

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               14-Oct-99 18:48:29
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 21:38:24
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Karel Jansens wrote:
>
> On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 17:25:34, Cameron <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> >
> >   Open source operating systems are the future of computing.  Unless OS/2
is
> > made open source,  it has a very, very, very short future.
> >
> You're sort of preaching to the pope here.
> Unfortunately, the chances of OS/2 ever getting open source are very
> dim.
> Bummer.

IMHO, OS/2 going open source would be the worst thing that could ever
happen to it.  It would mean IBM dropping all support of it, industry
dropping what remains of its support, and the maintenance of code put in
the hands of unpaid hobbyists who are completely unfamiliar with it.  It
would also decentralize fixpacks and device drivers, and probably do
some significant financial damage to Scitech who now has a pretty
significant stake in OS/2.

How is this the future of OS/2?

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               14-Oct-99 19:07:26
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 21:38:24
Subj: Re: Communicator 4.7 vs Communicator/2

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

josco wrote:
>
> http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/stories/news/0,4153,2352372,00.html
>
> What's new in Communicator 4.7? Well, it's
> officially Y2K compliant and there are a few
> security fixes. Netscape has also added a new
> version of AOL Instant Messenger and a
> Shop@Netscape button, ....
>
> Communicator 4.6 is notoriously buggy and
> widely considered less stable than previous
> versions. Does 4.7 fix this? In a week and a
> half of tests on several different Windows
> systems, Communicator 4.7 crashed or froze
> several times. Netscape has also had to
> release a workaround to solve a bug that was
> preventing the browser from launching at all.
> The browser didn't crash on Unix and Mac OS,
> but we didn't work it as hard as we did in
> Windows.
>
> -- joseph

Personally, I've worked 4.61 for OS/2 very hard and I use it every day
for browsing as well as e-mail and newsgroups.  It doesn't crash or
misbehave for me in the slightest.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               14-Oct-99 19:15:08
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 21:38:24
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Jeff Glatt wrote:
>
> >Win32 software written for hardware that is supported by VxD drivers
> >will not work in NT.
>
> It is not part of the "Win32 specifications" to produce "software
> [specifically] written for hardware [drivers]". (Not that I believe
> that you even have the slightest idea what you're talking about. I'm
> sure that you're simply tossing around some buzz phrases that you once
> heard some other OS/2 nutcase rambling about Windows, and thought that
> it made for lovely sounding FUD). Indeed, it is part of the "Win32
> specifications" to produce software that is hardware independent. The
> reason why there are things called "drivers" is to make that so.
> Obviously, this most basic programming concept has gone completely
> over your head.

I think what he was trying to get at was the fact that there were
historically, if not currently, several device drivers that existed only
in VxD form and therefore would not work in NT.  Until recently, USB
support was in this category among other things.  Of course, with the
new WDM this is no longer an issue.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                    14-Oct-99 23:13:13
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 21:38:24
Subj: Re: Communicator 4.7 vs Communicator/2

From: [e-mail] (John Hong)

Marty ([e-mail]) wrote:

: Personally, I've worked 4.61 for OS/2 very hard and I use it every day
: for browsing as well as e-mail and newsgroups.  It doesn't crash or
: misbehave for me in the slightest.

    Another point to mention is that IBM doesn't really change the
version number with this.  Netscape 2.02 for OS/2 was in actuality 3.0
with the -3 switch.  It's quite possible that IBM will make a fixpak or
re-release of 4.61 containing those 4.7 fixes, only still keeping the
version number 4.61.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: St. John's InfoNET (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                12-Oct-99 17:22:22
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 21:38:24
Subj: Re: The ultimate hacker OS...

From: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]>, on 10/05/99 at 07:23 AM,
   [e-mail] (Jerry McBride) said:

>Geezz... even copies of Wseb GA are turning up for free FTP over seas...

That sounds interesting. Could you give more detail?

les clark / edgewater, new jersey / usa
-----------------------------------------------------------
[e-mail]
-----------------------------------------------------------

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             14-Oct-99 23:49:26
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 21:38:24
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: [e-mail]

In article <7u4cj4$7eb$[e-mail]>,
  [e-mail] wrote:
> Mike Timbol writes:
>
> > Joseph wrote:
>
> >> OS/2 Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality.  Bummer,
bummer.
>
> > It's also bullshit.
>
> Incorrect.  OS/2 Java 1.1.8 does implement Java 1.2 functionality.
>
> > Download something like NetBeans, that requires
> > JDK 1.2.  Try to run it on OS/2.  No dice.
>
> Irrelevant, given that Joseph did not say that OS/2 Java 1.1.8
> implements ALL of Java 1.2 functionality.  It does implement SOME
> of it, however.

On the contrary, your very own logic proves that he said exactly that
(Re your argument from the "costly mistakes" thread of some years ago
which you've conveniently forgotten here).

Lucien S.


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: [e-mail]                               14-Oct-99 20:12:26
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 21:38:24
Subj: Re: Communicator 4.7 vs Communicator/2

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

John Hong wrote:
>
> Marty ([e-mail]) wrote:
>
> : Personally, I've worked 4.61 for OS/2 very hard and I use it every day
> : for browsing as well as e-mail and newsgroups.  It doesn't crash or
> : misbehave for me in the slightest.
>
>         Another point to mention is that IBM doesn't really change the
> version number with this.  Netscape 2.02 for OS/2 was in actuality 3.0
> with the -3 switch.

Not entirely correct.  It had some 3.0 fixes and functionality, but not
all.  With the -3 switch it reported itself as version 3.0, but that is
just a fascade.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            14-Oct-99 17:19:17
  To: All                                               14-Oct-99 21:38:24
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: josco <[e-mail]>

On 14 Oct 1999, John Hong wrote:

> Cameron ([e-mail]) wrote:
>
> : obsolescence is simply a matter of logic and arithmetic.  IA-64 or some
other
> : 64 bit technology is in the immediate future of computing.  In the same
fashion
>
>     Define 'immediate'.  3 years?  5 years?  IA-64 certainly won't be
> making much headway in the consumer desktop arena next year, and not even
> the year after.  Besides, for IA-64 to take off it will, ironically
> enough, need a Microsoft operating system.

What does a home or desktop PC need to with a 64-bit address space?
Quicken data files exceeding 10's and 1000's of gigabytes?

SGI IRIX jumped to a pseudo 64-bit and my codes doubled in memory
requrements, my data files doubled.  64-bit integers, 64-bit floats.  I
saw no improvment.  More RAM need to do the same work.


Graphics processing and fast I/O are things that the desktop needs and
these things require a different kind of bitness.  Go see a Dreamcast --
if you can find one since they are all sold out in CA.  That kind of
128-bit system is the future of the desktop and it costs $200 with
networkable 56kb modem. Sony's 128/64 bit console due in March/April will
support DVD, fast I/O and run around 400 mhz.  It will cost < 500.

IA-64 is irrelevant.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            14-Oct-99 20:36:00
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 02:48:15
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>> >Nice try at saving face, but you screwed up.  Be man enough to admit
>> >that you misunderstood, "Now if you'd like to point out some
>> >contradictions, I'd be glad to acknowledge them.", without insulting me
>> >this time.
>>
>> Again, you misunderstand. I changed no subject. The thread is "Linux
Myths".
>> You started talking about fixpacks. I say that you are confused by the
>> contradiction inherent in claiming that you are not reliant on IBM, yet you
>> install most, if not all of their fixpacks with clearly demostrates the
very
>> reliance you seek to deny.

>So what was the whole, "But it would be amusing to see you point out
>contradictions. Do so." if not a misunderstanding on your part?

Sometimes a rose is just a rose. I think it would be interesting to see you
point out contradictions.

>> Your confusion over this inherent contradiction is why you accuse believe
that
>> I am changing the subject when in fact, you did by writing about fixpacks.

>Now I'm confused.  ;-)

And let THAT be a lesson to you. <g>

>> >So truth by declaration, I've contradicted myself because David said
>> >so.  My actions may have contradicted the statements of other alleged
>> >OS/2 users in this group, but I don't see how that qualifies as me
>> >contradicting myself.  You're too ready to file me off into a convenient
>> >category that suits you.
>>
>> Not at all. I think that your actions fit right into the box that is OS/2
cooa
>> advocate.

>So the average COOA poster writes freeware applications and assists
>others in porting applications to OS/2?

Big box, remember?

>> You knock Windows based on incomplete knowledge.

>I've done GUI, Netscape Plugin, and device driver programming in Windows
>NT.  While I would never claim "complete knowledge," that ain't bad.

I may be mistaken here, but weren't you the guy talking about Windows 3.5?

>> You seem to feel that most people cannot make intelligent computer hardware

>> and software purchases,

>I felt that my mother had not done so, and that there are potentially
>many like her.

I'm still wondering about that. You explained here options to her.  She
consider them and made her decision. Are you sure that you are not just
disagreeing with her decision?

>> presumably based on their use of Windows,

>Nope.  Based on their perceived need for powerful computers to do some
>not very compute-demanding tasks.

They only make powerful computers. Perhaps people don't want old, waranty-less

computers or low end eMachines.

>> and that your selections are somehow superior, presumably because of your
>> use of OS/2.

>My selection is superior for my use.  I would not limit myself to a
>given tool if it didn't meet my needs well.  I have no brand loyalty.

Okay.

>> When confront with the numerous gaps in OS/2's offerings, you claim on the
>> one hand that such items aren't needed,

>Always qualified with, "for my own use."

That is true, but the "you" means "OS/2 users" not Marty specifically and in
all cases.

>> but on the other that despite this lack of need, such items will be
delivered
>> in the future such as our discussion of Scitech. You are then vague on
details
>> such as when these items will arrive and what shape they will take, again,
>> reference our Scitech dicussion.

>Sorry.  I don't work for Scitech.  I know only what I've heard and seen.

Ditto, and so far, I haven't seen much to give me confidence. I shared what I
did see with you, namely that list of old supported video chipsets(except for
the S4), and the fact that their OpenGL support is for Windows, not OS/2(or
any
other OS, AKAIK).

>> But remember, this is a big box. While you are in it, you are clearly in
the
>> center of the box, in that you are reasonable to a marvelous degree(if not
>> prone to making wrong conclusions :-)).  You are not on the fringe of the
box
>> like the more...excitable elements.

>I guess that's a compilment.  ;-)

Please do!

>> I didn't say you did. The reason I bought this up is because any Windows
person
>> said that they installed a service pack for just to do it, ten posts would
>> follow calling this person a lemming.

>And not one would be from me.

Fair enough.

>> I'm just wondering that since your fixpack use clearly fits this
definition,
>> why these guys aren't stepping up?

>Many here do have double standards.  I could name a few names, but that
>would only summon them into this discussion which we'd both agree is
>undesirable.

Stop it!! We are agreeing, forming a gestalt being...We are Windows. We *are*
OS/2. WE. ARE.....Win-OS/2?!?!

Nah...that's been taken. Never mind.

>> >Would you identify the windoze using public as your peers David?  The 12
>> >year olds playing 3D games, the businessmen using their office suites,
>> >the disfunctional nerds who spend all of their lives on IRC... are they
>> >all your peers, just because they use windoze?
>>
>> See "windoze".

>Force of habit.  If you like, you can respond using 1/2 OS.  ;-)

Nah...

>> Perhaps you aren't as different as you may think. But to answer
>> your question, they are fellow Windows users.

>Do you feel any particular kinsmanship to them or that your thoughts and
>ideas line up with theirs based on their OS choice?

I'm sure some ideas and thoughts do line up. Just as I'm sure I share the same

ideas about Unix with Unix guys.

>> >If it's not your opinion then what is your purpose in presenting it?
>> >Let those that feel this way present their opinion to me, otherwise you
>> >run the risk of having to defend their arguments.  I've noted that none
>> >have done so as of yet.
>>
>> Why is my point? Shouts of upgrade-itis ring through these halls, but none
in
>> your direction despite actions that clearly meet the definition of "windoze
>> lemmings" offered by some OS/2 users in this group.

>My fault.  I'll try to be more blatent about it next time.  ;-)

>> It's the lack of response that I find interesting, but not susprising.

>Personally, I don't even find it interesting.  In fact, entirely too
>predictable.

Well, not interesting in the "great book plot" sort of way, more like the "I
can't believe he punched his hand through that window!" sort of way.

>> After all, people who teamed with John Ominor in times past now attack. As
>> long as you use OS/2 (and are not Tim Martin) anything goes.

>You mean you didn't receive a License To Do and Say Whatever You Want
>and Always Be Right in the box when you bought OS/2?  You must not have
>gotten the Purple Spine edition like the rest of us.  ;-)

Well, I did get Warp 4 when it was first released. The license to which you
refer was in fixpack 2.


>> >That's quite a stretch.  If my computer blew itself up 10 minutes from
>> >now, life would go on.  I'd be pissed off no doubt, but my insatiable
>> >curiousity won't so consume me that I can't resume a normal life.
>>
>> What stretch? Your fellows seem to feel that Windows users upgrade just to
do
>> it. According to your own words, this is why you install fixpacks.

>Ok.

>> You say that Windows users don't need to upgrade, but do so out of a
>> perceived necessity.

>Have I?  Are you employing the collective "you"?

Didn't you say ugrade-itis was from a perceived necessity? Perhaps I
misundestood(and do want to be a man) :-).

>> By your own admission, your machine is this smooth running beast to be
patch by
>> fixpacks to satisfy your curiousity. That is your perceived need.

>I still disagree that this demonstrates any "need".  My world will not
>collapse if I'm deprived of this "joy".

Need doesn't have to be life or death. Sometimes I "need" some Ruby Red juice,

but I'll live without it.

>> >It's amusing in a way to see you trying to tell me what my perceptions
>> >of necessity are.  Since you know so much about me, tell me what you
>> >feel my favorite color should be.
>>
>> You tell me.  Your words are all I have to go by.

>No dime-shop psycho-analysis for this?  Aggression would point to a
>red... cunning and cold wit would point to a blue... However, I
>anticipate you saying perhaps a brown for fairly obvious reasons.  ;-)

????????? I must be tired. Brown?

>- Marty


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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            14-Oct-99 20:38:12
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 02:48:15
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>In <[e-mail]>, David H. McCoy
<[e-mail]> writes:
>|In article <uNcM3.7926$[e-mail]>,
>|[e-mail] says...
>||
>||Hobbyist <[e-mail]> wrote in message
>||news:[e-mail]...
>||| On comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy, [e-mail] posted :
>|||
>||| > You miss the point (hobbyists often do): OS/2 has numerous fixpacks for
>||| > two major reasons:
>||| >
>||| > 1) IBM does not force OS/2 users thru the annual upgrade blood-letting
>|||
>||| What annual upgrade blood-letting? Please stop exaggerating. When was
>||| NT4 released. Is it's next major upgrade yet released.
>||
>||[snip]
>||
>||I find Guido's argument interesting.  While most people accuse NT of
falling
>||behind, he is exaggerating the upgrade path of Windows.  It can't be both
>||ways.
>||
>||-B
>||
>||
>||
>|
>|It can be here where revisionism and distortion are tools of the OS/2
advocacy
>|trade.
>|
>|David H. McCoy
>
>Revisionism and distortion?
>
>Oh yeah, like people who post from an alter-ego omnipotent userid?
>Or maybe, people who 'fake' their domain names?

Poor, said Guido. Fine one instance where Ominor, your hero who hurt you so
badly, ever claimed to be omnipotent. As for the domain name, clearly its fake

and it keeps me from getting even more spam. Anyone who wants the real one
only
need ask.

>Ain't cooa grand?

Nope. You're a bore.

>regards,
>
>Guido
>
>

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            14-Oct-99 20:41:02
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 02:48:15
Subj: Re: Time to move on

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>>
>> [some stuff that he wants a response to]
>
>Almost forgot about this thread.  I'll get to it tomorrow.
>
>- Marty
>

I was wondering why you didn't until I checked my outbox and found that it
didn't go out.

Actually, I would have dropped it because it had been so long, but geez, you
know how much time it takes to respond to something that long. I didn't want
to
waste the effort.

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            14-Oct-99 17:37:04
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 02:48:15
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: josco <[e-mail]>

On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 [e-mail] wrote:

> In article <7u4cj4$7eb$[e-mail]>,
>   [e-mail] wrote:
> > Mike Timbol writes:
> >
> > > Joseph wrote:
> >
> > >> OS/2 Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality.  Bummer,
> bummer.
> >
> > > It's also bullshit.
> >
> > Incorrect.  OS/2 Java 1.1.8 does implement Java 1.2 functionality.
> >
> > > Download something like NetBeans, that requires
> > > JDK 1.2.  Try to run it on OS/2.  No dice.
> >
> > Irrelevant, given that Joseph did not say that OS/2 Java 1.1.8
> > implements ALL of Java 1.2 functionality.  It does implement SOME
> > of it, however.
>
> On the contrary, your very own logic proves that he said exactly that
> (Re your argument from the "costly mistakes" thread of some years ago
> which you've conveniently forgotten here).

Semantics and syntax.

What I said had a different meaning than what was edited and argued
against.  Tholen's comment was consistent with what was meant and said.

BTW a person's logic, as I understand logic, argues possibilities.  Logic
could show something is possible.  Mike's interpretation is possible.  It
was not relevant to what I meant nor in context with what I wrote.  It is
not as plausible an interpretation given the context of the post to which
he replied.  I consider it to be irrlevant.

Too bad since there are many interesting things to say which could have
been relevant.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                      15-Oct-99 00:34:22
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 02:48:15
Subj: Hey Mr. WarpCity...

From: [e-mail]

Howdy Tim! Warpstock is this Saturday, and I've still got that $50 that
says you won't be there. Feel free to prove me wrong!

See you there everybody!

--
-Steven Hunter               *OS/2 Warp 4 * |Warpstock '99 | Oct 16-17|
[e-mail] *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: [e-mail]                                 15-Oct-99 00:47:20
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 02:48:15
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Marty wrote:
>
> Jeff Glatt wrote:
> >
> > >Win32 software written for hardware that is supported by VxD drivers
> > >will not work in NT.
> >
> > It is not part of the "Win32 specifications" to produce "software
> > [specifically] written for hardware [drivers]". (Not that I believe
> > that you even have the slightest idea what you're talking about. I'm
> > sure that you're simply tossing around some buzz phrases that you once
> > heard some other OS/2 nutcase rambling about Windows, and thought that
> > it made for lovely sounding FUD). Indeed, it is part of the "Win32
> > specifications" to produce software that is hardware independent. The
> > reason why there are things called "drivers" is to make that so.
> > Obviously, this most basic programming concept has gone completely
> > over your head.
>
> I think what he was trying to get at was the fact that there were
> historically, if not currently, several device drivers that existed only
> in VxD form and therefore would not work in NT.  Until recently, USB
> support was in this category among other things.  Of course, with the
> new WDM this is no longer an issue.
>
> - Marty

Marty,

Thanks for the post.  You are quite correct.  I may not have stated
it as well as you have, but that is the point I was trying to get across.

