The purpose of this section is to provide a forum for our readers to voice their opinions and thoughts on issues related to OS/2. If you have an observation, concern, gripe or compliment regarding something, please feel free to send them to the OS/2 CONNECT editor for inclusion in this section, at: Title & Publisher or complete the form at the bottom of this page.
The opinions expressed in this section are those of the individual writer and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the editor or publisher of OS/2 CONNECT. NOTE: Letters may be edited for inappropriate or offensive language or clarity.
I could not help but chuckle at your indignant frustration at loading OS/2 on an Aptiva. If you had only sent me an e-mail....
Two years ago I loaded OS/2 on my Aptiva 2134 and, looking back, as a combination of blind faith and ignorance, managed to carry out the task with very few problems. My blind faith was in the fact that the machine was advertised as an IBM compatible, so I assumed OS/2 would work OK, and the ignorance was genuine!
I took a different approach to you. The first thing I did was to erase W95. I then carried out a standard OS/2 install into D partition, formatting my disks with FDISK and setting up a boot manager partition along the way. The install completed without incident and I then reloaded W95 into C from the backup/restore CD IBM had included with the machine. I also decided to put my internal (US Robotics) modem on to COM3.
I hit the following problems. Firstly, the Crystal Audio drivers shipped with Warp 3 were down level from the hardware installed in the machine. Secondly, Warp had no driver for the SIS video chip set. Thirdly, I had to find a way to tell Warp about COM3. Fourthly, I was restoring W95 into C which had moved because of the Boot Manager partition.
Fortunately, two years ago in the UK IBM was still trying to make Warp successful so the first two problems were fixed by installing the proper drivers and the third (3,3E8,4) with the assistance of IBM's help desk. (By the way, you will find this latter problem solved today at, of all places, IBM's Internet support site, www.ibm.net). The fourth was also solved using a small trick given by IBM's help desk which I cannot now remember.
Now a few constructive comments for you on your scanner based on what I have learned the hard way. Like you, I initially bought a HP (Scanjet 4P) scanner and found out afterwards it would not even run in a WIN-OS2 session, so I had to install it under W95 - this was the only reason I kept W95 on my machine!! If you stick with your HP you should look out for the following problems:
1. The Windows printing subsystem is fairly rudimentary. What this means relative to scanned images is that if you want to print a page, Windows sends the page to the printer, irrespective of whether or not your printer has enough memory to take it. So if you are trying to print a detailed image, only part (depending on how much memory you have in your printer), will print and Windows will piously put out a message blaming your printer! To fix this, export the image back into an OS/2 application (e.g. FaxWorks) and print from OS/2. The OS/2 printing subsystem is a professional piece of work which paces (in the SNA sense) the output to the printer: i.e., it breaks up the image data stream into pieces small enough to be handled by the printer buffer and sends the output a piece at a time.
2. If you are working in OS/2 and you want to photocopy a page to include with a letter or add a hard copy sheet into a fax you are sending, you will have to bring down OS/2, boot up Windows, scan the image, export to OS/2, take down Windows and bring up OS/2 again. Even using the setboot command this is a painful process and is what eventually led me to dump my Scanjet 4S and get a native OS/2 supported scanner.
To address items 1 & 2 above in your case let me make the following fervent suggestion. Put on a pair of trousers with reinforced kneepads, go back to the store whence you bought your scanner and beg! There are three software suppliers who provide OS/2 scanner support: Impos/2 (Germany) CFM TWAIN (Germany) and STi (US). Ask for a replacement from the list of scanners these three support. I can assure you with all my heart that this short term humbleness and pain will genuinely result in long term pleasure!!
I read with interest your editorial for this month's OS/2 CONNECT about Aptivas and OS/2. I too recently purchased an Aptiva (E3N -2153) and also installed OS/2. I did much the same as you, created a small partition for Windows 98 for "a couple of programs I run". One small difference though. I created the partitions as 1.6 GB for Win98 and the remaining 4.1 GB for OS/2. I used the new large HD support drivers in IDEDASD.EXE to create new boot floppies to install from. The included README offered a config.sys option (SET COPYFROMFLOPPY=1) which allowed me to install to a 4.1 GB drive and still allow the fresh install to boot.
