OS/2 Shareware BBS: 15 Message/15-Message.zip/UU990925.zip/Ua990924.txt

Text File | 1999-09-26 | 2MB | 40,252 lines

                   comp.os.os2.advocacy             (Usenet)

                 Saturday, 18-Sep-1999 to Friday, 24-Sep-1999

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

From: [e-mail]                                 18-Sep-99 06:44:29
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:21
Subj: Re: New OS/2 client not to be

From: Rob Hughes <[e-mail]>

Well, gee... I think I may just fall out of my chair here with shock and
amazement...

On Fri, 17 Sep 1999 14:14:25 -0400, "TomG" <[e-mail]>
wrote:

:The call has been made -- there will be no new client from Stardock and IBM
:has indicated that they have no plans for an OS/2-based client of their own.



  -----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
   http://www.newsfeeds.com       The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including  Dedicated  Binaries Servers
==-----

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Newsfeeds.com http://www.newsfeeds.com 72,000+ UN
(1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                      18-Sep-99 09:06:22
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:21
Subj: Re: New OS/2 client not to be

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

On Sat, 18 Sep 1999 02:19:03 -0700, Tim Martin wrote:

>Now some eleven months later
>and the egg is all over Wardell's face.

What sort of weird drug induced world do you live in, Tim?

Since when is trying hard to release a new client but failing
a source of "egg all over the face"?

Brad couldn't have been more clear that the deal was far
from struck and that it was a longshot at best.

The only one dancing on the grave of this project is you.  Let's
see.  Brad was working hard to make it happen.  You are happy
it didn't.  Who is the better OS/2 supporter?

Someone has egg all over his face, all right.  And it isn't Brad.

Art

PS  (Someone needs to tell Tim who I'm talking about or he won't
get it.)

***************************

To email, remove "nospam." from my address.





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

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

From: [e-mail]                               18-Sep-99 10:25:24
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: Look at yourselves

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Chris wrote:

> This is OS/2 Advocay is it not?
>
> The why the hell are you foghting between yourselves.... nothing but
> negative posts... that will only surely prop up the OS/2 haters even more
> and give them something to throw at you?
>
> Especially that golden prat Tim Martin who seems to have his brains stuck
> firmly up his own behind.
>
> Chris
> Using Windows 98, Outlook Express 5.
> (why Mr Martin? Cos I want to, its called choice, I use OS2 as well for more
> serious activities....)

Hold on here chump.  I didn't spend eleven months in these
newsgroups whipping up the expectations of the OS/2 user
into a frenzy for my own personal benefit.  Stardock has
done just that and you know it.  Stardock would have
benefitted from any Stardock Warp 5 product, IBM would
have been left holding the bag of problems Stardock was
sure to generate.  They knew that full well and that's the
most likely reason why they laughed Wardell out of their
offices.

The bad guy here is Wardell and his very public campaign
to get the OS/2 community to back his vaporware product.
Now those of you who hoped and prayed Stardock would
be successful are disappointed, angry and ready to place
the blame on IBM.  We ALL knew IBM was not going to
release a Warp 5 client this year.  Stardock simply wanted
(and needs) the publicity generated by such vaporware.

Now the OS/2 community will suffer because of Stardock.
OS/2 users who were sitting on the fence, praying for a
buggy Stardock Warp 5 product will walk away from OS/2
AND will spend months and months in these newsgroups
declaring OS/2 dead.

It's already happening.  Focus on OS/2 (About.com) is
running a full length obit on OS/2 without any real basis
other than Brad's public statements.  Who is Brad to
speak for IBM?  Nobody.  He doesn't know what IBM's
future plans are but he's made a public statement claiming
ALL of OS/2 is dead.  Slashdot.com is running with the
story that OS/2 is dead.  Soon it will appear at Esther's
favored Reseller and throughout the rest of ZDNet.

Yet IBM has never said anything publicly stating they
have no plans for an eventual Warp 5 product.  They
simply say they don't have plans for a Warp 5 product
now - today.

What is dead is Stardock's flaky deal to weasel their
way into the sale of a Stardock Warp 5 product.  We should
all be jumping for joy that IBM escorted Brad & Company
to the door.

Stardock and Brad look like complete fools and they deserve
to do so.  They have harmed the community of OS/2 more
than anyone else has ever done in recent years with their
self-serving pompous vaporware Stardock Warp 5 campaign.
Let's hope they walk away from OS/2 today.