Regards,
Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 15-Oct-99 00:58:12
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 02:48:15
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Jeff Glatt wrote:
>
> >> >Bennie Nelson
> >> >the Win32 specifications have at
> >> >least one major dichotomy:  if a Win 32 executable requires a VxD
> >> >driver, then it will not execute on NT.
>
> >> Huh?? What Win32 executables require a VxD driver? You don't link
> >> Win32 apps with drivers. you know. It's not like a DLL.
>
> >> Oh christ, I'm talking programming issues with a typical OS/2 enduser.
> >> It's hopeless, I know. They *never* learn any of this stuff. They just
> >> spout half-baked nonsense based upon other uninformed hearsay.
>
> >Win32 software written for hardware that is supported by VxD drivers
> >will not work in NT.
>
> It is not part of the "Win32 specifications" to produce "software
> [specifically] written for hardware [drivers]". (Not that I believe
> that you even have the slightest idea what you're talking about. I'm
> sure that you're simply tossing around some buzz phrases that you once
> heard some other OS/2 nutcase rambling about Windows, and thought that
> it made for lovely sounding FUD). Indeed, it is part of the "Win32
> specifications" to produce software that is hardware independent. The
> reason why there are things called "drivers" is to make that so.
> Obviously, this most basic programming concept has gone completely
> over your head.

Are you saying that you are unaware of the restrictions placed upon
developers by MS?  VxDs, which are supported by Win 9x, are not
supported in NT, period.

>
> As a person who has written both Win32 application software as well as
> drivers, I could explain to you how this all works, but I have
> absolutely no confidence that you'd be able to understand much of it,
> and worse, I strongly believe that your somewhat-unnatural "love" for
> OS/2 will blind you into believing nothing but the worst possible,
> least realistic FUD about Windows, some of which you're spewing right
> now.
>
> By all means, feel free to get as technical as you'd like on the
> subject of Win32 applications interfacing to VxD's. I have absolutely
> no doubt that I'll be able to debunk any specific statements you make

You have yet to disprove anything I have said.  Submit a URL that
shows how one goes about installing in NT any Win32 software requiring
one or more VxDs.

> (not that I expect you to get any more specific than your laughably
> nebulous, unsubstantiated claim that there is something "eerie" about
> the "Win32 specification" regarding VxDs). And I'll likely make you
> look like the technically illiterate fool that so many OS/2 zealots
> are nowadays

Actually, I'll give MS credit for NOT supporting VxDs in NT.  They
are a source of instability and numerous "blue screen" crashes in
Win 9x.  But, on the other hand, this situation does cause some
confusion for those who want to use Win 32 software.  Not all Win32
software that runs in Win 9x will run in NT.

>
> >>>MS was stipulating that IBM stop preloads of OS/2
> >>>as a precondition for receiving the Win 95 preload agreement.  IBM would
not
> >>>cave on that point.
>
> >>No, what *really* happened was that IBM withheld payment for the
> >>Windows 95 licenses until the last minute. IBM wasn't sure that it was
> >>going to license Win95 until after IBM saw that a number of its
> >>competitors had already signed up for it. It was only then that IBM
> >>agreed to MS's asking price
>
> >Nope.  Not according to the testimony in DOJ vs MS trial.
>
> I never heard any MS spokesman testify before the DOJ that "MS
> stipulated IBM stop preloads of OS/2 as a precondition for receiving
> the Win95 preload agreement". In fact, MS denied any such "demand",
> despite your indication otherwise

The court records for the trial contain testimony that disproves
your statement.

Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               14-Oct-99 21:29:28
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 02:48:15
Subj: Re: Linux Myths

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >> >Nice try at saving face, but you screwed up.  Be man enough to admit
> >> >that you misunderstood, "Now if you'd like to point out some
> >> >contradictions, I'd be glad to acknowledge them.", without insulting me
> >> >this time.
> >>
> >> Again, you misunderstand. I changed no subject. The thread is "Linux
Myths".
> >> You started talking about fixpacks. I say that you are confused by the
> >> contradiction inherent in claiming that you are not reliant on IBM, yet
you
> >> install most, if not all of their fixpacks with clearly demostrates the
very
> >> reliance you seek to deny.
>
> >So what was the whole, "But it would be amusing to see you point out
> >contradictions. Do so." if not a misunderstanding on your part?
>
> Sometimes a rose is just a rose. I think it would be interesting to see you
> point out contradictions.

Of course it would be amusing to see me point out contradictions,
especially when I don't see any.  That'd be like me pointing out a
dancing elephant with wings standing next to me.  Possibly fun to watch
("What??  You mean you can't see him?!?!  He's right there!"), but in
the long run doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

> >> >So truth by declaration, I've contradicted myself because David said
> >> >so.  My actions may have contradicted the statements of other alleged
> >> >OS/2 users in this group, but I don't see how that qualifies as me
> >> >contradicting myself.  You're too ready to file me off into a convenient
> >> >category that suits you.
> >>
> >> Not at all. I think that your actions fit right into the box that is OS/2
cooa
> >> advocate.
>
> >So the average COOA poster writes freeware applications and assists
> >others in porting applications to OS/2?
>
> Big box, remember?

I'm starting to feel like a mime trying to feel my way out of an
invisible box.

> >> You knock Windows based on incomplete knowledge.
>
> >I've done GUI, Netscape Plugin, and device driver programming in Windows
> >NT.  While I would never claim "complete knowledge," that ain't bad.
>
> I may be mistaken here, but weren't you the guy talking about Windows 3.5?

Possibly at some point, but not for the above mentioned development.
That was all NT 4.0.

> >> You seem to feel that most people cannot make intelligent computer
hardware
> >> and software purchases,
>
> >I felt that my mother had not done so, and that there are potentially
> >many like her.
>
> I'm still wondering about that. You explained here options to her.  She
> consider them and made her decision. Are you sure that you are not just
> disagreeing with her decision?

Well, I do disagree with her decision, but she couldn't justify it to me
(or it seemed, even herself).

> >> presumably based on their use of Windows,
>
> >Nope.  Based on their perceived need for powerful computers to do some
> >not very compute-demanding tasks.
>
> They only make powerful computers. Perhaps people don't want old,
waranty-less
> computers or low end eMachines.

But if they're free and supported (by family, for example) what's the
down side?

> >> When confront with the numerous gaps in OS/2's offerings, you claim on
the
> >> one hand that such items aren't needed,
>
> >Always qualified with, "for my own use."
>
> That is true, but the "you" means "OS/2 users" not Marty specifically and in
> all cases.

Well, I can't and won't speak for others here, so you'll have to take
issue with them.  My answers are regarding myself only.

> >> but on the other that despite this lack of need, such items will be
delivered
> >> in the future such as our discussion of Scitech. You are then vague on
details
> >> such as when these items will arrive and what shape they will take,
again,
> >> reference our Scitech dicussion.
>
> >Sorry.  I don't work for Scitech.  I know only what I've heard and seen.
>
> Ditto, and so far, I haven't seen much to give me confidence. I shared what
I
> did see with you, namely that list of old supported video chipsets(except
for
> the S4), and the fact that their OpenGL support is for Windows, not OS/2(or
any
> other OS, AKAIK).

I posted the directory structure of MGL showing the OpenGL components.
They compile and build under OS/2 and Linux.  They are software OpenGL
support at present.  DirectGL is an entirely different issue and is
win32 specific.

> >> But remember, this is a big box. While you are in it, you are clearly in
the
> >> center of the box, in that you are reasonable to a marvelous degree(if
not
> >> prone to making wrong conclusions :-)).  You are not on the fringe of the
box
> >> like the more...excitable elements.
>
> >I guess that's a compilment.  ;-)
>
> Please do!

Thx.

> >> I'm just wondering that since your fixpack use clearly fits this
definition,
> >> why these guys aren't stepping up?
>
> >Many here do have double standards.  I could name a few names, but that
> >would only summon them into this discussion which we'd both agree is
> >undesirable.
>
> Stop it!! We are agreeing, forming a gestalt being...We are Windows. We
*are*
> OS/2. WE. ARE.....Win-OS/2?!?!

I don't thunk so.

[Ah... somebody stop me!]

> >> >Would you identify the windoze using public as your peers David?  The 12
> >> >year olds playing 3D games, the businessmen using their office suites,
> >> >the disfunctional nerds who spend all of their lives on IRC... are they
> >> >all your peers, just because they use windoze?
> >>
> >> See "windoze".
>
> >Force of habit.  If you like, you can respond using 1/2 OS.  ;-)
>
> Nah...
>
> >> Perhaps you aren't as different as you may think. But to answer
> >> your question, they are fellow Windows users.
>
> >Do you feel any particular kinsmanship to them or that your thoughts and
> >ideas line up with theirs based on their OS choice?
>
> I'm sure some ideas and thoughts do line up. Just as I'm sure I share the
same
> ideas about Unix with Unix guys.

Right, but if one of them makes a statement, I would not necessarily
identify it with you.

> >> >If it's not your opinion then what is your purpose in presenting it?
> >> >Let those that feel this way present their opinion to me, otherwise you
> >> >run the risk of having to defend their arguments.  I've noted that none
> >> >have done so as of yet.
> >>
> >> Why is my point? Shouts of upgrade-itis ring through these halls, but
none in
> >> your direction despite actions that clearly meet the definition of
"windoze
> >> lemmings" offered by some OS/2 users in this group.
>
> >My fault.  I'll try to be more blatent about it next time.  ;-)
>
> >> It's the lack of response that I find interesting, but not susprising.
>
> >Personally, I don't even find it interesting.  In fact, entirely too
> >predictable.
>
> Well, not interesting in the "great book plot" sort of way, more like the "I
> can't believe he punched his hand through that window!" sort of way.

I find it to be more of an "I can't believe it's not butter" sort of
way.

> >> After all, people who teamed with John Ominor in times past now attack.
As
> >> long as you use OS/2 (and are not Tim Martin) anything goes.
>
> >You mean you didn't receive a License To Do and Say Whatever You Want
> >and Always Be Right in the box when you bought OS/2?  You must not have
> >gotten the Purple Spine edition like the rest of us.  ;-)
>
> Well, I did get Warp 4 when it was first released. The license to which you
> refer was in fixpack 2.

Well that explains it.  And since you felt no compulsory need to upgrade
to FP2, you never received it.

> >> >That's quite a stretch.  If my computer blew itself up 10 minutes from
> >> >now, life would go on.  I'd be pissed off no doubt, but my insatiable
> >> >curiousity won't so consume me that I can't resume a normal life.
> >>
> >> What stretch? Your fellows seem to feel that Windows users upgrade just
to do
> >> it. According to your own words, this is why you install fixpacks.
>
> >Ok.
>
> >> You say that Windows users don't need to upgrade, but do so out of a
> >> perceived necessity.
>
> >Have I?  Are you employing the collective "you"?
>
> Didn't you say ugrade-itis was from a perceived necessity? Perhaps I
> misundestood(and do want to be a man) :-).

I don't think I said that unqualified as such.  If I did, then add a
qualification of "many" or "some" and recompile.

> >> By your own admission, your machine is this smooth running beast to be
patch by
> >> fixpacks to satisfy your curiousity. That is your perceived need.
>
> >I still disagree that this demonstrates any "need".  My world will not
> >collapse if I'm deprived of this "joy".
>
> Need doesn't have to be life or death. Sometimes I "need" some Ruby Red
juice,
> but I'll live without it.

"Need" and "strong desire" are two different things.  You say you need
Ruby Red juice as an exaggeration to show how strong your desire for it
is.  I told you a million times not to exaggerate!

> >> >It's amusing in a way to see you trying to tell me what my perceptions
> >> >of necessity are.  Since you know so much about me, tell me what you
> >> >feel my favorite color should be.
> >>
> >> You tell me.  Your words are all I have to go by.
>
> >No dime-shop psycho-analysis for this?  Aggression would point to a
> >red... cunning and cold wit would point to a blue... However, I
> >anticipate you saying perhaps a brown for fairly obvious reasons.  ;-)
>
> ????????? I must be tired. Brown?

What's the first thing you can think of that's brown?

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             15-Oct-99 01:31:27
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 02:48:15
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
  josco <[e-mail]> wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 [e-mail] wrote:
>
> > In article <7u4cj4$7eb$[e-mail]>,
> >   [e-mail] wrote:
> > > Mike Timbol writes:
> > >
> > > > Joseph wrote:
> > >
> > > >> OS/2 Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality.  Bummer,
> > bummer.
> > >
> > > > It's also bullshit.
> > >
> > > Incorrect.  OS/2 Java 1.1.8 does implement Java 1.2 functionality.
> > >
> > > > Download something like NetBeans, that requires
> > > > JDK 1.2.  Try to run it on OS/2.  No dice.
> > >
> > > Irrelevant, given that Joseph did not say that OS/2 Java 1.1.8
> > > implements ALL of Java 1.2 functionality.  It does implement SOME
> > > of it, however.
> >
> > On the contrary, your very own logic proves that he said exactly
that
> > (Re your argument from the "costly mistakes" thread of some years
ago
> > which you've conveniently forgotten here).
>
> Semantics and syntax.
>
> What I said had a different meaning than what was edited and argued
> against.  Tholen's comment was consistent with what was meant and
said.

... and it directly contradicts the logic he proffered in the "costly
mistakes" thread years ago.

I've already copied and saved this little screwup. We'll see if he
figures it out.

> BTW a person's logic, as I understand logic, argues possibilities.
Logic

As I recall, your skills with logic (as well as OS's and computers in
general) are anemic at best.

Last 4 years havn't witnessed much improvement on this score for you or
Tholen.

Lucien S.

> could show something is possible.  Mike's interpretation is
possible.  It
> was not relevant to what I meant nor in context with what I wrote.
It is
> not as plausible an interpretation given the context of the post to
which
> he replied.  I consider it to be irrlevant.
>
> Too bad since there are many interesting things to say which could
have
> been relevant.
>
>


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: [e-mail]                             14-Oct-99 18:59:16
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 02:48:15
Subj: Re: Hey Mr. WarpCity...

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:
>
> Howdy Tim! Warpstock is this Saturday, and I've still got that $50 that
> says you won't be there. Feel free to prove me wrong!
>
> See you there everybody!
>
Tim has been seriously injured in an accident.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                     15-Oct-99 02:19:21
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 02:48:15
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: "Darin McBride" <[e-mail]>

On Mon, 04 Oct 1999 11:56:42 -0400, Brad BARCLAY wrote:

>    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...
>:).

Less Tim Martin!

:-)

---
Disclaimer: unless explicitly mentioned otherwise, I do not speak
for the company I work for.



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

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

From: [e-mail]                          15-Oct-99 02:58:10
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 02:48:15
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>>>Bennie Nelson
>>>Win32 software written for hardware that is supported by VxD drivers
>>>will not work in NT.

>>jglatt
>> It is not part of the "Win32 specifications" to produce "software
>> [specifically] written for hardware [drivers]". (Not that I believe
>> that you even have the slightest idea what you're talking about. I'm
>> sure that you're simply tossing around some buzz phrases that you once
>> heard some other OS/2 nutcase rambling about Windows, and thought that
>> it made for lovely sounding FUD). Indeed, it is part of the "Win32
>> specifications" to produce software that is hardware independent. The
>> reason why there are things called "drivers" is to make that so.
>> Obviously, this most basic programming concept has gone completely
>> over your head.

>Marty
>I think what he was trying to get at was the fact that there were
>historically, if not currently, several device drivers that existed only
>in VxD form and therefore would not work in NT.

That's a driver issue, and has nothing whatsoever to do with Win32
applications. For example, the Win32 program that I just wrote will do
MIDI output upon both NT as well as Win95. But, it will use entirely
different drivers upon both platforms. For that matter, it will use
entirely different drivers for different MIDI interfaces even under
the same operating system. That's because a properly written Windows
application is hardware independent. Bennie doesn't know this.

Obviously, Bennie really doesn't know what he's talking about when he
uttered the quote about "Win32 software written for hardware that is
supported by VxD drivers", nor the technical considerations of such
issues.

If someone were to fling around buzzwords as indiscrimately and
erroneously as Bennie does (and other OS/2 Advocates tend to do),
someone could derive all sorts of crazy, nebulous, buzzword-plagued
condemnations about OS/2's design.

>Until recently, USB
>support was in this category among other things.  Of course, with the
>new WDM this is no longer an issue.

Drivers are ALWAYS an issue on any platform. It's a fundamental
"layer" of any operating system, and if you don't have the driver
support you need, you're in trouble. For example, with my program
above, it may even exhibit different levels of support and
performance, depending upon the particular drivers that are used with
the app. That's the way that things always are with drivers...
anywhere they are.

But that's a support issue, not some alleged "design issue" about the
"Win32 specification" and some sort of supposed "software written for
hardware that is supported by VxD drivers".

And frankly, an OS/2 user should be the last person to start trying to
denigrate the driver support of Windows. Historically, OS/2 driver
support has been as dismal as any operating system has ever seen.

But you know, you can't tell these things to OS/2 zealots like Bennie.
They buy that esoteric IBM oddball product, and then they think that
makes them so "special" and "smart" that they can indiscriminately
grab a fistful of buzzwords and go around talking about issues of
which they know absolutely nothing.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               14-Oct-99 23:14:22
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 02:48:15
Subj: (1/3) Re: Time to move on

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >
> > In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> > > In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> > > "David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >>
> >> >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.
>
> What planet are you from?

We come from France.

> Dos and Windows 9x have little or no security and have been heartily
embraced.
> OS/2 has no security, but according to some, it has a halfway corporation
> presence.

They are deployed for desktop software where security is unimportant.
Are you saying Linux could be gainfully employed on the business
desktop?

> >> >> 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.
>
> A droplet is not a river but both are still wet. Are do you feel that there
are
> some OS/2 users that ARE NOT computer users?

A square is not a rectangle, but both have 4 sides.  That doesn't change
the fact that a square is a specific kind of rectangle and an OS/2 user
is a specific kind of computer user.

> >> However, YOU, Marty, a person who claims to be independent of support,
>
> >-- further future support.
>
> Until the next fixpack.

Back to needs and wants again.

> >> are in a minority, whether that minority is computer users or OS/2 users.
>
> >I disagree.
>
> Your choice. It is the right of every man to be wrong(and stubborn) despite
> overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

That should cover your thoughts.  >;-)

> Of course, you also think an unsecure, support operating system cannot
> make corporate headway despite the existence of DOS and Win9x.

No, I think Linux cannot.

> >> 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.
>
> Then you would not have installed any fixpacks, would you? Your statements
are
> at odds with your actions, Marty.

Absolutely not.  Do I need to eat chocolate chip cookies to survive?  In
this case no.  Does that stop me from eating them?

> >> >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.
>
> You don't like to answer questions. Did you ask her why? Did you TRY to
explain
> or did you just tell her in a condescending manner> My in-law was absolutely
> computer illiterate, yet had no problems making a decision. I'll bet your
> mother could do the same.

With the patience of several saints, I tried explaining to her the
benefits and drawbacks of several possibilities (not one of which was an
OS/2 system, I might add).  She failed to comprehend and all that was
left was her preconceived notions and propaganda she had heard.  To put
things in perspective, she also has a large fear of the year 2000.  Is
there a -phobia word for that yet?  There should be.  Milleniphobia just
doesn't flow too well.