As far as drivers are concerned, fortunately this model of Aptiva uses the Crystal CS4237B chipset, so I used Crystal's generic OS/2 drivers. My model uses the ATI Rage Pro chipset and I did not find any ATI drivers for this card. Fortunately the new GRADD drivers support it just fine. I am very pleased as well with how well OS/2 runs on this system. I will be watching SciTech for their drivers for this chipset.
As far as the IBM Aptiva list for OS/2 supported hardware, I think I have a pretty good idea why these models (and others) are not on the list. IBM has let their lawyers out of their cages again to run amok. I don't know about your model, but mine says very clearly on the front "Designed for Windows 98" and I have already had a run in with the IBM PC company on this. They will ONLY support this Aptiva with its installed OS (in this case Win98). This is why this model (and probably yours) are not on the list. If they were, that would imply that IBM supports this configuration, and that sent the lawyers all in a tizzy.
Stupid part about it is, OS/2 runs better on this system than the supported OS...Windows 98. And like you say, with a 6.0+ GB drive, IBM could have installed both OS'es and let the users decide. There is plenty enough room for it.
P.S. Windows 2000 beta 3 did NOT like this computer at all and would not even install.
Hey Tim, bet you that you could have gotten IBM to install and configure OS/2, for a price. IBM is use to having experts install systems, or having the customer pay IBM to install the system. That is how they make money. You know, that green stuff that allows you to stay in business. Have a good day.
I agree that there is still much hope for OS/2 especially in the light of Xfree86, and the Ports that have already happened.
OS/2 however already has deep roots in UNIX, as most of the commands at the prompt are the same.
I truly would like to see IBM do a turnaround, as it appears they are attempting to do. Here at my BofA account I have found that they do not plan to fix what is not broken. Meaning OS/2 is used in many facets and stands in the gap where NT won't.
Nations/BofA have committed to keep there system that are running on OS/2 there. Because OS/2 works.
Also recently, Dell signed a deal with IBM, and now Dell and Compaq are pushing OS/2 Server and Workstation.
Go figure.
There is still some oil in the lamp.....
MONOPOLY BLUES (follow-up)
One of the things I do before buying new hardware is to go to the OS/2 Device Driver Pak Online Page, and ensure there are drivers for the hardware I am buying.
Also if you go to Indelible Blue, they have a hardware section that lists what they bundle in there systems. Pretty nice stuff; they are a little pricey though.
Sad to say, Hard Knocks is sometimes the best teacher.
OS/2 people may be able to take some heart from what happened on the mainframes to VSE. IBM first said that they were going to advance it and have two mainframe systems, MVS and VSE. Then they appeared to be trying to kill VSE. This went on for many years before IBM finally gave in to those who didn't want the 800 pound gorilla called MVS and gave VSE many of the advances that were made to MVS. If we are lucky (don't hold your breath), the same might prove true for OS/2. As someone pointed out, maybe we should port what is good to Linux and tell IBM and Microsoft to stuff it. If Linux has a good kernel it could be made to look like Unix and OS/2. After all MVS is now classed as a UNIX system, so why not a UNIX system classed as an OS/2 system?
I've had an ISDN line (in Nashville, TN) from Bell South for two years - a $26 base rate ($38 after FCC toll + FCC Excess line + E911 + Taxes). The first three months were pure Hell, with enough responsibility belonging to Bell South that I received a credit for those months. Bell South's ISDN trouble shooters are really great folks - you won't believe the things we tried trying to debug my line. The next three months were a pain, but the end result has been worth it. Using OS/2 didn't help, but it wasn't a truly major problem because we have good terminal programs such as ZOC.
Using ZOC I configured my ZyXEL - Omni TA128U without many problems. Granted if I had been using M$'s Windows 9X I could have used ZyXEL's configuration program, but it isn't truly need. ZyXEL did a great job in adapting and modifying its BIOS program which ultimately overcame my line problems from Bell South. ZOC also did a great job installing the BIOS updates that ZyXEL did a wonderful job producing. ZyXEL has great hardware and doesn't laugh at the OS/2 users (yes, we are still step children).