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                    18-Sep-99 16:31:12
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: New OS/2 client not to be

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <[e-mail]>,
Tim Martin  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Jason wrote:
>
>> Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> : There is/was a specific reason why Stardock registered
>> : the Warp2000.com domain.
>>
>> Yup, to piss you off.
>>
>> -Jason
>
>Nice thought, huh?  Now some eleven months later
>and the egg is all over Wardell's face.   Maybe now
>he will transition to Windows completely and give
>the OS/2 community a break by releasing his faded
>OS/2 software through the Warp2000.com site.  At
>least put it to some use.

Why would he do that?  Stardock software sucks right?  Damn you are to
damn stupid Tim.  So why are you in the newsgroups that OS/2 users avoid.
You like the attention from the windows advocates?>

>
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                     18-Sep-99 19:10:22
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

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

On Fri, 17 Sep 1999 23:53:02 -0700, Donald Firestine wrote:

>---------------------------------------------------------------I don't
>use the usenet at any time,except this!  Your discussion of the
>situation is very acurate.  I am planning to go to the Warpfest

I'd like to warn you about Timmy a little bit.  You see, he's our local
paranoid schizophrenic, and has serious delusions of grandeur.  His statement
has a few holes.  First and foremost, Stardock wasn't promising anything - at
least not in anything I read of Brad or Kris's statements.  In fact, it was
our own Timmy who hyped Stardock for them.  Not to *help* them, but to then
turn around and blast them for it!  In fact, I would not be surprised if IBM
declined Stardock's proposal simply because they wanted to avoid having Timmy
on OS/2.  The second hole is ... hmmm, there's not much left to his rant
after that, is there.

Also remember that this is the same Timmy who praised Innoval for dropping
OS/2 and moving to Windows.  Innoval no longer makes any OS/2 software, but
Stardock does.  Yet Timmy blasts Stardock and praises Innoval.  Wonder why
that is.  Well, we could get into all sorts of plausible theories, but the
simplest theory is that Timmy had some sort of disagreement with Brad Wardell
in the past, and has a personal vendetta now.  Personally, I'm operating
under this assumption - all the rest of the theories imply much more
intelligence than I'm willing to grant ...

>conference tommorow with my wife.  I would not like this supposed "News"
>to affect sales at this event, because it affects some small developers
>who don't need the negative publicity.
>
>Has anyone noticed that the origional news of this event was published
>on:    http://www.os2ss.com/news/    and that the Source person was "Sean
>Dilworth"?  If you double click on this URL, you will find an e-mail
>message to :
>
>[e-mail]

Sure - many people are avoiding spammers nowadays ... so?

>Please don't get excited!
>
>I have been listening to the Stardock server for about a year; lets wait
>and see what IBM has to say.  Warp 4 is still the best O/S for the
>desktop and we all know that.  Yes, I will make space for a Linux
>distribution as well, but OS/2 is still superior and we all know that.

---
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]                                  18-Sep-99 18:32:06
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: [e-mail]

After the bad news about no OS/2 new client, I decided to add WinNT to
my HD partitions. Ohh boy!. Got many stop errors and it was NOT as
friendly as OS/2.  Yup it install faster, BUT even was unable to apply
service #4.  5 installations aborted.... oh crap!.

OS/2 is the *REAL* OS alternative.  It is very Sad IBM managers don't
get the point that the pc community deserves an alternative a choice
against Windows.  They think OS/2 is a bad thing for IBM. They are
wrong.  IMO, IBM have the *social responsibility* to provide OS
alternatives and fight against MS monopoly.

Hopefully, someday IBM will release OS/2 source code.  It is a sad
day, because we are OS/2 and OS/2 is everyone of us. It will live as
we continue to use it, advocate for it, and more important those few
OS/2 developers, improve it.  Thanks for danis506 and other excellent
software out-there.

It is sad that IBM, quits against MS. Forget about Be or other OS's.
The choice against Windows *still* is OS/2.

Regards

Edfel J. Rivera

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

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

From: [e-mail]                       18-Sep-99 19:21:02
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: [e-mail] (Massimo)

On Sat, 18 Sep 1999 18:32:13, [e-mail] wrote:

> The choice against Windows *still* is OS/2.

I agree.

I'll keep on using it at home and at work too.

Of course until it's usable (fixpaks, drivers, apps and so on..)

See you.