> >> >> 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.
>
> I wonder. I've yet to run into any computer illiterate person who couldn't
make
> a wise decision based on a good explanation.  EVERY person who was a
computer
> newbie who asked my advice took my advice 100% of the time. I asked a couple
of
> friends and they had the same hit ratio.
> Now, why would a mother ignore the advice of her son let alone someone more
> knowledgable than herself and presumably, someone she trusts?

That's a personal issue, but is precisely the case.

> I suspect that your advice was ignored for reasons other than your mother's
> "cluelessness".  Perhaps you noticed that you were using OS/2 decided your
> advice was...questionable? :-)

Well she always hears how I leave my computer on all the time and don't
reboot.  That must have turned her off to the whole thing.

> >> >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.
>
> Okay.  I wonder how many people anticipated the Internet or this IT job
market?

Anyone that had prior interest in such topics probably could have seen
it coming.

> >> 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?  :-)
>
> Installs with the driver! :-)

Right, so in order to meet my precondition for having "no OpenGL
installed on your system" you'd have to start from the VGA driver, hence
you'd have to reboot to install it.

> >> >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.
>
> Fine. This was just one example to show an overall problem.

It's only a problem for those who want to use such things, and they
should have had the sense not to use the wrong tool for their job in the
first place.

> >> >> 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.
>
> Indeed. But the truck that can tow that load and play that CD is even
better,
> isn't it?

Sure, but you can't have your cake and eat it too.  There are always
tradeoffs.

> >> >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.
>
> Once can indeed always wait for 6 months "it" will be faster and cheaper.
> However, eventually the plunge will be made and even you, Marty, will try to
> pick the most flexible solution available. It has nothing to do with trying
to
> keep up. It has everything to do with finding the most bang for the buck.

And the most bang for my buck has invariably been the one that meets my
present needs at the time my needs are assessed -- not the one that
might meet my future needs.  I have found this to be true in my own case
as far as technology is concerned.

> >> >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.
>
> And you feel that rebooting to use a single features is more efficient than
> using the tool that gives you all under a single umbrella?

For me, booting to win is a tradeoff.  I'm giving up my favorite
applications, my comfortable user interface, and a good deal of pep the
way my system is configured (pep being a subjective evaluation of
responsiveness).

> >> >> >> 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.
>
> Again, it is your right to go into a car dealership and tell someone that
the
> AC is optional no matter how many times they tell you that it is standard.
It
> doesn't make you right. Just difficult.

I'm not saying it's optional or gingerbread for everyone.  I'm saying it
is for me.

> >> 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.
>
> But yet, they are features that CAN be used. What you consider necessary
isn't
> relevent in this context. What is relevent is that you are forced to pay for
> features you CANNOT use.

I can use them if I want to reboot.  What I consider necessary is very
relevant to the context of my statement:  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.
>
> Well, let's see it.

Here's a good one, straight from the horse's mouth, posted directly to
this newsgroup, no less:

http://x29.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=451059199&CONTEXT=939953176.408551516&hitnum=3


> >> 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.
>
> Without looking at a line of their code I can guarantee you that if they
> support those advance features, they will not be the same codebase.

The interfaces to the operating systems are obviously OS specific, but
the driving code is in fact, the same.  All OS's have to be able to
change video hardware registers and manipulate video memory.  How that
is done is specific to the OS.  However, telling a card to draw a
polygon or change into a given graphics mode can be done from a common
code base.  This is what is known as "abstraction."  The low-level
interface to OS/2 is almost completely ironed out without the need to
touch the higher level code.

> That is not possible.

Incorrect.  It has already been done.

> Either they will bring all their other drivers down to
> the lowest common denominator, all they will be forced to have different
code
> for the myriad of advanced features that OS/2 doesn't support.

All video cards have similar access through whichever bus they use.  As
long as the OS can write to port and registers and memory addresses

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               14-Oct-99 23:14:22
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 02:48:15
Subj: (2/3) Re: Time to move on

(which any OS can) full support is possible for anything.

> >> >> 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?
>
> Because in the hear and now, I may want to use something in the future that
I
> don't use today. It can already exist and not be installed on my machine.

"Great strides don't matter. Plans don't matter. We don't deal in
vaporware remember?"

> >> 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.
>
> And that is why OS/2's user base is shrinking.
>
> >> >> >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.
>
> Then Scitech is pretty useless unless you wish to use two year old cards or
the
> S4.

Many OS/2 users fall into a category such that Scitech is in fact,
useful.  So many, in fact, that IBM licensed SDD for OS/2.

> >> 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.
>
> You would be refering to Nvidia's Gradd drivers. These are the same ones
that
> force OS/2 users to run at 640x480 and 60mhz.

So other alternatives can be sought that don't have this limitation.

> >> 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.
>
> How do you figure? With hoards of people like yourself(no offense) who don't
> plan on using any new cards, how is it in their best interest to support
them?

It is their product which they have invested countless man-hours in.
They are simply protecting their investment.

> >> >> 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?
>
> Maybe the millions of people who've purchased new machines less than one
year
> ago.

How would they wind up with 1 or 2 year old cards, specifically ones
which are not supported by OS/2 or SDD?

> >> 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:
> >[deleted]
>
> And what exactly does that have to do with the fact that SciTech doesn't
have
> an OS/2 version of GLDirect dispite your proclaimations of once and future
OS/2
> support?

GLDirect is a Win32 specific interface.  OpenGL is a multiplatform
interface which I have shown it does support and implement.

> >> >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.
>
> > Right.  Drop SOM because other less capable platforms are more popular.
>
> Half right. Drop some because OS/2 is less popular and show the world the
state
> of OS/2 development.

You said it yourself, they're just sticking to the lowest common
denominator.

> >> >> 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.
>
> I've read Warpcast. Now, we've gone from EDM/2 making a comeback to
irrelevent.
> Interesting. And your statement still doesn't address what I said about OS/2
> development, namely that it is falling off.

How does Warpcast not refute your claim that OS/2 development is falling
off?

> Amiga has some developers, but no one believes that it is a hotbed of
software
> development. In OS/2, there just isn't much happening on the development
front.

Again I defer to Warpcast.

> > >> 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.
>
> You HAVE to in OS/2. And all the while, programming advancements will pass
you
> by.

Coding for OS/2 is not any more difficult than coding for win32 for most
tasks.

> >> >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.
>
> Well, what rally?

Again I defer to Warpcast.

> >> >> 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.
>
> I'm not disputing that. It just seems that we don't know what it means.

This doesn't seem like a large amount of interest for such a narrow
subject to you?

> >> 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.
>
> Indeed for clearly mine did. You would not have found a harder sell than I.
NT
> won me over by working better than OS/2 did, for me, on the same hardware.
Even
> the first week, when I changed drive letters and OS/2 failed to boot with a
> "can't find country.sys" and NT boot successfully. For me, it simply
> outperformed OS/2.

Clearly subjective and we disagree.

> >> 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 don't think you are being realistic, that is how. I think that you will do
> something.

You must be an astrologer too, just like the other dave in this group.
;-)

> For example, did you anticipate installing fixpack 12? Did you
> install earlier fixpacks?

We've been through this.

> > >> >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.
>
> I had such thing while using OS/2. For example, until Warp 4, I couldn't
play
> AVIs and move the mouse without locking the system. Easy to avoid? You bet.
> Would I consider that smooth? No, after all, I couldn't move the mouse.

I have no such similar circumstances.

> Currently, I don't have any "Patient: My left arm hurts when I move it.
> Doctor:Don't move it." problems. Now, this is not the same as problem-free.

And not what I have described, either.  A left arm is an important part
of the body.  I have no major, important, or critical parts of my system
malfunctioning.  In fact, I don't know of anything in my system
malfunctioning.  That's how I perceive it to be running smoothly.

> For example, I just installed an Acer 4x4x32 CD-RW. When I started using
> DirectCD, Win2k would crash. That's the price of mixing bleeding edge and
low
> level software,but Adaptec is on the ball by having a patch fixes that
problem.
> Now, to me, a workaround, would clearly be not using DirectCD, but I
wouldn't
> considered that a smoothly running system.

Nor would I.

> BTW, can OS/2 use DirectCD?

That's like asking, can WinNT use SOM?  How about DIVE or DART?  It's
specific to the given platform.

> [snip]
>
> >> >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.
>
> But we are talking about one's options when using OS/2. It would seem to me
> that one shouldn't have to dump and OS, to do such a thing. A more optimal
> solution would be an OS that allowed you to do as much as possible.

I don't see any one OS that meets all of my needs <and> wants.  OS/2
meets all of my needs and most of my wants, so it is my choice.

> >> >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.
>
> Of course. But if you needed that feature and it forced you to reboot, that
> would be annoying, wouldn't it?

But I don't, so it's not.

> >> >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.
>
> How many fixpacks have you installed? When you installed any, did you
> anticipate needing another?

We visited this elsewhere.

> >> >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.  ;-)
>
> I'd rather view a live horse's ass than beat a dead horse. Like you. :-)

I'm no dead horse!  :-P  (and you're not beating me)

> >> >> 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.
> >>

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               14-Oct-99 23:14:22
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 02:48:15
Subj: (3/3) Re: Time to move on

> >> 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.
>
> Well, my mistake for one. That "486 than can" should be "486 that CANNOT".
> Also, my point is that people in this group seem to feel that using OS/2
proves
> they are knowledgable and using Windows proves someone else is not. My point
is
> that smart people choose fast machines and Windows and deny OS/2.

Smart people also choose fast machines and OS/2.  Smart people also
choose slow machines and OS/2.  Not so sure if smart people choose slow
machines and winxx... ;-)

> >> >> 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.
>
> Depends on where you buy it. I purchased the OS/2 Warp 4 upgrade for $129.
The
> full blown is $189. I've seen NT for as much as $249. I purchased the full-
> blown for $72. If you don't shop around, your statement would be correct.

Ok.

> >> >> 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.
>
> First, I've got a fast machine, so a small speed hit is irrelevent.

I'm not so tolerant of inefficiency.

> Second, like compression, you can encrypt individual files or folders. For
> example, you can easily make a directory and an files in it would be
encrypted.
> No need to encrypt programs, just your data.

So just your data might be difficult to recover and be slower to access.

> Third, since you don't know that the encryption is paltry, why make such a
> comment? Why not instead, make one that you can back up?

Because I've seen first-hand how paltry their front-door security is.  I
had a PIII crack a 24 character long administrator password in a lab at
school as part of an experiment.  It did so with a commonly available
program using brute-force techniques (no dictionaries were employed),
and common standard user-level access.  It came up with the password in
under 4 hours.  That's pretty paltry IMHO.

> Finally, there is the option create a recovery key if you so
> wish, but of course, a recovery key is a security risk.

Understood.

> Any thing else you wish to add?

Nope.  That about covers it.

> >> >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.
>
> You seem to feel that people can't make decisions.

Incorrect.  You seem to feel that alternatives are inferior.

> All of my static payments go out electronically with no intervention on my
> part. This saves time and effort and makes tracking payments easier. Time
> is money. Some companies even give you a discount for electronic payments.
> Again, however, you show that OS/2 user characteristic of condemning what
> you don't have and "attacking" your fellows that do want such a feature.

Where is my condemnation or attack?  I asked if it was needed or
desired?  It is not needed, since there are alternatives available.  It
is desired by some.

> >> >>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.
>
> First, HPFS Zip drive support on the PP version is iffy at best.

In what way(s)?

> Second, protection bits is not even in the same universe as a disk that can
> have read/write/password protection. I cannot believe that you would even
offer
> that as a substitute.

My misconception.  What are "protection bits"?

> Third, under OS/2, the zip drive takes the next available, lowest available
> drive letter. What this means is that the zip drive will change if you
change
> partitions. Under Windows, I made my CDROM Z: and my ZipDrive Y. No matter
> what, they don't change.
>
> You cannot do this under OS/2.

I don't swap around partitions too often, so I'm not sensitized to these
issues.  My only opinion of drive handling and MS operating systems is
one that leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth, since DOS, NT, and
Win9x actually have 3 <completely different> concepts of how my drive
letters should be mapped.  What is C: in DOS is D: in NT.  What is C: in
95 is E: in DOS and F: in NT.  And so forth.  I don't know how I managed
to do such a thing, but I was less than impressed with the consistency.
This also made installation extremely difficult using a DOS-based
install.

> >> >> 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.
>
> Not an alternative to people who want cheaper PP and don't have SCSI cards.
> You, the "take my hand-me-down 486" want people do drop $100 on a SCSI card,
> $250 on a SCSI scanner instead of spending $70 on a PP scanner?

Right tool for the right job.  Whatever that means to whomever.

> >> >> 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.
>
> I suspect that someone making animated gifs wouldn't want to do so on the
> command-line.

Then PM or X11?  I found it was quite easy to batch-process the GIFs
using the command line version for my application.

> >> >> 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.
>
> Of course. Let me help. The answer would be no.

There are commercial CD rippers available for OS/2 which are fairly
full-featured.  Neither of us is qualified to compared the features of
both products since neither of us has used both products.  This seems to
be part of your, "if it exists for win32, then any other equivalent apps
on other platforms must be inferior" attitude.

> >> >> 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.
>
> Simple methods sometimes provide simple results.

Simple results are often correct results.

> Purify is an Unix and Windows standard, but I understand how OS/2 forces
> one to make do.

Yes, working in OS/2 does tend to make one write better code.  Must be
an osmosis effect from working with a well structured, well designed
system.

> >> >> OpenGL?
> >>
> >> >What about it?
> >>
> >> Hardware support.
>
> >On the way.  Software support is already there.
>
> "On the way". That would be NO.

That would be a "NO" for now and a "YES" for later.

> >> >> 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.
>
> Indeed, people who want the widest array of software and hardware possible.

And the point being?

> >> 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?
>
> Corel Office? Right. A dog that was dropped. You are probably the only man
in
> America using Corel Office. I suspect that you use it to say you can,
instead
> of for real work.

It impressed me.  It was the first real Java <application> (not applet)
I've ever seen in action.  I much prefer using native SmartSuite, but I
think it adequately illustrates the robustness and possibilities of Java
apps.  Specifically apps that run on the currently supported version of
Java for OS/2.

> As for the features, new Java developing is moving towards Java2.

You mean it's not there yet?  Why do I care where it is moving?

> If you want to be a Java developer who is behind practically every other
> OS and thus be non-competitive while making inferior Java products, by all
> means, stick to OS/2.

Or if you want to have write once, run anywhere applications, you
conform to what is standard, thoroughly tested, and available anywhere.
I think the apps I pointed out show the current OS/2 version of Java to
be more than capable of doing complex, useful tasks.

> >> 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
>
> Truly, a rich use Marty, and similar to my own. I just have more fun. :-)

Dubious.  My form of debugging my programs is playing arcade games.
What's more fun than that?  :-)

- Marty

PS:  If we're gonna keep this thread up, can we shorten it a bit?  It's
getting to be a real chore...

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          15-Oct-99 03:29:08
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 02:48:15
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>>>>>Bennie Nelson
>>>>>the Win32 specifications have at
>>>>>least one major dichotomy:  if a Win 32 executable requires a VxD
>>>>>driver, then it will not execute on NT.

>>>> Huh?? What Win32 executables require a VxD driver? You don't link
>>>> Win32 apps with drivers. you know. It's not like a DLL.

>> >> Oh christ, I'm talking programming issues with a typical OS/2 enduser.
>> >> It's hopeless, I know. They *never* learn any of this stuff. They just
>> >> spout half-baked nonsense based upon other uninformed hearsay.

>> >Win32 software written for hardware that is supported by VxD drivers
>> >will not work in NT.

>> It is not part of the "Win32 specifications" to produce "software
>> [specifically] written for hardware [drivers]". (Not that I believe
>> that you even have the slightest idea what you're talking about. I'm
>> sure that you're simply tossing around some buzz phrases that you once
>> heard some other OS/2 nutcase rambling about Windows, and thought that
>> it made for lovely sounding FUD). Indeed, it is part of the "Win32
>> specifications" to produce software that is hardware independent. The
>> reason why there are things called "drivers" is to make that so.
>> Obviously, this most basic programming concept has gone completely
>> over your head.

>Are you saying that you are unaware of the restrictions placed upon
>developers by MS?

Oh this is precious. A technically-illiterate OS/2 *enduser*
attempting to lecture programmers upon what MS does and doesn't
provide to developers.

>VxDs, which are supported by Win 9x, are not
>supported in NT, period.

And this has exactly what to do with your statements such as "if a Win
32 executable requires a VxD driver, then it will not execute on NT."
or "Win32 software written for hardware that is supported by VxD
drivers will not work on NT"??

Win32 executables are *not* VxDs. (Do you even know what a VxD is? For
laughs, we should hear you explain to us what it is, and what it does.
I'm sure that would be a riot!) And Win32 executables are hardware
independent (unless you're talking about some specialized vertical app
that is specifically written to work with only one, particular driver,
for whatever reason. But that isn't even close to being a typical
Win32 app. Indeed, that's the sort of app that not only DOESN'T MS
"restrict" developers to writing, as you apparently misbelieve, but
actually recommends strongly against).

Nevertheless, like so many other typical OS/2 Zealots, your FUD is as
behind the times as the aging niche product you seek to promote.
You've apparently never even heard of the Windows Driver Model.
Typical.

The only real "dichotomy" here is between reality and your idea of
what reality is.

>> As a person who has written both Win32 application software as well as
>> drivers, I could explain to you how this all works, but I have
>> absolutely no confidence that you'd be able to understand much of it,
>> and worse, I strongly believe that your somewhat-unnatural "love" for
>> OS/2 will blind you into believing nothing but the worst possible,
>> least realistic FUD about Windows, some of which you're spewing right
>> now.
>>
>> By all means, feel free to get as technical as you'd like on the
>> subject of Win32 applications interfacing to VxD's. I have absolutely
>> no doubt that I'll be able to debunk any specific statements you make

>You have yet to disprove anything I have said.  Submit a URL that
>shows how one goes about installing in NT any Win32 software requiring
>one or more VxDs.

Again. You don't know what you're talking about. Win32 software
doesn't require "one or more VxDs". Win32 software is platform
independent. Go to my web site and you can download plenty of programs
that I've personally written which run under both NT and 95/98. Not
only that, they work with a WIDE VARIETY OF DRIVERS AND HARDWARE.
These are programs which do extensive I/O through drivers. (Do you
know what I/O is, Bennie?) And yet, they are still hardware dependent.
Fortunately, I know how to write Win32 programs which you appear to
erroneously believe are impossible to write, or exceptions to the
rule, or which programmers are restricted from writing by MS, and any
of the other technically-illiterate FUD you OS/2 zealots like to toss
around indiscriminately and blindly.