My local ISP is the Nashville Exchange (unlimited service at $18/month for one ISDN B-channel or 56k Dial-up Access) and you know rest the story. There were plenty of problems learning the appropriate information and where to place it in the IBM Internet Dialer and later in InJoy. These are problems I never would have experienced if I had been able to used the setup programs the ISP had available for a M$ Windows 9X box.
I also had the same problems learning the appropriate information to configured Netscape. They never would have been problem if I were to use a M$ Windows 9X box and a pre-package Netscape or similar program.
Suffice to say, YES - I think OS/2 is worth the headaches in these and other areas. If IBM-OS/2 does well with the Y2K issue, while Microsoft stumbles on the Y2K issue and/or its battles with the Justice Department, I think we will enjoy a resurgence in OS/2 (and other OS's). If not, we all need to be making our decisions regarding our next choice for an operating system.
Now to dream of an ADSL line. :)
In December 1998 I purchased a new Pentium II 450 with a 16 meg graphic card and a Creative Labs 128pci sound card. I had to return the graphics card at a $20.00 loss (thanks Mr. Gates). I have not yet found drivers for the sound card. Microsoft's monopoly pisses me off. I informed the people at the PC store prior to purchasing the PC that I used OS/2 and Linux only. When will we get some justice?
Just read your March editorial about ISDN. AMEN.
Had worst case scenario: called GTE business office about a year ago, and asked about getting an ISDN line. There was a long Jack Benny pause, and the rep asked what ISDN was. End of conversation.
For reference we are in southern Illinois about 30 miles east of St. Louis.
Ran into a site a while back that talked about how to solve OS/2 ISDN problems, and evidently it didn't get bookmarked.
We are thinking that ADSL or one of its derivatives has a better chance in this area than ISDN (about the year 2005.)
We have been as happy as a kid with an all day sucker, with OS/2 and don't want to change. Even with the lack of a good accounting program.
I use ISDN under OS/2. GTE is my ISP @ $29.95 for 100 hours and $1.00 per hour additional. If you connect with both 64K lines, they charge for each line, i.e. 4 hours @ 128K = 8 hours. I have a Hayes ESP card on COM2, IRQ3 with the current SIO drivers. SIO recognizes the Hayes ESP by name. I use an Adtran Express XRT TA connected to the ESP and set up to work @ 230K (I chose GTE because they support Stacker compression which enables the 230K speed) In-Joy 2.0b is my dialer and works great - the highest max rate I've seen is 209Kbps. The average is usually around 65 - 90Kbps. I also use Cantwait - a little batch file that changes the MTU from 1536 to 524.
My system is a SuperMicro P6SNE with a PPro 200Mhz, 192MB EDO Ram, Adaptec 2940 UW with a 4.3GB Quantum, Teac 6x CDROM, Iomega Jaz. Matrox Millineum with 4MB, Creative Voodoo2, Soundblaster AWE 32 and a 28.8 fax/modem.
I am running the Aurora preview with absolutely no problems. One partition is JFS with most of my apps on it and I use the PSnS Backup program to the Jaz.
E-mail me if you need more info. OS/2 roolz!
I read with interest your editorial about setting up ISDN service with OS/2. When US West introduced ADSL service in my area, I jumped at the opportunity. I had found a Linux "how-to" about configuring a Linux system for ADSL and figured well, why shouldn't it work for OS/2 Warp 4?
I was proved right, of course, but what a hassle it was to gain that satisfaction. Actually, part of the hassle was because US West is trying to push ADSL and its own ISP as part of a package and I wanted to stay with the ISP that I had had for a couple of years. My ISP has ADSL capability, but let's just say cooperation between it and US West, the sole provider of ADSL service here, was not of the highest order. It would have been easier to drop my ISP and take the complete US West package.
My preference for OS/2 added another layer of complexity. US West flatly stated that only Windows and Macintosh operating systems were supported for ADSL. What that meant was they didn't have any employees who had heard of anything but Windows and Macintosh. My ISP was a little better. There was a fellow there who had heard of "OS/2 Warp" and was willing to do a Web search for more information.
Eventually I got my line converted to ADSL, got the hardware delivered (Ethernet card and Cisco NetSpeed router, and obtained the IP addresses. After installing the hardware, it was a matter of configuring OS/2 for a LAN connection, but really that sounds simpler than it was. Fortunately, other OS/2 users from the newsgroups came to my assistance (I was able to use the old dialup connection while messing about with the ADSL stuff.)