Massimo S.
  IBM OS/2 Warp 4
  Certified Engineer
  Sys Admin/Web Master
--------------------------
 http://www.dinosoft.it
 http://www.itline.it/os2
 http://www.quasarbbs.com
Efnet #Os2ita irc.telia.no
--------------------------

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                     18-Sep-99 19:02:23
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: "David D. Huff Jr." <[e-mail]>

The unsettling part Tim is that on this issue I am seeing your side of
it.
I have seen the rants for a year about Stardock. Their reaction to
IBM's reaction is inappropriate. They have no right to make policy
or even state policy for IBM. They found out why the deal could not
be made and made their closure in such a way that dropping any ongoing
support for OS/2 would be acceptable in their eyes.

Oh me oh my...
Who is going to tell the French that the 40,000 Warp 4 clients they
contracted for is a dead end street?

Golly shucks OS/2 is dead again!

Tim Martin wrote:

> Stardock's failure to the OS/2 community has been to
> use these newsgroups and every possible media
> access to publicly float their idea of a Stardock Warp 5
> client product.
>
> Stardock's biggest failure is what they have achieved
> in scaring the OS/2 community and in hurting OS/2
> and those who use it.  So far the public OS/2 web site
> masters are running with his words and working to
> scare away OS/2 users with the worst of headlines:
>
> OS/2 Org:  "NO MORE OS/2 Client !!!!"
>
> WarpCast:  "Judgement Day results"  (Results?  No more OS/2 client)
>
> Bandiera's News & Rumors:  "No New OS/2 Client"
>
> MACarlo (Italian Site): "No New OS/2 Client"
>
> And these are just the sites who tend to post OS/2
> news, gossip and information on a more regular basis.
> This fodder has now been handed to OS/2's detractors
> (they are already here in these newsgroups applauding,
> panning OS/2 users, claiming "I told you so", etc) and
> we're sure to see it repeated again and again.
>
> If you were a potential OS/2 user, if you are a current
> OS/2 user these headlines and stories all claiming
> to declare OS/2 dead because some whiny little third
> party Windows company that barely supports OS/2 (they
> don't use OS/2 themselves) was unable to obtain the rights
> from IBM to create and palm off on the OS/2 community
> 'their' own version of a Warp 5 client enhanced by 'their'
> technology.
>
> There is absolutely no reason to be mad at IBM.  They've
> been telling us all year long they have no intention of
> offering a Warp 5 client this year (in 1999).  You want to
> blame someone for all this negative OS/2 publicity blame
> Brad Wardell and Stardock.  They've spent eleven very long
> months pumping everyone up, priming us, planting public
> posts of their devoted effort to bring 'their' version of a
> Stardock Warp 5 client to the sad sad left-out-in-the-cold
> and poor OS/2 user.
>
> Stardock's biggest failure are those who run the company
> and who have chosen to take this all very public.  Had they
> stayed mum, did all of their negotiations in the background,
> stopped planting their stories in public forums or through
> strategic OS/2 outlets, kept it out of the OS/2 community
> limelight then none of the headlines you see today at any
> of these OS/2 public web sites would be there.
>
> In a few days we'll see what Stardock and Wardell have
> wrought with their very public announcements:  PCWeek,
> TechWeek, ZDNet, and all the familiar commercial news
> sites will be running full blown stories on how IBM has
> literally killed OS/2.  The proof?  Why Brad Wardell, speaking
> for IBM, says so.  And what will the big quote be?  Brad Wardell's
> public statement that appears to speak for IBM when it says,
> "IBM has indicated that they have no plans for an OS/2 based
> client of their own."
>
> Brad Wardell has no authority to speak for IBM.  None.
>
> Brad Wardell and Stardock will chase away more OS/2
> users than we all care to admit.  We're already seeing
> the backlash from Stardock's fervent but misguided
> supporters as they post to these newsgroups claiming
> OS/2 dead and their departure from OS/2 to other OS
> platforms.  If anyone is helping to destroy OS/2 it is
> Stardock, plain and simple.
>
> Stardock and Brad Wardell now have every reason to
> turn away from OS/2.  Perhaps that was the original
> strategy behind their taking this escapade so public.
>
> OS/2 is not dead.  It is doubtful there was ever going to
> be a Stardock Warp 5 product but it was certainly a great
> way to garner substantial publicity for Stardock as they
> push their way as 'players' in the world of Microsoft.
>
> 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]                    18-Sep-99 18:52:01
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: Look at yourselves (also Tim Martin shameless liar)

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <[e-mail]>,
Tim Martin  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Chris wrote:
>
>> Tim,
>>
>> LOL
>>
>> I have seldom come across such a person as yourself Tim, you are one of a
>> kind alright.
>
>Ditto.
>
>> But tell me, do you think you are causing more harm than good in your
>> vendetta against Brad and his company? I think so. It would be perhaps
>> prudent to work *with* him rather than constantly denegrating his efforts?
>
>Lessee, Brad Wardell and Stardock are devoting their development
>dollars to applications that only run under Microsoft operatings
>systems.  They spent 11 months in these newsgroups hyping
>a vaporware Stardock OS/2 product and Brad Wardell and staff do
>not use OS/2.  Stardock has done more harm to OS/2 than any
>other entity this year.