My own software disproves your allegations about NT and Win32 and
Windows drivers, etc. And I'm hardly the only programmer who writes
Win32 stuff that runs on both NT and Win95/98. There are *lots* of
such Win32 programmers and programs. You just don't know about them
because you're hopelessly out of touch with the reality of Win32. You
apparently live in this nightmare dreamworld where you can't install a
Win32 application unless you have some sort of VxD mysteriously
written for that specific application.

You're loony. Your FUD is loony. The mere fact that you think such
ridiculous claims of yours need to be disproven is testament to how
far out of touch you are with reality.

>> (not that I expect you to get any more specific than your laughably
>> nebulous, unsubstantiated claim that there is something "eerie" about
>> the "Win32 specification" regarding VxDs). And I'll likely make you
>> look like the technically illiterate fool that so many OS/2 zealots
>> are nowadays

>Actually, I'll give MS credit for NOT supporting VxDs in NT.  They
>are a source of instability and numerous "blue screen" crashes in
>Win 9x.  But, on the other hand, this situation does cause some
>confusion for those who want to use Win 32 software.  Not all Win32
>software that runs in Win 9x will run in NT.

Hahahahah! Actually that is true. And by "explaining" why you think
that's so, you reveal how technically ignorant you truly are.

The reason why some (actually, few -- mostly game software that uses
DirectX versions higher than 3.0 -- and that will change with NT 5)
Win32 software that runs in Win9X doesn't run in NT has ABSOLUTELY
NOTHING TO DO WITH DRIVERS.

As I said before, I *could* explain all of this to you, but I doubt
that you'd understand much of it, and worse, I believe that, due to
your zealous "love" for OS/2, you would deliberately choose not to
believe anything but the worst possible FUD about Windows, regardless
of how little resemblance to reality it bears (such as your above
statements about Win32 executables. Out to lunch, you are).

>The court records for the trial contain testimony that disproves
>your statement.

So you erroneously assume.

But then, that appears to be how you "determined" what causes a
particular Win32 program not to run under NT. You sure as hell didn't
arrive at your deduction by gleaning it from proper, technical
documentation.

And now, you're just looking more and more silly and uninformed as you
pursue a technical discussion that is clearly over your head

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          15-Oct-99 03:34:10
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 02:48:15
Subj: Re: McCoy Digest

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>> | >Now isn't that a cute signature. Have you ever tried NT, Karel?

>> | I'm sure that his "experience" with it is on a par with his "buddy"
>> | Tholen's "experience" with NT -- woefully inadequate to have anything
>> | but the obviously naive, uninformed "opinions" (typically based upon
>> | hearsay) that people like Karel and Tholen routinely spout.

>> What I do have a problem with is people being so proud of their ignorance
>> that they choose to broadcast it to the world, even going so far as to put
>> it in their signatures.

>> Karel, what's your experience with NT? Have you used it for any length of
>> time? How often did it crash on you?

>> Yup, I think he's full of it.

>I saw the signature and made a lot of similar inferences about the user
>of the signature and decided that it wasn't really worth a comment.

I think that's how, historically, a lot of mainstream users
(especially programmers and journalists, who have been frequent
targets of naive, overzealous OS/2 fanatics) regard OS/2 "advocates".

Ultimately, I think that OS/2 advocates have done about as "effective"
a job of promoting their pet product as Amiga True Believers did,
which is not surprising being that both pursued the same tactics and
made the same mistakes.

As Kurt Vonnegut would say.. "And so it goes"

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                     14-Oct-99 21:28:20
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 02:48:15
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


[e-mail] wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]>,
>   josco <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 [e-mail] wrote:
> >
> > > In article <7u4cj4$7eb$[e-mail]>,
> > >   [e-mail] wrote:
> > > > Mike Timbol writes:
> > > >
> > > > > Joseph wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >> OS/2 Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality.  Bummer,
> > > bummer.
> > > >
> > > > > It's also bullshit.
> > > >
> > > > Incorrect.  OS/2 Java 1.1.8 does implement Java 1.2 functionality.
> > > >
> > > > > Download something like NetBeans, that requires
> > > > > JDK 1.2.  Try to run it on OS/2.  No dice.
> > > >
> > > > Irrelevant, given that Joseph did not say that OS/2 Java 1.1.8
> > > > implements ALL of Java 1.2 functionality.  It does implement SOME
> > > > of it, however.
> > >
> > > On the contrary, your very own logic proves that he said exactly
> that
> > > (Re your argument from the "costly mistakes" thread of some years
> ago
> > > which you've conveniently forgotten here).
> >
> > Semantics and syntax.
> >
> > What I said had a different meaning than what was edited and argued
> > against.  Tholen's comment was consistent with what was meant and
> said.
>
> ... and it directly contradicts the logic he proffered in the "costly
> mistakes" thread years ago.

Logic:
The science or art of exact reasoning, or of pure and formal thought, or of
the laws according to which the processes of pure thinking should be
conducted; the science of the formation and application of general notions;
the science of generalization, judgment, classification, reasoning, and
systematic arrangement;  correct reasoning.

I think you are misusing the word "logic".


> I've already copied and saved this little screwup. We'll see if he
> figures it out.
>
> > BTW a person's logic, as I understand logic, argues possibilities.
> Logic
>
> As I recall, your skills with logic (as well as OS's and computers in
> general) are anemic at best.
>
> Last 4 years havn't witnessed much improvement on this score for you or
> Tholen.

Look up the word logic.  You might mean "argument" then again you might be
very sensitive and have a long memory.  In that case you're mind is made
up.  Attack

  argument \Ar"gu*ment\, n. [F. argument, L. argumentum, fr. arguere to
argue.] 1.
  Proof; evidence. [Obs.]

  2. A reason or reasons offered in proof, to induce belief, or convince the
mind;
  reasoning expressed in words; as, an argument about, concerning, or
regarding a
  proposition, for or in favor of it, or against it.

  3. A process of reasoning, or a controversy made up of rational proofs;
argumentation;
  discussion; disputation.

  The argument is about things, but names. --Locke.

  4. The subject matter of a discourse, writing, or artistic representation;
theme or topic;
  also, an abstract or summary, as of the contents of a book, chapter, poem.

  You and love are still my argument. --Shak.

  The abstract or argument of the piece. --Jeffrey.

  [Shields] with boastful argument portrayed. --Milton.

  5. Matter for question; business in hand. [Obs.]

  Sheathed their swords for lack of argument. --Shak.

  6. (Astron.) The quantity on which another quantity in a table depends;
as, the altitude
  is the argument of the refraction.

  7. (Math.) The independent variable upon whose value that of a function
depends.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                     14-Oct-99 21:34:27
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 02:48:15
Subj: Re: Communicator 4.7 vs Communicator/2

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


John Hong wrote:

> Marty ([e-mail]) wrote:
>
> : Personally, I've worked 4.61 for OS/2 very hard and I use it every day
> : for browsing as well as e-mail and newsgroups.  It doesn't crash or
> : misbehave for me in the slightest.
>
>         Another point to mention is that IBM doesn't really change the
> version number with this.  Netscape 2.02 for OS/2 was in actuality 3.0
> with the -3 switch.  It's quite possible that IBM will make a fixpak or
> re-release of 4.61 containing those 4.7 fixes, only still keeping the
> version number 4.61.

yes, IBM's use of versions numbers is conservative.  Netscape 2.02 for OS/2
wasn't a complete implementation of all v3.0 functionality just like OS/2
JDK 1.1.8 adds some but not all JDK 1.2 functionality.  With that said, I
also use the most recent edition of 2.02 with "-3" and have not found a site
which supports V3.0 and does not work with V2.02.

IBM has it's own policies and priorities.  More reliable software, fewer
changes and strategic additions of technology to "older" versions of
software.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                14-Oct-99 21:31:04
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 02:48:15
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: [e-mail] (Jerry McBride)

In article <7u50mm$rgk$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:
>In article <jToFOOvT2yOC7=[e-mail]>,
>  alliem@_nospam_ wtjam.net wrote:
>> On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Tim Timmins posted :
>>
>> > Not just the start menu can be out of date. The whole shortcuts
>> > implementation can point to broken links. Why MS forced this into
>> > NT is beyond me. Just to get away from Presentation Manager ?
>>
>> This doesn't occur in a sensible administered system.
>
>But, with all due respect, what does "sensibly administered" really
>mean? In the context of the currect discussion, it seems to me that it
>can only mean "kow-towing to the shortcomings of the interface's
>implementation."
>

It means, "it's a feature" and when things reall get lost call support and
reboot the box... By the time support gets on the line, the NT box is up and
uh... running...

>Granted, we all kow-tow to whichever interface/environment/OS we decide
>to use, at least on some level, and at least to a degree.  I guess I
>just have a hard time with euphamisms.
>
>
>Curtis
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.

--

*******************************************************************************

*            Sometimes, the BEST things in life really ARE free...
*
*       Get a FREE copy of NetRexx 1.151 for your next java project at:
*
*
*
*                      GET IT NOW! WHILE IT'S STILL FREE!
*
*
*
*                     http://www2.hursley.ibm.com/netrexx
*
*******************************************************************************


/----------------------------------------\
| From the desktop of: Jerome D. McBride |
|         [e-mail]             |
\----------------------------------------/

--

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                15-Oct-99 06:53:09
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 05:27:03
Subj: IBM's Marketing Skills

From: [e-mail]

As I was driving home today, I was thinking about all the
technology that IBM has done that the marketing department has
really screwed up.  I came up with these 4 examples....

Do any of you out there know of others?

Microchannel  Far ahead of the ISA buss, as well as the EISA
buss, and only matched today with the PCI Buss.

MWave         Really an engineering and software marvel. Actead
as a sound card, and a Modeom at 33600

Token Ring Lan Adapter  Only today with switching hubs can
Ethernet match what Token ring did 10 years ago!

OS/2.         Far ahead of Windows even today.



How long will it take Gerstner to realise that IBM's technical
prowess is second to none?  The IBM marketing dept has screwed
up more times than any other company in any industry.  It is
only the inertia of such a large company that they can continue,
blind to the fact that they cannot market their way out of a wet
paper bag!  Now IBM is considering slicing off all desktop PC
production to Dell and Acer.....  however it is not the hardware
division of IBM that is at fault but rather the marketing dept.
In a few years IBM will be strictly a service company and no
longer an innovative computer company.  Has anyone ever sent a
message like this to Gerstner?

No other company in the computer business has blown the
marketing sooo badly.  Surely this must be on the minds of a few
IBMers?




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                            15-Oct-99 08:42:18
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 10:27:10
Subj: Re: McCoy Digest

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 20:42:09, "Drestin Black"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> gee, guess at least you have a choice, Linux just crashes as soon as you
> press the power on button.
>
> (I mean, if we are going to believe your pathetic silliness, then we gotta
> believe mine too right?)
>
>  Incidentally, this is the screen you get after pressing power button:
>
> Loading Linu............ click, machine off.
>

You can't run the sources, dummy. <G>


BTW, does it say on the license agreement of NT somewhere: "Remove
sense of humour before attempting to run this operating system?"

I mean, it ain't funny if I have to put <G>'s in everywhere.

Oh, <G>, of course.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net

|---------------------------------------------------|
|            <undefined O/S> boot options           |
|                                                   |
|               Please choose from list             |
|                                                   |
|       <crash>         <OS/2>        <linux>       |
|---------------------------------------------------|

So is this more PC to you dudes?

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

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            15-Oct-99 08:42:18
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 10:27:10
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 22:48:58, Marty <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Karel Jansens wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 17:25:34, Cameron <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >   Open source operating systems are the future of computing.  Unless
OS/2 is
> > > made open source,  it has a very, very, very short future.
> > >
> > You're sort of preaching to the pope here.
> > Unfortunately, the chances of OS/2 ever getting open source are very
> > dim.
> > Bummer.
>
> IMHO, OS/2 going open source would be the worst thing that could ever
> happen to it.  It would mean IBM dropping all support of it, industry
> dropping what remains of its support, and the maintenance of code put in
> the hands of unpaid hobbyists who are completely unfamiliar with it.  It
> would also decentralize fixpacks and device drivers, and probably do
> some significant financial damage to Scitech who now has a pretty
> significant stake in OS/2.
>
> How is this the future of OS/2?
>
Well, that's what "they" said about Linux (and some are *still* saying
it).
You could be right, though.

How about a BSD-like approach? I know many manufacturers ans ISV's
would love to have seen the BSD's take off instead of Linux, because
of the central guidance issue.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net

|---------------------------------------------------|
|            <undefined O/S> boot options           |
|                                                   |
|               Please choose from list             |
|                                                   |
|       <crash>         <OS/2>        <linux>       |
|---------------------------------------------------|

NT-vocates made trouble, so here's the first P. C. sig-line.

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

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            15-Oct-99 08:42:21
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 10:27:10
Subj: Re: Hey Mr. WarpCity...

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 22:59:32, "David T. Johnson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> [e-mail] wrote:
> >
> > Howdy Tim! Warpstock is this Saturday, and I've still got that $50 that
> > says you won't be there. Feel free to prove me wrong!
> >
> > See you there everybody!
> >
> Tim has been seriously injured in an accident.

I'm sorry to hear that.
If you get in touch, could you give my best wishes to him? Although
I'm always picking on him here in COOA, I do think he's an okay dude.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net

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

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

From: [e-mail]                     15-Oct-99 10:06:14
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 10:27:10
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: [e-mail]

Lucien writes:

>> Mike Timbol writes:

>>> Joseph wrote:

>>>> OS/2 Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality.  Bummer,
>>>> bummer.

>>> It's also bullshit.

>> Incorrect.  OS/2 Java 1.1.8 does implement Java 1.2 functionality.

>>> Download something like NetBeans, that requires
>>> JDK 1.2.  Try to run it on OS/2.  No dice.

>> Irrelevant, given that Joseph did not say that OS/2 Java 1.1.8
>> implements ALL of Java 1.2 functionality.  It does implement SOME
>> of it, however.

> On the contrary, your very own logic proves that he said exactly that
> (Re your argument from the "costly mistakes" thread of some years ago
> which you've conveniently forgotten here).

I've not forgotten anything here.  Ironically, you've forgotten
something, namely that my "very own logic" involved the usage of
"prevent", as in "prevent costly mistakes" or "prevent wild fires",
which you insisted was ambiguous.  The quotation above does not
involve anything analogous to "prevent", which is why Timbol's
interpretation is incorrect, and also why your "on the contrary"
is incorrect.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                            15-Oct-99 11:25:05
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 10:27:10
Subj: Re: IBM's Marketing Skills

From: Tim Timmins <[e-mail]>

How about person to person, and of course the Repository.

I don't think Mwave got screwed, it just got overtaken by the rapid
growth of music and graphics on the internet.

Regards,
Tim

[e-mail] wrote:

> As I was driving home today, I was thinking about all the
> technology that IBM has done that the marketing department has
> really screwed up.  I came up with these 4 examples....
>
> Do any of you out there know of others?
>
> Microchannel  Far ahead of the ISA buss, as well as the EISA
> buss, and only matched today with the PCI Buss.
>
> MWave         Really an engineering and software marvel. Actead
> as a sound card, and a Modeom at 33600
>
> Token Ring Lan Adapter  Only today with switching hubs can
> Ethernet match what Token ring did 10 years ago!
>
> OS/2.         Far ahead of Windows even today.
>
> How long will it take Gerstner to realise that IBM's technical
> prowess is second to none?  The IBM marketing dept has screwed
> up more times than any other company in any industry.  It is
> only the inertia of such a large company that they can continue,
> blind to the fact that they cannot market their way out of a wet
> paper bag!  Now IBM is considering slicing off all desktop PC
> production to Dell and Acer.....  however it is not the hardware
> division of IBM that is at fault but rather the marketing dept.
> In a few years IBM will be strictly a service company and no
> longer an innovative computer company.  Has anyone ever sent a
> message like this to Gerstner?
>
> No other company in the computer business has blown the
> marketing sooo badly.  Surely this must be on the minds of a few
> IBMers?
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                     15-Oct-99 10:34:12
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 10:27:10
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: [e-mail]

Roberto Alsina writes:

>>> I wrote:

>>>> Jason S. wrote:

>>>>> Tholen was *twice* nominated for Usenet Kook of the Month -- the
>>>>> first time by Roberto Alsina back in 1997,

>>>> Alsina is the person who accused me of posting an average of 134
>>>> articles every day, which was ludicrous.  When he pointed to his
>>>> alleged evidence, it became obvious that he didn't even bother to
>>>> check the range of dates.  Even then, he continued to insist that
>>>> he was right, until others started getting on his case.  How
>>>> ironic that he nominated me rather than himself.

>>> Well, Dave, that should show you that you are not universally seen
>>> as the beacon of pure reason and thought you apparently think you
>>> are.

>> Illogical, given that the above historical account doesn't do
>> anything to contradict any assumption about what people see.

> As long as you claim I am not people, what you just said may make sense.

What I said makes sense regardless of whether I claim you are people
or not.  Nevertheless, given that you are not plural, you are not
people.

>>> BTW: you were nominated for being stupid enough to argue with Eliza.

>> Incorrect.  I wasn't stupid enough to argue with Eliza.  I was
>> responding to a real person who was inserting responses generated
>> by an Eliza program.  I realized that.  Others realized that I
>> realized that.  You did not.  How ironic that you should mention
>> being "stupid enough".  Exactly how do you explain your math error
>> and the long delay in admitting to it?

> I need not explain anything to you.

Then explain it to the readers.  Just how did you manage to get the
math so terribly wrong?  And why did you take so long to admit the
error, even after the source of the error was clearly pointed out?

> That you are still pissed about it 2 years after the fact shows you
> are indeed a grudgy old fellow, and that you have indeed not grown
> out of it.

Same old Alsina.  Even after I explained to you that Jason S. brought
you up, not me, here you are, still trying to put the onus on me.
Just like last time, you're unwilling to admit your error.  One can
only wonder how long it will take this time before you finally admit
it.

>>> Anyway, you still haven't groen out of this?

>> Still having those reading comprehension problems, Roberto?  Check
>> the thread more carefully again.  I didn't bring you up.  Jason S.
>> did.

> But you did bring up that specific incident, didn't you Dave?

I'm simply noting the irony of the situation, Roberto.  Your error
and your failure to admit it when the source of the error was
identified qualified you for the award much more than it did me.

> Of course your response needs not have any connection to what you
> are replying to, as per your usual "discussion" methodology.

Irrelevant, given that my response does have a connection to what
I'm replied to.

>>> Man, are you a grudgy old fellow!

>> You must be referring to Jason S., given that he's the one who brought
>> you up.

> No, I meant you,

Illogical, given that Jason S. brought you up, not me.

> who still have a grudge about that ancient story.

Incorrect.  The fact that I still remember it only indicates that I
have a sufficiently good memory and says absolutely nothing about
"a grudge".  The fact that you're here, responding to me, raises
interesting questions about your own motivations.  Just how did you
manage to stumble across a reference to you in this newsgroup?

>>> PS: they weren't 134 a day,

>> Then why did you claim there were,

> Because I was wrong, Dave, just as I admitted years ago.

Not right away.  Indeed, even after the source of the error was
pointed out to you, you continued to insist that you were right.