Now I've got ADSL and it works great, but only because there still are some open standards. It's depressing to think that maybe someday you won't be able to get a high-speed connection without using proprietary software. I hope that never happens.
Anyway, thanks for OS/2 Connect. Keep up the good work!
I have been using ISDN lines on my OS/2 computers for three years and there is no problem at all. I used a USR ISDN modem at first but found it difficult and then got a 3Com ISDN Impact IQ modem and it was a cinch. They provide the software and the modem does all the rest. I used the IBM dialer and can give you all the settings that I use. I am currently using the Ilink2 dialer and it is much nicer than the IBM dialer.
Thanks for your magazine. I've been reading it for some years.
I am sorry to hear you've had problems using ISDN with OS/2. I am not an expert, but I've been using ISDN for over two years, and have solved my share of problems. If you would like to discuss matters, please let me know and I'll offer whatever insight I may have.
Right on target. Probably the most amazing and disappointing thing about IBM's "network computing" initiative is the lack of the two kinds of drivers that OS/2 really needs to make this work: Modems and Network Devices.
Actually, I think IBM would really like to devote more time and resources to OS/2, but they cannot do that right now. Year2000 is burning through their resources and pushing a lot of other important stuff like OS/2 to the back burner. If IBM's big-bank customers don't succeed vs. Y2K, it probably doesn't matter what IBM then decides to do with OS/2. IBM will lose a lot of prestige if Y2K goes badly for their enterprise customers. This is really all-or-nothing, and OS/2 must take a temporary back seat.
If that is really the situation, we should be ready to raise a ruckus if IBM doesn't do OS/2 right once Y2K has subsided.
Concerning your ISDN-Problem take a look at:
ftp://ftp.uni-freiburg.de/pub/pc/os2/isdn
It is a powerful an AFAIK the only program for OS/2 to establish an interned link via ISDN, provided you have a 1.1 CAPI for your ISDN-Adapter. Cards which comes with an OS/2-CAPI are e.g. from ELSA or from RFI (HotISDN). I myself use a TELES S0-card (which is no longer supported for OS/2) and it works fine. The TELES-company also pulled the OS/2 files from their web-page.
But allow me to give my own description of the whole situation: Everybody is complaining about lack of support for OS/2. On the other hand there is mostly no support for LINUX by the hardware-vendors but they always have support because they are not wasting time complaining but rather use this time writing drivers as soon as the new hardware is out. I think we can learn a little. We have to organize ourselves similar to the LINUX-people. Every software should be free and the sources should be published (->GNU). I also see a chance to incorporate with the LINUX-people to obtain a synergy effect. I myself have not so high programming skills but there are other ways to support and contribute (e.g. a membership in the "Open WARP club" with a monthly fee). My personal idea is to save the WPS (which is by far the most outstanding feature of OS/2) from extinct by porting it to LINUX (everything to do this is already provided: IDL-files, SOM-compiler to create headers, online-help, original documentation-books by IBM).
I just tried to install a 56K PCI modem ("Future Com", I believe); when it would not work I called the manufacturer and discovered that the card is dependant on software, exclusively W95/8. Despite my feelers out on the net, no one has suggested a project going to make this efficient modem work with OS/2.
Thank goodness for StarOffice and PMview!
While I agree with you that IBM doesn't deserve to own a product like OS/2 with the support it provides, I would like to mention that the latest FixPaks do help in running OS/2 happily on new computers. Of course, until you update the installation disks and meddle with the config.sys on the install disk, you cannot get OS/2 to boot on the computer. Again, the IBM web site is NOT being udpated as often as it should be. IBM is neither pursuing vendors to test their new systems with OS/2 nor doing it by itself. As far as ISDN modems go, please look at the website for compatible modems.
I run OS/2 v4 (with FixPak 9) on a Aptiva E86 (300PII with 8.4GB HDD and a DVD drive). Of course, I had to buy an external modem.
To submit a letter to the editor for this section, please complete the following form. NOTE: Some web browsers may not support e-mail protocols. In this event, e-mail or fax your message separately.