>> and why did you persist with your
>> claim, even after your error was clearly pointed out?

> For the reasons I gave in 1997.

Do you really think those so-called reasons are any less illogical
now than they were back then?

>>> but they sure felt like it.

>> That wasn't your argument at the time.  You insisted on actual
>> numbers back then, not feelings.

> It is my argument of today.

Ah, your argument du jour.  Interesting that your "feeling" has a
precision of 134.  Others tend to use "dozens", or "umpteen", or
some other non-specific term when referring to such feelings.  You
were specific down to the single posting, and used flawed mathematics,
not feelings, to try and substantiate it.  You dug yourself into a
hole back then, and I see you're doing it again, in a feeble attempt
to save face.

> You obviously still live in 1997.

Illogical; knowledge of history is not equivalent to living in the
past.

>>> PPS: preemptive Tholen argument response: they felt like that to me,

>> Irrelevant, given that you didn't refer to feelings back then, but
>> instead actual numbers.

> In case you haven't noticed, the date of this thread is 1999.

I have noticed.  Of what relevence is it?  You made your error back
then.

> I expected a response about the events of this thread.

And that's exactly what you got:  an indication of the irony that
you nominated me rather than yourself.

> What are you, some sort of librarian of ancient anger?

What makes you ask that?  What are you, someone who seeks out any
reference to you in any newsgroup?  Exactly what drew your attention
to this newsgroup after so long a silence?

>>> that's subjective, personal opinion,

>> The numbers you referred to are not.

> Who's talking about that?

I am.  That's how to be accurate about the history.

>>> you have no way of proving I didn't feel that way,

>> I do have a way of proving your reference to actual numbers.

> And who's talking about that?

I am.  That's how to be accurate about the history.

>>> so save it for the winter.

>> I'll deal with you whenever you choose to respond, Roberto.

> I'll deal with you whenever I have no need to be useful to society.

Exactly how does changing your argument (your argument du jour)
benefit society, Roberto?

Give it up, Roberto.  You looked bad back then, and there's no way
you can make yourself look any better now.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                    15-Oct-99 10:49:28
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 10:27:10
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: [e-mail]

Roberto Alsina writes:

>> Jason S. writes:

>>>>> Tholen was *twice* nominated for Usenet Kook of the Month -- the
>>>>> first time by Roberto Alsina back in 1997,

>>>> Alsina is the person who accused me of posting an average of 134
>>>> articles every day, which was ludicrous.  When he pointed to his
>>>> alleged evidence, it became obvious that he didn't even bother to
>>>> check the range of dates.  Even then, he continued to insist that
>>>> he was right, until others started getting on his case.  How ironic
>>>> that he nominated me rather than himself.

>>> None of this changes the fact that you were nominated in 1997.

>> It does demonstrate that person responsible did not have his facts
>> straight and wasn't interested in getting them straight.  Rather
>> coincidentally, you also relied on false information in the nomination
>> that you prepared.

> Your lack of logic is astounding.

Your lack of substantiation for the claim you just made is astounding.

> You were not nominated because of the fact you present, but because
> of another.

Irrelevant, given that I didn't say anything about what motivated you
to submit a nomination.  I'm simply noting the irony that you didn't
nominate yourself, after making such a boneheaded mistake and
continuing to insist that you were right, even after the source of the
error was clearly identified.

> That I was wrong in A doesn't prove I was wrong in B,

Irrelevant, given that I haven't claimed that you are wrong in B.  I'm
simply noting the irony that you didn't nominate yourself, for the
reason given above.

> much less that you are not a kook,

What kind of person makes an order of magnitude error in a simple
posting rate calculation and continues to insist that the calculation
is correct, even after the source of the error has been identified?
You should have nominated yourself, Roberto.

> which everyone who has read your drivel already knows you are.

The fact that you erroneously accused me of posting an average of
134 articles every day is not "drivel".  The fact that you continued
to insist that your calculation was correct, even after the source
of the error was identified, is not "drivel".  Rather, they are
facts that show you to be more deserving of the nomination.

> The award would have been just a cherry on the cake, a "official"
> acknowledgement of your nuttiness.

I'm not the one who botched the math, Roberto.  You did.

> Fear not, you're still a kook in my heart.

What you have in your heart is irrelevant to me.  The facts are
relevant, and the facts are that you botched the math and didn't
admit it until others agreed with my analysis.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                     15-Oct-99 11:21:00
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 10:27:10
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: [e-mail]

Jason S. writes:

>>>>> Tholen was *twice* nominated for Usenet Kook of the Month -- the first
>>>>> time by Roberto Alsina back in 1997,

>>>> Alsina is the person who accused me of posting an average of 134 articles
>>>> every day, which was ludicrous.  When he pointed to his alleged evidence,
>>>> it became obvious that he didn't even bother to check the range of dates.
>>>> Even then, he continued to insist that he was right, until others started
>>>> getting on his case.  How ironic that he nominated me rather than
himself.

>>> None of this changes the fact that you were nominated in 1997.

>> It does demonstrate that person responsible did not have his facts
>> straight and wasn't interested in getting them straight.

> The critical fact -- your kookiness -- was correctly noted, Dave.

Incorrect, given that there isn't any on my part to note.  There is
some on Roberto's part, however, namely his ridiculous accusation
that I posted an average of 134 articles to USENET every day, and
his failure to admit the error even after it was demonstrated to him.

>> Rather coincidentally, you also relied on false information in the
>> nomination that you prepared.

> I relied on actual posts of yours, for the most part.

What did you rely on for the rest, Jason, and just how much is "the
most part"?

>> Rather coincidentally, you also relied on false information in the
>> nomination that you prepared.

> Is that "false information," Dave?

The National Lampoon relied on actual statements made by Richard Nixon.
For example, Nixon said "I am not a crook."  Except the National
Lampoon left out a critical piece of information, namely "not".  They
thereby turned the actual statement into false information.  You used
a similar, though not identical, approach.

>>>>> 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

>>>> Actually, that's the wake of your notorious attempts to "get a rise" out
>>>> of me.  Put the onus where it belongs, Jason:  on you, not me.

>>> Typical Tholen attempt to obfuscate the *real* issue.

>> Noting an important historical fact that you left out is not
>> obfuscation.

> Dave, the issue is your kookiness.

What alleged "kookiness", Jason?  That's rather ironic, coming from
someone who spends time on USENET trying to "get a rise" out of
others.

>>>>> There was no evidence of tampering

>>>> Incorrect.  The voting deadline was extended,

>>> ..which is not evidence of tampering...

>> Prove that the outcome was not affected by the deadline extension.

> The burden to prove that the extension affected the outcome lies on
> your shoulders, Dave. You made a claim: back it up.

You're the one claiming that the results of the ballot should be
believed, Jason.  The burden of proof is on your shoulders, not mine.

>>>> and I know that at least one vote wasn't counted.

>>> ..for a person who wasn't nominated,

>> Which makes the fact that you received a vote even more significant.

> Which explains why it wasn't counted.

It does no such thing.  Rather, it demonstrates more evidence of
tampering.

>>> so the alleged vote was a nullity.

>> On the contrary, your actions earned you that vote.  Too bad the
>> significance is lost on you.

> Even assuming arguendo that someone did vote for me, you got more
> than enough votes to win.

Prove that you didn't get more, Jason.  Your actions certainly
earned the disdain of several people in sci.astro.

>>>>> Tholen claimed that someone named "Wayne Strang" (who was not even
>>>>> nominated)

>>>> Incorrect.  Consult deja.com for proof.

>>> Dave, the ballot has been reposted repeatedly.

>> The result showing Wayne Strang's election was reposted.

> Do you mean the post by the December 1997 Kook of the Month that
> declared "Wayne Strang" to be the unanimous winner?

I mean the post showing that Wayne Strang won.

> Odd, since you claim that I got a vote, and I know that you got at
> least one vote yourself.

That was a different, unofficial, "tongue-in-cheek", tampered with,
ballot, Jason.

>>> "Wayne Strang" (whoever that is) was not on it.

>> Incorrect.

> Reference?

Deja.com.

>>> Now, it is possible that a nomination was made,

>> More than just possible.  One was indeed made.

> Prove it, if you think you can.

See the above-mentioned posting, Jason.

>>> but the rules require a second, and it appears that no second was made --
>>> thus, he was not properly nominated under the rules.

>> Then how did he manage to win?

> He didn't, Dave.

Incorrect, Jason.

>>>>> won the election and complained that a vote cast by some unnamed person
>>>>> allegedly for me was not counted.

>>>> You want actual names, Jason?

>>> Provide it, if you think you can.

>> I said "names", Jason, not "name", thus your use of "it" is
>> inappropriate.

> Provide them, if you think you can.

Having memory problems, Jason?  Deja.com can help.

>>>> Check the people who criticized you for
>>>> your "campaigning" in sci.astro.

>>> Are you alleging that these alleged people voted for me, Dave?

>> The people are not alleged, Jason.  You quickly left sci.astro after
>> you were criticized multiple times.  Consult deja.com if you can't
>> remember their names.

> I was never subscribed to sci.astro, Dave, so it is illogical to
> claim that I "left" that group.

You posted to sci.astro, Jason.  You then disappeared after receiving
considerable criticism.  It is therefore not illogical to claim that
you left.

>>>> As for the person who contacted me
>>>> privately to say that he voted for you, just what do you think the
>>>> word "privately" means?

>>> I imagine that it means that this alleged person allegedly sent you
>>> an email.

>> It means that I won't betray a confidence, Jason.

> ..preferring to make typical Tholen unsubstantiated claims.

On the contrary, the vote counter has the substantiation, Jason.

>>>>> Tholen conveniently disregarded the fact that I was not nominated in
>>>>> making this complaint.

>>>> Doesn't change the fact that you received at least one vote, and quite
>>>> possibly more, perhaps even the most.

>>> And perhaps you were on the grassy knoll in Dallas in 1963, Dave.

>> Non sequitur.

> Whatever.

Typical Jason S.

>>>>> The second KOTM title that Dave won

>>>> I haven't won any, Jason.

>>> Incorrect.

>> Still trying to foist your unofficial, "tongue-in-cheek", tampered
>> results on the unsuspecting reader, eh Jason?

> I simply refer to the poll that was taken by someone other than me
> in CSMA earlier this year. They're not "my" results.

Also tampered with.  You and Edwin had thousands of votes that
disappeared.

>>>>> 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.

>>>> Incorrect.  You and Edwin both had thousands of votes that disappeared.

>>> ..and the technical problems with the polling were straightened out
>>> by the people who run that site.

>> Evidence, please.

> The fact that the persons who were tampering with the vote (running up
> thousands of votes for me and Edwin) apparently could no longer run
> up the vote to such an extent speaks for itself.

How would you know whether those people even attempted to tamper with
the vote after the alleged technical problems were straightened out?

>>>> And from Eric Bennett:

>>>> ] The other poll (csma KOTM) was not well protected against vote fraud.
I
>>>> ] had an amusing evening playing with their vote counting system to see
if I
>>>> ] could get around their belatedly instituted safeguards (which I did...

>>> ..and Eric voted for Nathan A. Hughes, not for you, Dave.

>> Irrelevant, Jason.  It demonstrates that the poll was not protected
>> against fraud.

> No vote is completely protected against fraud, Dave.

Prove it, if you think you can, Jason.  I was in a meeting last night
in which votes were taken.  Eyes were open and hands were raised.
Anyone could verify the count.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                     15-Oct-99 11:28:11
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 10:27:10
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: [e-mail]

Eric Bennett writes (under a pseudonym):

>> Impossible, given that deja.com does prove that I am correct.

> Prove it, if you think you can.

Yet again?  Have you forgotten the last time already?

>> That's not the "actual ballot".

> Incorrect.

Feel free to demonstrate how it's allegedly incorrect, if you think
you can.

>> Incorrect.

> Taking reading comprehension lessons from Eric Bennett again, Dave?

Obviously not.

Taking identification lessons from Bob Dole, Eric?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                  15-Oct-99 07:37:21
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 10:27:10
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: "Joe Malloy" <[e-mail]>

Something like <[e-mail]> is still trying to argue
that he's *not* a Kook and tholened:

> > Your lack of logic is astounding.
>
> Your lack of substantiation for the claim you just made is astounding.

Your lack of evidence for the claim you just made is phenomenal, Tholane
(where the heck did the extra "e" come from in you email address above?).
Prove it, if you think you can.



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

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

From: [e-mail]                                       15-Oct-99 22:14:29
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 14:34:16
Subj: Re: IBM Warp Client 5 is under development

From: "stan" <[e-mail]>

Rick Lindsay <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
> From within IBM Austin comes word that there is really a development team
working
> on a new client....
>
>
>
>
> Rick Lindsay, Lindsay Computer Systems, http://www.jumpnet.com/~lcs
> Austin, Texas. 512-719-5257.  Asus based systems, Asus Products.
>                                     Advanced Systems.
>            This message is SHAREWARE, please register...
>
>
>


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

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

From: [e-mail]                             15-Oct-99 12:16:07
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 14:34:16
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: [e-mail]

In article <7u6ub4$jh0$[e-mail]>,
  [e-mail] wrote:
> Lucien writes:
>
> >> Mike Timbol writes:
>
> >>> Joseph wrote:
>
> >>>> OS/2 Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality.  Bummer,
> >>>> bummer.
>
> >>> It's also bullshit.
>
> >> Incorrect.  OS/2 Java 1.1.8 does implement Java 1.2 functionality.
>
> >>> Download something like NetBeans, that requires
> >>> JDK 1.2.  Try to run it on OS/2.  No dice.
>
> >> Irrelevant, given that Joseph did not say that OS/2 Java 1.1.8
> >> implements ALL of Java 1.2 functionality.  It does implement SOME
> >> of it, however.
>
> > On the contrary, your very own logic proves that he said exactly
that
> > (Re your argument from the "costly mistakes" thread of some years
ago
> > which you've conveniently forgotten here).
>
> I've not forgotten anything here.  Ironically, you've forgotten
> something, namely that my "very own logic" involved the usage of
> "prevent", as in "prevent costly mistakes" or "prevent wild fires",
> which you insisted was ambiguous.  The quotation above does not
> involve anything analogous to "prevent", which is why Timbol's
> interpretation is incorrect, and also why your "on the contrary"
> is incorrect.
>

Wrong.

Go back and reread the thread to find out why.

Lucien S.


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: [e-mail]                             15-Oct-99 12:22:23
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 14:34:16
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
  Joseph <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>
> [e-mail] wrote:
>
> > In article <Pine.SGI.3.93.991014172817.20439B-
[e-mail]>,
> >   josco <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 [e-mail] wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <7u4cj4$7eb$[e-mail]>,
> > > >   [e-mail] wrote:
> > > > > Mike Timbol writes:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Joseph wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >> OS/2 Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality.  Bummer,
> > > > bummer.
> > > > >
> > > > > > It's also bullshit.
> > > > >
> > > > > Incorrect.  OS/2 Java 1.1.8 does implement Java 1.2
functionality.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Download something like NetBeans, that requires
> > > > > > JDK 1.2.  Try to run it on OS/2.  No dice.
> > > > >
> > > > > Irrelevant, given that Joseph did not say that OS/2 Java 1.1.8
> > > > > implements ALL of Java 1.2 functionality.  It does implement
SOME
> > > > > of it, however.
> > > >
> > > > On the contrary, your very own logic proves that he said exactly
> > that
> > > > (Re your argument from the "costly mistakes" thread of some
years
> > ago
> > > > which you've conveniently forgotten here).
> > >
> > > Semantics and syntax.
> > >
> > > What I said had a different meaning than what was edited and
argued
> > > against.  Tholen's comment was consistent with what was meant and
> > said.
> >
> > ... and it directly contradicts the logic he proffered in
the "costly
> > mistakes" thread years ago.
>
> Logic:
> The science or art of exact reasoning, or of pure and formal thought,
or of
> the laws according to which the processes of pure thinking should be
> conducted; the science of the formation and application of general
notions;
> the science of generalization, judgment, classification, reasoning,
and
> systematic arrangement;  correct reasoning.
>
> I think you are misusing the word "logic".

What you think is irrelevant. What you can demonstrate is relevant.

> > I've already copied and saved this little screwup. We'll see if he
> > figures it out.
> >
> > > BTW a person's logic, as I understand logic, argues possibilities.
> > Logic
> >
> > As I recall, your skills with logic (as well as OS's and computers
in
> > general) are anemic at best.
> >
> > Last 4 years havn't witnessed much improvement on this score for
you or
> > Tholen.
>
> Look up the word logic.  You might mean "argument" then again you
might be
> very sensitive and have a long memory.  In that case you're mind is
made
> up.  Attack

Feel free to reread the "costly mistakes" thread, if you're interested;
it's still archived on USENET.

Of course, you'll be no more capable of understanding what was going on
than Tholen was.

Lucien S.

>   argument \Ar"gu*ment\, n. [F. argument, L. argumentum, fr. arguere
to
> argue.] 1.
>   Proof; evidence. [Obs.]
>
>   2. A reason or reasons offered in proof, to induce belief, or
convince the
> mind;
>   reasoning expressed in words; as, an argument about, concerning, or
> regarding a
>   proposition, for or in favor of it, or against it.
>
>   3. A process of reasoning, or a controversy made up of rational
proofs;
> argumentation;
>   discussion; disputation.
>
>   The argument is about things, but names. --Locke.
>
>   4. The subject matter of a discourse, writing, or artistic
representation;
> theme or topic;
>   also, an abstract or summary, as of the contents of a book,
chapter, poem.
>
>   You and love are still my argument. --Shak.
>
>   The abstract or argument of the piece. --Jeffrey.
>
>   [Shields] with boastful argument portrayed. --Milton.
>
>   5. Matter for question; business in hand. [Obs.]
>
>   Sheathed their swords for lack of argument. --Shak.
>
>   6. (Astron.) The quantity on which another quantity in a table
depends;
> as, the altitude
>   is the argument of the refraction.
>
>   7. (Math.) The independent variable upon whose value that of a
function
> depends.
>
>


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: [e-mail]                                  15-Oct-99 12:39:27
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 14:34:16
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: [e-mail] (Isxios)

On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 14:35:05, Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> There was a reason for that.  Microsoft withheld the Win 95 license until
the day
> of Win 95's release.  Why?  MS was stipulating that IBM stop preloads of
OS/2
> as a precondition for receiving the Win 95 preload agreement.  IBM would not
> cave on that point.
>
> Bennie Nelson

Perhaps not up to that point, but they did, in my opinion, give in on
that point, because it was at that point that IBM seemed to not just
halt on Warp, but even started actively killing it. Warp3 was a groing
OS. It was selling tremendously well, yet IBM stopped pushing it, just
as it was taking off. Do you really think that was just a coincidence?

Isxios


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http
(1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                  15-Oct-99 12:43:23
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 14:34:16
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: [e-mail] (Isxios)

On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 22:05:41, [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)
wrote:

>
> I never heard any MS spokesman testify before the DOJ that "MS
> stipulated IBM stop preloads of OS/2 as a precondition for receiving
> the Win95 preload agreement". In fact, MS denied any such "demand",
> despite your indication otherwise

No, an MS spokesman would not testify to this. Someone from IBM did.
But, of course, therein lies your problem, you will never believe
anything that doesn't come out of the mouth of a Microsoft
spokesperson.

Isxios


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http
(1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               15-Oct-99 09:40:02
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 14:34:16
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Karel Jansens wrote:
>
> On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 22:48:58, Marty <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> > Karel Jansens wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 17:25:34, Cameron <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >   Open source operating systems are the future of computing.  Unless
OS/2 is
> > > > made open source,  it has a very, very, very short future.
> > > >
> > > You're sort of preaching to the pope here.
> > > Unfortunately, the chances of OS/2 ever getting open source are very
> > > dim.
> > > Bummer.
> >
> > IMHO, OS/2 going open source would be the worst thing that could ever
> > happen to it.  It would mean IBM dropping all support of it, industry
> > dropping what remains of its support, and the maintenance of code put in
> > the hands of unpaid hobbyists who are completely unfamiliar with it.  It
> > would also decentralize fixpacks and device drivers, and probably do
> > some significant financial damage to Scitech who now has a pretty
> > significant stake in OS/2.
> >
> > How is this the future of OS/2?
> >
> Well, that's what "they" said about Linux (and some are *still* saying
> it).
> You could be right, though.
>
> How about a BSD-like approach? I know many manufacturers ans ISV's
> would love to have seen the BSD's take off instead of Linux, because
> of the central guidance issue.

Thing is, Linux was not pre-existing as a commercial closed-source
product before it went open source.  As much as people will deny it,
OS/2 currently has a corporate userbase and support.  Going open source
will do serious damage to both of these existing areas.  Perhaps if it
was never sold commercially to begin with, I could see the benefits.
But in its current form it has everything to lose and very little to
gain from such a thing.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                       15-Oct-99 13:49:11
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 14:34:16
Subj: Re: IBM's Marketing Skills

From: Gilbert Saint-flour <[e-mail]>

In <7u6j0q$6v$[e-mail]>, on 15 Oct 1999 at 06:53,
[e-mail] said:

>As I was driving home today, I was thinking about all the technology
>that IBM has done that the marketing department has really screwed up.
>I came up with these 4 examples....
>Microchannel, MWave, Token Ring, OS/2.

You only have a partial view of what IBM is selling.  Yes, poor marketing
screwed up the things you mention, but IBM is very successful in other
areas: S/390 mainframes, AS/400, RS/6000, Disk storage, Memory chips,
Software, IT Services, etc.  PCs are a commodity and IBM isn't very good
unless they can have a large profit margin.

Gilbert Saint-flour <[e-mail]>


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

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

From: [e-mail]                             15-Oct-99 14:13:09
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 14:34:17
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: [e-mail]

Jeff,

Seek help.

Not only are baring your soul on a ng for an OS you deny (made by a
company you profess to despise); but; now you are talking to yourself
_in_print_ as well!

Best wishes for a speedy recovery,

Guido

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)
writes:
||Bennie Nelson
||the Win32 specifications have at
||least one major dichotomy:  if a Win 32 executable requires a VxD
||driver, then it will not execute on NT.
|
|Huh?? What Win32 executables require a VxD driver? You don't link
|Win32 apps with drivers. you know. It's not like a DLL.
|
|Oh christ, I'm talking programming issues with a typical OS/2 enduser.
|It's hopeless, I know. They *never* learn any of this stuff. They just
|spout half-baked nonsense based upon other uninformed hearsay.
|
||MS was stipulating that IBM stop preloads of OS/2
||as a precondition for receiving the Win 95 preload agreement.  IBM would not
||cave on that point.
|
|No, what *really* happened was that IBM withheld payment for the
|Windows 95 licenses until the last minute. IBM wasn't sure that it was
|going to license Win95 until after IBM saw that a number of its
|competitors had already signed up for it. It was only then that IBM
|agreed to MS's asking price



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

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

From: [e-mail]                                     15-Oct-99 07:09:05
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 14:34:17
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


[e-mail] wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]>,
>   Joseph <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > [e-mail] wrote:
> >

>
> > > > What I said had a different meaning than what was edited and
> argued
> > > > against.  Tholen's comment was consistent with what was meant and
> > > said.
> > >
> > > ... and it directly contradicts the logic he proffered in
> the "costly
> > > mistakes" thread years ago.
> >
> > Logic:
> > The science or art of exact reasoning, or of pure and formal thought,
> or of
> > the laws according to which the processes of pure thinking should be
> > conducted; the science of the formation and application of general
> notions;
> > the science of generalization, judgment, classification, reasoning,
> and
> > systematic arrangement;  correct reasoning.
> >
> > I think you are misusing the word "logic".
>
> What you think is irrelevant. What you can demonstrate is relevant.

Whether you want to read the definition of the word "Logic" or not read it
is your business.


>
> > > I've already copied and saved this little screwup. We'll see if he
> > > figures it out.
> > >
> > > > BTW a person's logic, as I understand logic, argues possibilities.
> > > Logic
> > >
> > > As I recall, your skills with logic (as well as OS's and computers
> in
> > > general) are anemic at best.
> > >
> > > Last 4 years havn't witnessed much improvement on this score for
> you or
> > > Tholen.
> >
> > Look up the word logic.  You might mean "argument" then again you
> might be
> > very sensitive and have a long memory.  In that case you're mind is
> made
> > up.  Attack
>
> Feel free to reread the "costly mistakes" thread, if you're interested;
> it's still archived on USENET.

I might if it were at all interesting.

> Of course, you'll be no more capable of understanding what was going on
> than Tholen was.

I understand you misued the word logic. What once went  on between you an
him is not interesting to me in the least bit.  The thread was about
Navigator 4.7.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                    15-Oct-99 14:22:11
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 14:34:17
Subj: Re: [README] New banners available

From: [e-mail] (Chris Downs)

On Wed, 13 Oct 1999 12:05:10 +0100, Paul Vigay
<[e-mail]> wrote:


>I don't think it's a case of being envious (although I wouldn't mind some of
>his money...) but more a case of valuing one's freedom, choice and
>independence.

And did anyone see Gate$ statement on teletext? He admits "Microsoft's
days are numbered". I don't remember the page, but a short search
through the small stories section should find it ;-)


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

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

From: [e-mail]                          15-Oct-99 10:42:15
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 14:34:17
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Jeff Glatt wrote:
>
> >>>Bennie Nelson
> >>>Win32 software written for hardware that is supported by VxD drivers
> >>>will not work in NT.
>
> >>jglatt
> >> It is not part of the "Win32 specifications" to produce "software
> >> [specifically] written for hardware [drivers]". (Not that I believe
> >> that you even have the slightest idea what you're talking about. I'm
> >> sure that you're simply tossing around some buzz phrases that you once
> >> heard some other OS/2 nutcase rambling about Windows, and thought that
> >> it made for lovely sounding FUD). Indeed, it is part of the "Win32
> >> specifications" to produce software that is hardware independent. The
> >> reason why there are things called "drivers" is to make that so.
> >> Obviously, this most basic programming concept has gone completely
> >> over your head.
>
> >Marty
> >I think what he was trying to get at was the fact that there were
> >historically, if not currently, several device drivers that existed only
> >in VxD form and therefore would not work in NT.
>
> That's a driver issue, and has nothing whatsoever to do with Win32
> applications. For example, the Win32 program that I just wrote will do
> MIDI output upon both NT as well as Win95. But, it will use entirely
> different drivers upon both platforms. For that matter, it will use
> entirely different drivers for different MIDI interfaces even under
> the same operating system. That's because a properly written Windows
> application is hardware independent. Bennie doesn't know this.
>
> Obviously, Bennie really doesn't know what he's talking about when he
> uttered the quote about "Win32 software written for hardware that is
> supported by VxD drivers", nor the technical considerations of such
> issues.

Actually, I know whereof I speak from experience.  Sound cards were not
always supported under NT because of the use of VxDs to access the
hardware.  This method is supported in Win 9x and not supported in NT.
Any Win32 software written for that soundcard would not work because
the soundcard could not be accessed.

>
> If someone were to fling around buzzwords as indiscrimately and
> erroneously as Bennie does (and other OS/2 Advocates tend to do),
> someone could derive all sorts of crazy, nebulous, buzzword-plagued
> condemnations about OS/2's design.
>
> >Until recently, USB
> >support was in this category among other things.  Of course, with the
> >new WDM this is no longer an issue.
>
> Drivers are ALWAYS an issue on any platform. It's a fundamental
> "layer" of any operating system, and if you don't have the driver
> support you need, you're in trouble. For example, with my program
> above, it may even exhibit different levels of support and
> performance, depending upon the particular drivers that are used with
> the app. That's the way that things always are with drivers...
> anywhere they are.
>
> But that's a support issue, not some alleged "design issue" about the
> "Win32 specification" and some sort of supposed "software written for
> hardware that is supported by VxD drivers".
>
> And frankly, an OS/2 user should be the last person to start trying to
> denigrate the driver support of Windows. Historically, OS/2 driver
> support has been as dismal as any operating system has ever seen.

OS/2 driver support is better now than when Win 95 was released.  As I
recall, there was a huge list of thousands of devices not being supported
in Win 95 during the beta.  OS/2's support for devices is far better now
than NT 4.0 when it was released.

>
> But you know, you can't tell these things to OS/2 zealots like Bennie.
> They buy that esoteric IBM oddball product, and then they think that
> makes them so "special" and "smart" that they can indiscriminately
> grab a fistful of buzzwords and go around talking about issues of
> which they know absolutely nothing.

Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               15-Oct-99 15:30:15
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 14:34:17
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: Roberto Alsina <[e-mail]>

In article <7u70sk$l4g$[e-mail]>,
  [e-mail] wrote:

I think I will indulge in some tholenisms, just for the bad old times'
sake.

> > You were not nominated because of the fact you present, but because
> > of another.
>
> Irrelevant, given that I didn't say anything about what motivated you
> to submit a nomination.

The fact for which you were nominated is not the fact that motivated
me to nominate you. Your comprehension problems continue.

> I'm simply noting the irony that you didn't
> nominate yourself, after making such a boneheaded mistake and
> continuing to insist that you were right, even after the source of the
> error was clearly identified.

Being wrong is not kooky. Insisting on mistakes is not kooky.
Even if what you say is true, it still makes no sense.

> > That I was wrong in A doesn't prove I was wrong in B,
>
> Irrelevant, given that I haven't claimed that you are wrong in B.  I'm
> simply noting the irony that you didn't nominate yourself, for the
> reason given above.

Kooky reasons for a kook. I should have guessed that.

> You should have nominated yourself, Roberto.

Why? I am not a kook. Or at least I do not believe I am a kook.
Why should I nominate a person I do not believe to be a kook?
That only makes sense in the mind of a kook: you.

> > which everyone who has read your drivel already knows you are.
>
> The fact that you erroneously accused me of posting an average of
> 134 articles every day is not "drivel".

Of course it is not. You didn't post that. I did. What you post is
drivel. What I post isn't.

> > The award would have been just a cherry on the cake, a "official"
> > acknowledgement of your nuttiness.
>
> I'm not the one who botched the math, Roberto.  You did.

But you are the kook, Dave.

> > Fear not, you're still a kook in my heart.
>
> What you have in your heart is irrelevant to me.

But not to me, and that's why I share it with the world, kooky.

Anyway, that was not the only time you argued with a computer
program. Do you authorize me to show here the other one?

--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)


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: [e-mail]                             15-Oct-99 08:27:03
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 14:34:17
Subj: Re: IBM Warp Client 5 is under development

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>


stan wrote:
>
> Rick Lindsay <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> news:[e-mail]...
> > From within IBM Austin comes word that there is really a development team
> working
> > on a new client....

Ssssssssshhhhhhhhhhhh!  Brad Wardell has assured us that IBM has
indicated to him with a clear message that there will be no new client.

> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Rick Lindsay, Lindsay Computer Systems, http://www.jumpnet.com/~lcs
> > Austin, Texas. 512-719-5257.  Asus based systems, Asus Products.
> >                                     Advanced Systems.
> >            This message is SHAREWARE, please register...
> >
> >
> >

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          15-Oct-99 11:55:25
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 21:58:13
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Isxios wrote:
>
> On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 14:35:05, Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
> > There was a reason for that.  Microsoft withheld the Win 95 license until
the day
> > of Win 95's release.  Why?  MS was stipulating that IBM stop preloads of
OS/2
> > as a precondition for receiving the Win 95 preload agreement.  IBM would
not
> > cave on that point.
> >
> > Bennie Nelson
>
> Perhaps not up to that point, but they did, in my opinion, give in on
> that point, because it was at that point that IBM seemed to not just
> halt on Warp, but even started actively killing it. Warp3 was a groing
> OS. It was selling tremendously well, yet IBM stopped pushing it, just
> as it was taking off. Do you really think that was just a coincidence?
>
> Isxios

According to IBM's Gary Norris' testimony at the trial, IBM was denied
access to Win 95 for the purpose of preloading it on IBMs PCs.  MS held
out until 11:45 PM on Aug 24th.  Win 95 was released at midnight, fifteen
minutes later.  IBM did not agree at that point to MS' demands.  Two
years later, IBM released Warp v4 and publicly announced Netscape for
OS/2.  MS retaliated.  This is also covered in Norris' testimony.  Some
URLs covering these aspects of the case are:

http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/stories/news/0,4153,1014850,00.html
http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/stories/news/0,4153,1015008,00.html
http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/stories/news/0,4153,1014993,00.html

IBM did not give up on Warp v3, but followed it with Warp v4.  That was
quite a stunning product given the level of MS' offerings.  IBM did not
give up on Warp, in my estimation.  They were coerced into it, if the
DOJ's case is correct.

Regards,
Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               15-Oct-99 15:59:19
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 21:58:13
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: Roberto Alsina <[e-mail]>

In article <7u6vvg$kk8$[e-mail]>,
  [e-mail] wrote:
> Roberto Alsina writes:
>
> >>> I wrote:
>
> >>>> Jason S. wrote:
>
> >>>>> Tholen was *twice* nominated for Usenet Kook of the Month -- the
> >>>>> first time by Roberto Alsina back in 1997,
>
> >>>> Alsina is the person who accused me of posting an average of 134
> >>>> articles every day, which was ludicrous.  When he pointed to his
> >>>> alleged evidence, it became obvious that he didn't even bother to
> >>>> check the range of dates.  Even then, he continued to insist that
> >>>> he was right, until others started getting on his case.  How
> >>>> ironic that he nominated me rather than himself.
>
> >>> Well, Dave, that should show you that you are not universally seen
> >>> as the beacon of pure reason and thought you apparently think you
> >>> are.
> >>> Well, Dave, that should show you that you are not universally seen
> >>> as the beacon of pure reason and thought you apparently think you
> >>> are.
>
> >> Illogical, given that the above historical account doesn't do
> >> anything to contradict any assumption about what people see.
>
> > As long as you claim I am not people, what you just said may make
sense.
>
> What I said makes sense regardless of whether I claim you are people
> or not.  Nevertheless, given that you are not plural, you are not
> people.

I am part of the people. Excuse my bad english.

Now, if I am part of the people, let me show you why what you said makes
no
sense:

My claim:

-----
Well, Dave, [Your KOTM nomination] should show you that you are not
universally seen as the beacon of pure reason and thought you apparently
think you are.
-----

Let's break that into pieces:

[a] I say you apparently think you are a beacon of pure reason and
thought.
[b] I say that since I don't see you as one, you are not universally
seen
    as one.

Since [a] is not a statement of fact but of my personal opinion, you can
not deny it. You can however claim my opinion is wrong, and that you are
not a beacon of pure reason and thought (BOPRAT for short).

If you are not a BOPRAT, then you are accepting [b], since you are part
of
the universe, and my overall premise is correct.

But you didn't do that. You said

-----
Illogical, given that the above historical account doesn't do
anything to contradict any assumption about what people see.
-----

If I am part of the people, "people" as a whole can not see you in a
way different than my own. Part of the people may, of course, but not
"people", which presumes a universal agreement by all parts of the
people, of which I am one.

Since the historical account shows that I don't see you as a BOPRAT,
it contradicts directly an assumption that "people" see you as a
BOPRAT. That's why I said that nominating you for KOTM should
have shown you that "people" doesn't see you as a BOPRAT, and thus,
you should not have that assumption about how people see you.

Therefore, the historical account does something to contradict the
specific assumption about people seing you as a BOPRAT, and your
statement makes no sense.

Clear enough for you?

> >>> BTW: you were nominated for being stupid enough to argue with
Eliza.
>
> >> Incorrect.  I wasn't stupid enough to argue with Eliza.  I was
> >> responding to a real person who was inserting responses generated
> >> by an Eliza program.  I realized that.  Others realized that I
> >> realized that.  You did not.  How ironic that you should mention
> >> being "stupid enough".  Exactly how do you explain your math error
> >> and the long delay in admitting to it?
>
> > I need not explain anything to you.
>
> Then explain it to the readers.

I need not explain anything to the readers either.

> > That you are still pissed about it 2 years after the fact shows you
> > are indeed a grudgy old fellow, and that you have indeed not grown
> > out of it.
>
> Same old Alsina.  Even after I explained to you that Jason S. brought
> you up, not me,

I never said you brought me up. I never said Jason didn't brought me up.
Stop saying it, we all agree.

> here you are, still trying to put the onus on me.

For the things you did brought up? Yes.

> Irrelevant, given that my response does have a connection to what
> I'm replied to.

I can't parse that.

> The fact that you're here, responding to me, raises
> interesting questions about your own motivations.  Just how did you
> manage to stumble across a reference to you in this newsgroup?

I notice all references to me in USENET.

> >>> PS: they weren't 134 a day,
>
> >> Then why did you claim there were,
>
> > Because I was wrong, Dave, just as I admitted years ago.
>
> Not right away.

Never said I did.

> >> and why did you persist with your
> >> claim, even after your error was clearly pointed out?
>
> > For the reasons I gave in 1997.
>
> Do you really think those so-called reasons are any less illogical
> now than they were back then?

They haven't changed. Why do you expect their logic qualities to
have changed?

> >>> but they sure felt like it.
>
> >> That wasn't your argument at the time.  You insisted on actual
> >> numbers back then, not feelings.
>
> > It is my argument of today.
>
> Ah, your argument du jour.

Of course. Why should I use an argument of 1997? Do you feel that
writing in french makes you look more correct?

> Interesting that your "feeling" has a precision of 134.

Not necessarily.

> Others tend to use "dozens", or "umpteen", or
> some other non-specific term when referring to such feelings.

I don't think I would have felt different with anything from, say,
100 up to 150.

> You
> were specific down to the single posting, and used flawed mathematics,
> not feelings, to try and substantiate it.

You are confusing 1997 and 1999. As you said, in 1997 I was not
talking about feelings. I am doing it now, and I have not substantiated
it in any way, much less with flawed mathematics.

> You dug yourself into a
> hole back then, and I see you're doing it again, in a feeble attempt
> to save face.

At least I have a face to save, Dave.

> >>> PPS: preemptive Tholen argument response: they felt like that to
me,
>
> >> Irrelevant, given that you didn't refer to feelings back then, but
> >> instead actual numbers.
>
> > In case you haven't noticed, the date of this thread is 1999.
>
> I have noticed.  Of what relevence is it?  You made your error back
> then.

And that was not on this thread.

> > What are you, some sort of librarian of ancient anger?
>
> What makes you ask that?

Curiosity.

> What are you, someone who seeks out any
> reference to you in any newsgroup?

Someone who has software to do that for him, actually.

> Exactly what drew your attention
> to this newsgroup after so long a silence?

A reference to my name. I do it to keep track of arguments I am involved
in.

> >>> that's subjective, personal opinion,
>
> >> The numbers you referred to are not.
>
> > Who's talking about that?
>
> I am.  That's how to be accurate about the history.

Then you didn't understand me. When I said "that's subjective,
personal opinion" I was not talking about the numbers. I was
talking about what I said in a recent post. Therefore your
response was a non sequitur.

> >>> so save it for the winter.
>
> >> I'll deal with you whenever you choose to respond, Roberto.
>
> > I'll deal with you whenever I have no need to be useful to society.
>
> Exactly how does changing your argument (your argument du jour)
> benefit society, Roberto?

In no way. That's why I only do it when I am not needing to be useful.
Reading comprehension problems, Dave?

--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)


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: [e-mail]                          15-Oct-99 11:48:05
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 21:58:13
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Jeff Glatt wrote:
>
> >>>>>Bennie Nelson
> >>>>>the Win32 specifications have at
> >>>>>least one major dichotomy:  if a Win 32 executable requires a VxD
> >>>>>driver, then it will not execute on NT.
>
> >>>> Huh?? What Win32 executables require a VxD driver? You don't link
> >>>> Win32 apps with drivers. you know. It's not like a DLL.
>
> >> >> Oh christ, I'm talking programming issues with a typical OS/2 enduser.
> >> >> It's hopeless, I know. They *never* learn any of this stuff. They just
> >> >> spout half-baked nonsense based upon other uninformed hearsay.
>
> >> >Win32 software written for hardware that is supported by VxD drivers
> >> >will not work in NT.
>
> >> It is not part of the "Win32 specifications" to produce "software
> >> [specifically] written for hardware [drivers]". (Not that I believe
> >> that you even have the slightest idea what you're talking about. I'm
> >> sure that you're simply tossing around some buzz phrases that you once
> >> heard some other OS/2 nutcase rambling about Windows, and thought that
> >> it made for lovely sounding FUD). Indeed, it is part of the "Win32
> >> specifications" to produce software that is hardware independent. The
> >> reason why there are things called "drivers" is to make that so.
> >> Obviously, this most basic programming concept has gone completely
> >> over your head.
>
> >Are you saying that you are unaware of the restrictions placed upon
> >developers by MS?

If I had written the answer below and Jeff had written the question above,
Jeff would have come back with "note, no answer."

Jeff, do I get to fill in the blank, since you didn't answer the question?

>
> Oh this is precious. A technically-illiterate OS/2 *enduser*
> attempting to lecture programmers upon what MS does and doesn't
> provide to developers.

You've done quite a job of filling in a personal description of me with
so little information.  Quite a work of fiction you have going there, too.
You'll criticize me as "illiterate" and you are willing to denigrate my
character and abilities when you are quite ignorant of what I am like and
what my abilities are.

>
> >VxDs, which are supported by Win 9x, are not
> >supported in NT, period.
>
> And this has exactly what to do with your statements such as "if a Win
> 32 executable requires a VxD driver, then it will not execute on NT."
> or "Win32 software written for hardware that is supported by VxD
> drivers will not work on NT"??

Some Win32 software is written for hardware that is accessed via a VxD
type device driver.  Some hardware manufacturers bundle their own applications
with the hardware.  Example: sound card with midi and audio applications.

>
> Win32 executables are *not* VxDs. (Do you even know what a VxD is? For
> laughs, we should hear you explain to us what it is, and what it does.
> I'm sure that would be a riot!) And Win32 executables are hardware
> independent (unless you're talking about some specialized vertical app
> that is specifically written to work with only one, particular driver,
> for whatever reason. But that isn't even close to being a typical
> Win32 app. Indeed, that's the sort of app that not only DOESN'T MS
> "restrict" developers to writing, as you apparently misbelieve, but
> actually recommends strongly against).
>
> Nevertheless, like so many other typical OS/2 Zealots, your FUD is as
> behind the times as the aging niche product you seek to promote.
> You've apparently never even heard of the Windows Driver Model.
> Typical.

Why did Microsoft create that?  And why did MS pledge to merge Win 9x
and NT into one common platform?  Precisely because of the incompatibilities
between Win 9x and NT.  And why is MS having such a tough time achieving
the common code base for Windows?  Because the consumers would have to
ditch a lot of investments in software that currently runs on Win 9x that
wouldn't be supported.  And much of that software would be Win32 software.

>
> The only real "dichotomy" here is between reality and your idea of
> what reality is.

The real dichotomy is between Win 9x and NT.

>
> >> As a person who has written both Win32 application software as well as
> >> drivers, I could explain to you how this all works, but I have
> >> absolutely no confidence that you'd be able to understand much of it,
> >> and worse, I strongly believe that your somewhat-unnatural "love" for
> >> OS/2 will blind you into believing nothing but the worst possible,
> >> least realistic FUD about Windows, some of which you're spewing right
> >> now.

While not necessary, I will insert a little personal history.  In 1988, I
taught myself how to program in x86 assembler.  The reason?  I wanted to
write a real time MIDI program and needed an MPU401 device driver.  The MIDI
program and device driver were written in assembler for performance reasons.
The program generated harmony in real time based upon the notes played on a
MIDI capable instrument.  This was no simple program, either.  The harmonies
were written according to Bach's rules of harmony and up to eight different
keys could be used per song.  The melodies would always be correct for the
key being played: the program would detect modulations and modulate
accordingly.
It also allowed the keys to be entered.  The program was not limited to the
standard major and minor keys.

This was not a sequencer.  I wanted something that was totally dynamic.

My wife played keyboards and loved to use it.  She said it was really amazing.
She would play something using a piano voice, for instance, and my program
would generate harmony melodies played on, say, a flute.  In essence, it
would "jam" with her.    It always played in the keys she wanted and followed
her lead.

As a further aside, I've written thousands of lines of code in many
programming
languages: from IBM 370 assembler to fourth generation languages; from PC
assembler
to REXX.

> >>
> >> By all means, feel free to get as technical as you'd like on the
> >> subject of Win32 applications interfacing to VxD's. I have absolutely
> >> no doubt that I'll be able to debunk any specific statements you make

Jeff,
I would welcome the opportunity to have a decent technical exchange with
you.  You have consistently shown your inability to do so.  Instead you've
repeatedly revealed the weakness of your positions by resorting to personal
attacks and insults.  If your technical positions were worth anything, you
wouldn't have to try to disguise them with such drivel.

>
> >You have yet to disprove anything I have said.  Submit a URL that
> >shows how one goes about installing in NT any Win32 software requiring
> >one or more VxDs.
>
> Again. You don't know what you're talking about. Win32 software
> doesn't require "one or more VxDs". Win32 software is platform
> independent. Go to my web site and you can download plenty of programs
> that I've personally written which run under both NT and 95/98. Not
> only that, they work with a WIDE VARIETY OF DRIVERS AND HARDWARE.
> These are programs which do extensive I/O through drivers. (Do you
> know what I/O is, Bennie?) And yet, they are still hardware dependent.
> Fortunately, I know how to write Win32 programs which you appear to
> erroneously believe are impossible to write, or exceptions to the
> rule, or which programmers are restricted from writing by MS, and any
> of the other technically-illiterate FUD you OS/2 zealots like to toss
> around indiscriminately and blindly.
>
> My own software disproves your allegations about NT and Win32 and
> Windows drivers, etc. And I'm hardly the only programmer who writes
> Win32 stuff that runs on both NT and Win95/98. There are *lots* of
> such Win32 programmers and programs. You just don't know about them
> because you're hopelessly out of touch with the reality of Win32. You
> apparently live in this nightmare dreamworld where you can't install a
> Win32 application unless you have some sort of VxD mysteriously
> written for that specific application.
>
> You're loony. Your FUD is loony. The mere fact that you think such
> ridiculous claims of yours need to be disproven is testament to how
> far out of touch you are with reality.
>
> >> (not that I expect you to get any more specific than your laughably
> >> nebulous, unsubstantiated claim that there is something "eerie" about
> >> the "Win32 specification" regarding VxDs). And I'll likely make you
> >> look like the technically illiterate fool that so many OS/2 zealots
> >> are nowadays
>
> >Actually, I'll give MS credit for NOT supporting VxDs in NT.  They
> >are a source of instability and numerous "blue screen" crashes in
> >Win 9x.  But, on the other hand, this situation does cause some
> >confusion for those who want to use Win 32 software.  Not all Win32
> >software that runs in Win 9x will run in NT.
>
> Hahahahah! Actually that is true. And by "explaining" why you think
> that's so, you reveal how technically ignorant you truly are.
>
> The reason why some (actually, few -- mostly game software that uses
> DirectX versions higher than 3.0 -- and that will change with NT 5)
> Win32 software that runs in Win9X doesn't run in NT has ABSOLUTELY
> NOTHING TO DO WITH DRIVERS.

You are incorrect here.  I gave VxDs as ONE EXAMPLE of incompatibilies
in the Windows achitecure.  I did not say or imply that it was the only
one, or even, the most important one.  It was simply the one I chose.

>
> As I said before, I *could* explain all of this to you, but I doubt
> that you'd understand much of it, and worse, I believe that, due to
> your zealous "love" for OS/2, you would deliberately choose not to
> believe anything but the worst possible FUD about Windows, regardless
> of how little resemblance to reality it bears (such as your above
> statements about Win32 executables. Out to lunch, you are).
>
> >The court records for the trial contain testimony that disproves
> >your statement.
>
> So you erroneously assume.

And you've offered no proof to the contrary.  Try this URL:

http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/stories/news/0,4153,1014850,00.html

This article tells how Gary Norris explains to the court that MS did
not allow IBM access to Win 95 until 15 minutes before the midnight
launch of Win 95 on August 24th, 1995.  Why? Because IBM would not
agree to cut back shipments of OS/2 and replace them with Windows.

>
> But then, that appears to be how you "determined" what causes a
> particular Win32 program not to run under NT. You sure as hell didn't
> arrive at your deduction by gleaning it from proper, technical
> documentation.
>
> And now, you're just looking more and more silly and uninformed as you
> pursue a technical discussion that is clearly over your head

You are just as mistaken about this as you are about the testimony
at the MS vs DOJ trial.  If you need any further assistance finding
the facts, just ask.  I've got other URLs that also support my position.

Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               15-Oct-99 12:11:07
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 21:58:13
Subj: Re: Software Choice = Warp 5?

From: Brad BARCLAY <[e-mail]>

Darin McBride wrote:
>
> On Mon, 04 Oct 1999 11:56:42 -0400, Brad BARCLAY wrote:
>
> >       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...
> >:).
>
> Less Tim Martin!
>
> :-)

    Someone in another thread mentioned that Tim has been in a serious
accident.  If this is true, then my best wishes go out to him for a
speedy recovery.

Brad BARCLAY

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Posted from the OS/2 WARP v4.5 desktop of Brad BARCLAY.
E-Mail:  [e-mail]        Location:  2G43D@Torolabs

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Toronto Labs, DB2 for OS/2 Install Developer (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                  15-Oct-99 13:09:22
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 21:58:13
Subj: Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: "Joe Malloy" <[e-mail]>

Oy, something claiming to be a <[e-mail]> tholened:

> > Prove it, if you think you can.
>
> Yet again?  Have you forgotten the last time already?

You only *think* you have "demonstrated" something.  It's baseless claim,
though, and as a result deserves a "prove it, if you think you can"
response.


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

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

From: Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]                 15-Oct-99 13:00:27
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 21:58:13
Subj: FUD Wars: Microsoft warps reality

From: "www.angelfire.com web2news.pl" <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]>

FUD Wars: Microsoft warps reality

[ http://lists.essential.org/1998/am-info/msg01529.html ]
The Steve Bartko Incident
(astroturf)
[ http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/content/pcmo/0414/306632.html ]
Dvorak on astroturf

[ http://www.zdnet.com/sr/columns/foley/980805.html ]
Foley on Waggener-Edstrom tactics

[ http://slashdot.org/features/99/04/23/1316228.shtml ]
Slashdot on Mindcraft

[ http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/tech/DailyNews/mslinux990428.html ]
ABC on Mindcraft

[ http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/1999/04/27/mindcraft/ ]
Salon on Mindcraft

[ http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayNew.pl?/petrel/980420np.htm ]
Nick Petreley on astroturf

[ http://www.wired.com/news/news/business/story/17745.html ]
Wired: Is MS Preening in Public Posts?
(astroturf)
[ http://features.linuxtoday.com/stories/8890.html ]
Handling the Microsoft Certified Professional

[ http://linuxtoday.com/stories/8186.html ]
The War - Paul Ferris

[ http://www.nacs.net/~heller/ms/ms_linuxmyths.html ]
Linux Myths rebuttal by Hebrank

Full text at: http://www.angelfire.com/nj2/edcurry/fudwars.html

Posted with: http://www.angelfire.com/ca4/mccluretroy/web2news.html

http:  www angelfire com nj2 edcurry fudwars html web2news.pl

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: [e-mail] (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               15-Oct-99 11:58:14
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 21:58:13
Subj: Re: McCoy Digest

From: Craig Kelley <[e-mail]>

jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) writes:

> On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 20:42:09, "Drestin Black"
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> > gee, guess at least you have a choice, Linux just crashes as soon as you
> > press the power on button.
> >
> > (I mean, if we are going to believe your pathetic silliness, then we gotta
> > believe mine too right?)
> >
> >  Incidentally, this is the screen you get after pressing power button:
> >
> > Loading Linu............ click, machine off.
>
> You can't run the sources, dummy. <G>
>
> BTW, does it say on the license agreement of NT somewhere: "Remove
> sense of humour before attempting to run this operating system?"

No, that's in the EULA for Outlook (it is a dim one, after all).

Oh yeah, almost forgot:   <G>

--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley  -- [e-mail]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [e-mail] for PGP block

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                  15-Oct-99 13:07:05
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 21:58:13
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: "Joe Malloy" <[e-mail]>

> you will never believe anything that doesn't
> come out of the mouth of a Microsoft spokesperson.

And you believe everything that an IBM spokeman has to say.  You're no
better than you claim he is.



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

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

From: [e-mail]                          15-Oct-99 18:22:01
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 21:58:14
Subj: Re: IBM's Marketing Skills

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>[e-mail]
>No other company in the computer business has blown the
>marketing sooo badly.

Incorrect. Obviously, you've never heard of the Amiga and CBM. (That's
not surprising. Many people didn't hear about it due to CBM marketing.
If they did hear about the Amiga, it was likely from Amiga True
Believers, which really left a bad taste in many people's mouthes).

Perhaps if more Team OS/2 people *had* been aware of what happened to
the Amiga, they wouldn't have gone down that same path, with the same
ultimate results.

This is, of course, exactly what I warned people about when I first
entered this newsgroup 4 years ago. I could see that things weren't
proceeding with OS/2 exactly where they were with the Amiga in 1985.
And sure enough. OS/2 today is pretty much exactly where the Amiga was
in 1989.

At the risk of spoiling a good story, I should tell you that the
Amiga's story does *not* have a happy ending.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          15-Oct-99 18:00:12
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 21:58:14
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>> >>>Bennie Nelson
>> >>>Win32 software written for hardware that is supported by VxD drivers
>> >>>will not work in NT.

>> >>jglatt
>> >> It is not part of the "Win32 specifications" to produce "software
>> >> [specifically] written for hardware [drivers]". (Not that I believe
>> >> that you even have the slightest idea what you're talking about. I'm
>> >> sure that you're simply tossing around some buzz phrases that you once
>> >> heard some other OS/2 nutcase rambling about Windows, and thought that
>> >> it made for lovely sounding FUD). Indeed, it is part of the "Win32
>> >> specifications" to produce software that is hardware independent. The
>> >> reason why there are things called "drivers" is to make that so.
>> >> Obviously, this most basic programming concept has gone completely
>> >> over your head.

>> >Marty
>> >I think what he was trying to get at was the fact that there were
>> >historically, if not currently, several device drivers that existed only
>> >in VxD form and therefore would not work in NT.

>> That's a driver issue, and has nothing whatsoever to do with Win32
>> applications. For example, the Win32 program that I just wrote will do
>> MIDI output upon both NT as well as Win95. But, it will use entirely
>> different drivers upon both platforms. For that matter, it will use
>> entirely different drivers for different MIDI interfaces even under
>> the same operating system. That's because a properly written Windows
>> application is hardware independent. Bennie doesn't know this.

>> Obviously, Bennie really doesn't know what he's talking about when he
>> uttered the quote about "Win32 software written for hardware that is
>> supported by VxD drivers", nor the technical considerations of such
>> issues.

>Actually, I know whereof I speak from experience.

Of really??? Just much "Win32 software" have you personally "written
for hardware that is supported by VxD drivers". I have a web site
containing a dozen such programs that I've personally written. That's
why I know the FUD you're attempting to promulgate is so much
inaccurate hot air from someone who thinks he knows-it-all but is
obviously waaaaaaaaaaay over his head here, and doesn't really know
what he's talking about.

Show me the money, and then you won't be such a load of foolish,
misguided hot air.

>Sound cards were not always supported under NT

This is, of course, a completely inaccurate statement (unless you're
talking about some early beta of NT akin to OS/2 1.0. I mean, at some
early point, OS/2 didn't support such things as JAVA, zip drives,
higher video resolutions, etc, etc, etc. But that still doesn't
explain why you're making flat-out-erroneous, unproven statements
about Win32 as it exists today).

Obviously, you are completely unaware of NT's Kernel Mode Drivers and
its implementation of MCI. I have no doubt that you know absolutely
nothing about the details of NT's driver structure. Have you ever even
opened Art Baker's book to page 1??? I doubt it. Here it sits right
next to my computer -- one of the books that I'm currently reading. If
you're going to insist upon talking about NT drivers, maybe you read
it to clear up your misconceptions, such as the one above).

>because of the use of VxDs to access the
>hardware.

Um, you are apparently completely unaware that some sound card support
under Win 9X doesn't use VxDs. For example, my Roland RAP-10 audio
card is using a Win 3.1 driver under Win 9X which is NOT a VxD.

Again, you simply do not know what you're talking about. Your ideas of
what are "true" and "false" about Win32, NT drivers, and other such
Windows issues are obviously based upon uninformed hearsay and
inaccurate FUD (no doubt disseminated from other technically
illiterate and uninformed OS/2 zealots).

I'll say it again because it bears noting the extent of your
fanaticism. I *could* explain all of this stuff to you so that you'd
actually know the truth instead of your distorted, inaccurate version,
but I doubt that you'd understand it, and much worse, I'm convinced
that your overzealous "love" for OS/2 has made you hellbent upon
believing only the absolute worst FUD about Windows which anyone can
conjure up, regardless of accuracy and any sense of perspective.

To be sure, your own FUD is far from accurate, and obviously lacks the
perspective of being spoken from personal experience with these
programming issues, despite your undemonstrated claim otherwise.

>This method is supported in Win 9x and not supported in NT.

Um, NT drivers have plenty of access to the same hardware as VxDs, and
can do the same things with that hardware, thereby providing a device
independent (ie, typical) Win32 application the same support.

Obviously, you don't know what you're talking about. I guess that's
why you've been unable to provide even one example to buttress your
uninformed FUD, and cite it as typical, whereas I have an entire web
site of software that refutes your bogus depictions about "Win32
software" and I cite countless other Win32 software as likewise.

>Any Win32 software written for that soundcard would not work because
>the soundcard could not be accessed.

Win32 programmers don't write for *a* soundcard. We write for all
soundcards. I *write* such Win32 software. It accesses the soundcard
under both NT and Win 9X. I know what I'm talking about.

You obviously haven't written any such software. That's undoubtably
why you don't know what you're talking about.

>> If someone were to fling around buzzwords as indiscrimately and
>> erroneously as Bennie does (and other OS/2 Advocates tend to do),
>> someone could derive all sorts of crazy, nebulous, buzzword-plagued
>> condemnations about OS/2's design.

>> >Until recently, USB
>> >support was in this category among other things.  Of course, with the
>> >new WDM this is no longer an issue.
>>
>> Drivers are ALWAYS an issue on any platform. It's a fundamental
>> "layer" of any operating system, and if you don't have the driver
>> support you need, you're in trouble. For example, with my program
>> above, it may even exhibit different levels of support and
>> performance, depending upon the particular drivers that are used with
>> the app. That's the way that things always are with drivers...
>> anywhere they are.
>>
>> But that's a support issue, not some alleged "design issue" about the
>> "Win32 specification" and some sort of supposed "software written for
>> hardware that is supported by VxD drivers".
>>
>> And frankly, an OS/2 user should be the last person to start trying to
>> denigrate the driver support of Windows. Historically, OS/2 driver
>> support has been as dismal as any operating system has ever seen.

>OS/2 driver support is better now than when Win 95 was released.  As I
>recall, there was a huge list of thousands of devices not being supported
>in Win 95 during the beta.  OS/2's support for devices is far better now
>than NT 4.0 when it was released.

Ah, so then your recent FUD about the reputed current "design" and
state of Win32 is actually based upon some preliminary betas of NT and
Win 9X. I see. That explains a lot.

It explains why you don't know what you're talking about today.

Incidentally, driver support for both Win9X and NT are better than
OS/2 *now*. But I guess that when one is living in the past like you
are, what's happening right now doesn't really matter.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          15-Oct-99 14:45:29
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 21:58:14
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Jeff Glatt wrote:
>
> >> >>>Bennie Nelson
> >> >>>Win32 software written for hardware that is supported by VxD drivers
> >> >>>will not work in NT.
>
> >> >>jglatt
> >> >> It is not part of the "Win32 specifications" to produce "software
> >> >> [specifically] written for hardware [drivers]". (Not that I believe
> >> >> that you even have the slightest idea what you're talking about. I'm
> >> >> sure that you're simply tossing around some buzz phrases that you once
> >> >> heard some other OS/2 nutcase rambling about Windows, and thought that
> >> >> it made for lovely sounding FUD). Indeed, it is part of the "Win32
> >> >> specifications" to produce software that is hardware independent. The
> >> >> reason why there are things called "drivers" is to make that so.
> >> >> Obviously, this most basic programming concept has gone completely
> >> >> over your head.
>
> >> >Marty
> >> >I think what he was trying to get at was the fact that there were
> >> >historically, if not currently, several device drivers that existed only
> >> >in VxD form and therefore would not work in NT.
>
> >> That's a driver issue, and has nothing whatsoever to do with Win32
> >> applications. For example, the Win32 program that I just wrote will do
> >> MIDI output upon both NT as well as Win95. But, it will use entirely
> >> different drivers upon both platforms. For that matter, it will use
> >> entirely different drivers for different MIDI interfaces even under
> >> the same operating system. That's because a properly written Windows
> >> application is hardware independent. Bennie doesn't know this.
>
> >> Obviously, Bennie really doesn't know what he's talking about when he
> >> uttered the quote about "Win32 software written for hardware that is
> >> supported by VxD drivers", nor the technical considerations of such
> >> issues.
>
> >Actually, I know whereof I speak from experience.
>
> Of really??? Just much "Win32 software" have you personally "written
> for hardware that is supported by VxD drivers". I have a web site
> containing a dozen such programs that I've personally written. That's
> why I know the FUD you're attempting to promulgate is so much
> inaccurate hot air from someone who thinks he knows-it-all but is
> obviously waaaaaaaaaaay over his head here, and doesn't really know
> what he's talking about.

I'm not spreading "fud."  How can what you've written be taken seriously,
when MS has admitted that Win 9x and NT are competing and incompatible
implementations of Win32?  They have been intending and working for years
to merge these two platforms.  They haven't succeeded.  As I have said,
NT's nonsupport of VxD type drivers is good.  And any software that
requires hardware that is ONLY supported via a VxD driver will not
work in NT.  That's a minor issue, anymore.

>
> Show me the money, and then you won't be such a load of foolish,
> misguided hot air.

What's the URL for your site?

>
> >Sound cards were not always supported under NT
>
> This is, of course, a completely inaccurate statement (unless you're
> talking about some early beta of NT akin to OS/2 1.0. I mean, at some
> early point, OS/2 didn't support such things as JAVA, zip drives,
> higher video resolutions, etc, etc, etc. But that still doesn't
> explain why you're making flat-out-erroneous, unproven statements
> about Win32 as it exists today).

MS still provides hardware compatibility list for NT.  It's very
existence proves that there are devices that are not supported by
NT.  If NT supported every device, there would be no need for a
hardware compatibility list.

>
> Obviously, you are completely unaware of NT's Kernel Mode Drivers and
> its implementation of MCI. I have no doubt that you know absolutely
> nothing about the details of NT's driver structure. Have you ever even
> opened Art Baker's book to page 1??? I doubt it. Here it sits right
> next to my computer -- one of the books that I'm currently reading. If
> you're going to insist upon talking about NT drivers, maybe you read
> it to clear up your misconceptions, such as the one above).
>
> >because of the use of VxDs to access the
> >hardware.
>
> Um, you are apparently completely unaware that some sound card support
> under Win 9X doesn't use VxDs. For example, my Roland RAP-10 audio
> card is using a Win 3.1 driver under Win 9X which is NOT a VxD.

Nowhere in any statement I have made did I state or imply that ALL
soundcard devices have VxD drivers for Win 95 support.

How well do games run in NT that require DirectX 6?

>
> Again, you simply do not know what you're talking about. Your ideas of
> what are "true" and "false" about Win32, NT drivers, and other such
> Windows issues are obviously based upon uninformed hearsay and
> inaccurate FUD (no doubt disseminated from other technically
> illiterate and uninformed OS/2 zealots).
>
> I'll say it again because it bears noting the extent of your
> fanaticism. I *could* explain all of this stuff to you so that you'd

You say that, but nothing you've written gives a hint that you are able
to deliver on this promise.  I would welcome an intelligent, courteous
technical exchange with you.

> actually know the truth instead of your distorted, inaccurate version,
> but I doubt that you'd understand it, and much worse, I'm convinced
> that your overzealous "love" for OS/2 has made you hellbent upon
> believing only the absolute worst FUD about Windows which anyone can
> conjure up, regardless of accuracy and any sense of perspective.

You "conviction" is quite misplaced.  I own four copies of Windows.  Win 3.0,
Win 3.11, and two copies of Win 95.  Win 3.0 is not in use, but the other
three are installed and are regularly used in my household.  I also have three
copies of Warp v4 and one copy of Linux installed.

At work, I have NT 4 and Warp 4 installed on my desktop system, and I am
System Administator for a server running NT Server.  I support Windows NT,
Win 95, and Win 98 on desktops in our department.

>
> To be sure, your own FUD is far from accurate, and obviously lacks the
> perspective of being spoken from personal experience with these
> programming issues, despite your undemonstrated claim otherwise.

Is that a confession?  Were you looking in the mirror when you wrote that?
It sure describes your "contributions" to this newsgroup.

>
> >This method is supported in Win 9x and not supported in NT.
>
> Um, NT drivers have plenty of access to the same hardware as VxDs, and
> can do the same things with that hardware, thereby providing a device
> independent (ie, typical) Win32 application the same support.

This is quite true.  Nothing I have stated has denied that.  The point
here is that to provide support for both Win 9x and NT, when a VxD has
been developed for Win 9x, another device driver must be developed.
After all your blusteriness has dissipated, you've admitted that I'm right.

>
> Obviously, you don't know what you're talking about. I guess that's
> why you've been unable to provide even one example to buttress your
> uninformed FUD, and cite it as typical, whereas I have an entire web
> site of software that refutes your bogus depictions about "Win32
> software" and I cite countless other Win32 software as likewise.

You've not supplied one counter example.  You've merely alluded to their
existence.  Besides, all of those examples do not establish that my
point is wrong.  All I'd have to do is provide one example.

>
> >Any Win32 software written for that soundcard would not work because
> >the soundcard could not be accessed.
>
> Win32 programmers don't write for *a* soundcard. We write for all
> soundcards. I *write* such Win32 software. It accesses the soundcard
> under both NT and Win 9X. I know what I'm talking about.

If you go back and look at my statement, I clearly indicated that the
software was bundled by the manufacturer of the card.  This is a
common occurrence: proprietary software written for a propietary
hardware device and supplied in the package with that device.

>
> You obviously haven't written any such software. That's undoubtably
> why you don't know what you're talking about.

I have written hundreds of programs, thousands of lines of code, using
many programming languages.  You obviously have me confused with someone
else.

>
> >> If someone were to fling around buzzwords as indiscrimately and
> >> erroneously as Bennie does (and other OS/2 Advocates tend to do),
> >> someone could derive all sorts of crazy, nebulous, buzzword-plagued
> >> condemnations about OS/2's design.

If someone were to fling around insults as indiscrimately and
erroneously as Jeff does (and other Winvocates tend to do),
someone could derive all sorts of crazy, nebulous, buzzword-plagued
condemnations about OS/2's supporters.

>
> >> >Until recently, USB
> >> >support was in this category among other things.  Of course, with the
> >> >new WDM this is no longer an issue.
> >>
> >> Drivers are ALWAYS an issue on any platform. It's a fundamental
> >> "layer" of any operating system, and if you don't have the driver
> >> support you need, you're in trouble. For example, with my program
> >> above, it may even exhibit different levels of support and
> >> performance, depending upon the particular drivers that are used with
> >> the app. That's the way that things always are with drivers...
> >> anywhere they are.
> >>
> >> But that's a support issue, not some alleged "design issue" about the
> >> "Win32 specification" and some sort of supposed "software written for
> >> hardware that is supported by VxD drivers".

It is a design issue.  Win 9x provides a different architecture for
hardware support than NT.

> >>
> >> And frankly, an OS/2 user should be the last person to start trying to
> >> denigrate the driver support of Windows. Historically, OS/2 driver
> >> support has been as dismal as any operating system has ever seen.
>
> >OS/2 driver support is better now than when Win 95 was released.  As I
> >recall, there was a huge list of thousands of devices not being supported
> >in Win 95 during the beta.  OS/2's support for devices is far better now
> >than NT 4.0 when it was released.
>
> Ah, so then your recent FUD about the reputed current "design" and
> state of Win32 is actually based upon some preliminary betas of NT and
> Win 9X. I see. That explains a lot.

Not a good inference to draw from my statement.  What else can we conclude?
How about: OS/2 is supposed to be dead, and hardware device support is one
way to prove that OS/2 is dead.  BUT, OS/2's device support now is better
than Win 95 and NT 4 when they were released.  Can we conclude then that
Win 95 and NT were Dead On Arrival?  Obviously not.  But, if Win 95 and NT
were not labelled "dead" given the level of device support when they were
released, why should OS/2 be considered dead when it's current level of
device support exceeds the device support of those two products when they
were released?

>
> It explains why you don't know what you're talking about today.
>
> Incidentally, driver support for both Win9X and NT are better than
> OS/2 *now*. But I guess that when one is living in the past like you
> are, what's happening right now doesn't really matter.

OS/2 supports more than an adequate number of devices.  Furthermore, the
devices supported by OS/2 tend to be the better quality devices.

I don't care that OS/2 doesn't support every sound card or every video card
or every printer.  I don't need one of each.  What I want is high quality
products that are not a source of instability and problems.  With OS/2, if
the product is supported, it's more likely than not to be a trouble-free
experience.  You cannot say that for Win 9x.

Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            15-Oct-99 17:34:10
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 21:58:14
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Fri, 15 Oct 1999 13:40:04, Marty <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Karel Jansens wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 22:48:58, Marty <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > > Karel Jansens wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 17:25:34, Cameron <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >   Open source operating systems are the future of computing.  Unless
OS/2 is
> > > > > made open source,  it has a very, very, very short future.
> > > > >
> > > > You're sort of preaching to the pope here.
> > > > Unfortunately, the chances of OS/2 ever getting open source are very
> > > > dim.
> > > > Bummer.
> > >
> > > IMHO, OS/2 going open source would be the worst thing that could ever
> > > happen to it.  It would mean IBM dropping all support of it, industry
> > > dropping what remains of its support, and the maintenance of code put in
> > > the hands of unpaid hobbyists who are completely unfamiliar with it.  It
> > > would also decentralize fixpacks and device drivers, and probably do
> > > some significant financial damage to Scitech who now has a pretty
> > > significant stake in OS/2.
> > >
> > > How is this the future of OS/2?
> > >
> > Well, that's what "they" said about Linux (and some are *still* saying
> > it).
> > You could be right, though.
> >
> > How about a BSD-like approach? I know many manufacturers ans ISV's
> > would love to have seen the BSD's take off instead of Linux, because
> > of the central guidance issue.
>
> Thing is, Linux was not pre-existing as a commercial closed-source
> product before it went open source.  As much as people will deny it,
> OS/2 currently has a corporate userbase and support.  Going open source
> will do serious damage to both of these existing areas.  Perhaps if it
> was never sold commercially to begin with, I could see the benefits.
> But in its current form it has everything to lose and very little to
> gain from such a thing.
>
> - Marty

You are - of course - right.
But we can dream, yes?

After all, for us, the SOHO-munchkins, an open-source OS/2 would be
like heaven on earth: (almost) as stable as linux, nice polished
look-and-feel, plenty apps already (contrary to what some claim) and
several good development tools. It would be nice to start building
from such a base.

But, like you say: the only losers would be IBM and the fortune 500.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net

|---------------------------------------------------|
|            <undefined O/S> boot options           |
|                                                   |
|               Please choose from list             |
|                                                   |
|       <crash>         <OS/2>        <linux>       |
|---------------------------------------------------|

NT-vocates made trouble, so here's the first P. C. sig-line.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          15-Oct-99 18:03:19
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 21:58:14
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>Warp3 was a groing
>OS. It was selling tremendously well

No, it wasn't. That's just something which some OS/2 Advocates would
like to believe. The reality is that, in its entire lifetime, OS/2
never even sold as many units as NT sells in one year now. And NT is
"a growing OS". That puts it into proper perspective.

OS/2 is, and has always been, a niche market item.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          15-Oct-99 18:07:16
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 21:58:14
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>> I never heard any MS spokesman testify before the DOJ that "MS
>> stipulated IBM stop preloads of OS/2 as a precondition for receiving
>> the Win95 preload agreement". In fact, MS denied any such "demand",
>> despite your indication otherwise

>No, an MS spokesman would not testify to this. Someone from IBM did.
>But, of course, therein lies your problem, you will never believe
>anything that doesn't come out of the mouth of a Microsoft
>spokesperson.

And therein lies your problem, you will never believe anything that
comes out of the mouth of anyone who doesn't think that Microsoft is
satan incarnate

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          15-Oct-99 18:10:14
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 21:58:14
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>[e-mail]
>Jeff,
>
>Seek help.

>Not only are baring your soul on a ng for an OS you deny (made by a
>company you profess to despise); but; now you are talking to yourself
>_in_print_ as well!

Phil Caveman,

Seek an eye doctor, and then a brain specialist. Apparently, you're
unable to see replies, including even your own reply to me.

Obviously, either your brain\eyes are malfunctioning, or you are
incredibly stupid (and since I've read your ridiculous posts, the
latter isn't out of the question)

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

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

From: alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net                          15-Oct-99 14:28:12
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 21:58:14
Subj: Re: Revenge of the OS/2 User and Linux

From: Hobbyist <alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, jansens_at_ibm_dot_net posted :

> Karel Jansens
> jansens_at_ibm_dot_net
>
> |---------------------------------------------------|
> |            <undefined O/S> boot options           |
> |            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^                        |
> |               Please choose from list             |
> |                                                   |
> |       <crash>         <OS/2>        <linux>       |
> |---------------------------------------------------|

The sig is still just as idiotic. Why bother to alter it?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                          15-Oct-99 15:42:18
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 21:58:15
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Hobbyist wrote:
>
> On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Bennie Nelson posted :
>
> > OS/2 driver support is better now than when Win 95 was released.  As I
> > recall, there was a huge list of thousands of devices not being supported
> > in Win 95 during the beta.  OS/2's support for devices is far better now
> > than NT 4.0 when it was released.
>
> What kind of pathetic advocacy is this?
>
> How long has OS/2 Warp 3 and 4 have been released and you have to be
> comparing driver availability to the 32bit windows offerings when they
> were just released?

The point I'm making here is the opposite: if Win 95 and NT were not
considered
dead when they were released and their device support was not as good as
OS/2's
is now, why is device support considered a negative for OS/2, now?  How long
had Windows been around in various flavors prior to the release of Win 95?
And,
NT 4 was so bad that MS had to release NT Compatability Tool v1.  Warp's
support
for devices is very good.  That is a turnaround from the OS/2 1.x and 2.0 days
when OS/2 was considered the os for PS/2s (or, in other words, hardware from
IBM).

Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net                          15-Oct-99 14:33:15
  To: All                                               15-Oct-99 21:58:15
Subj: Re: IBM re-evaluating consumer PC business

From: Hobbyist <alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net>

On comp.os.os2.advocacy, Bennie Nelson posted :

> OS/2 driver support is better now than when Win 95 was released.  As I
> recall, there was a huge list of thousands of devices not being supported
> in Win 95 during the beta.  OS/2's support for devices is far better now
> than NT 4.0 when it was released.

What kind of pathetic advocacy is this?

How long has OS/2 Warp 3 and 4 have been released and you have to be
comparing driver availability to the 32bit windows offerings when they
were just released?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

+============================================================================+