Tired of lying yet?  OS/2 doesn't pay the bills yet they still write for
it.  They didn't hype it but you went on a jihad when you found out they
were talking with IBM.

>
>As an avid OS/2 advocate I'll support those who support OS/2.
>
>> Chris
>
>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: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                    18-Sep-99 21:01:17
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: Gerben Bergman <[e-mail]>

On Sat, 18 Sep 1999 18:32:13 GMT, [e-mail] had a little bit of a
hissy fit and spewed:

| After the bad news about no OS/2 new client, I decided to add WinNT to my HD
| partitions. Ohh boy!. Got many stop errors and it was NOT as friendly as
| OS/2.  Yup it install faster, BUT even was unable to apply service #4.  5
| installations aborted.... oh crap!.

Why is it that OS/2 users are always this unlucky when trying out Windows?
Up to SP5 here, no problems at all...

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

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

From: [e-mail]                    18-Sep-99 19:08:21
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <[e-mail]>,
Gerben Bergman  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>On Sat, 18 Sep 1999 18:32:13 GMT, [e-mail] had a little bit of a
>hissy fit and spewed:
>
>| After the bad news about no OS/2 new client, I decided to add WinNT to my
HD
>| partitions. Ohh boy!. Got many stop errors and it was NOT as friendly as
>| OS/2.  Yup it install faster, BUT even was unable to apply service #4.  5
>| installations aborted.... oh crap!.
>
>Why is it that OS/2 users are always this unlucky when trying out Windows?
>Up to SP5 here, no problems at all...
>

Curious isn't it.  I used OS/2 for 4 years and had no trouble with NT or
Linux.  They can't seem to make other things work and will take whatever
scraps IBM throws them, unfazed by the general market perception that IBM
doesn't try to fight against.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                18-Sep-99 15:45:25
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail]

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

>We all heard it, Stardock is not allowed to release a new OS/2 client. I and
>many other OS/2 users are very disapointed about this.

I'd like to register my disappointment with something else.

Okay, guys, you're having a total blast bashing Stardock.  Have fun.  Have
lots
of fun.  But the IBM message was NOT a Stardock message.  The IBM message was
that no one, not Stardock, not IBM, not anybody would be doing an OS/2 client.

I fail to see how this makes either a great villian out of Stardock or a hero
out of IBM.  Let's face it.  IBM doesn't want a popular client; they want a
"tons-of-money" business system.

Jim L
Remove XX from address to Email
More gun laws will cure the nations ills - just like drug laws do.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               18-Sep-99 16:54:04
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: Look at yourselves

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Tim Martin wrote:
>
> Chris wrote:
>
> > This is OS/2 Advocay is it not?
> >
> > The why the hell are you foghting between yourselves.... nothing but
> > negative posts... that will only surely prop up the OS/2 haters even more
> > and give them something to throw at you?
> >
> > Especially that golden prat Tim Martin who seems to have his brains stuck
> > firmly up his own behind.
> >
> > Chris
> > Using Windows 98, Outlook Express 5.
> > (why Mr Martin? Cos I want to, its called choice, I use OS2 as well for
more
> > serious activities....)
>
> Hold on here chump.  I didn't spend eleven months in these
> newsgroups whipping up the expectations of the OS/2 user
> into a frenzy for my own personal benefit.

Then who did???

Tim, here's the bottom line.  If you can find 3 postings where either Brad
Wardell or Kris Kwilas even <mentioned> Warp 5 client or Warp 2000 (other
than to deny its existence), I'll believe you.  JUST 3 POSTINGS, which
should be more than easy to find if they've been ceaselessly pushing the
product for 11 months.  FIND THEM, OR SHUT THE PHUCK UP.

<remains of idiotic rant removed>

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               18-Sep-99 16:36:07
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: New OS/2 client not to be

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Tim Martin wrote:
>
> Jason wrote:
>
> > Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > : There is/was a specific reason why Stardock registered
> > : the Warp2000.com domain.
> >
> > Yup, to piss you off.
> >
> > -Jason
>
> Nice thought, huh?  Now some eleven months later
> and the egg is all over Wardell's face.   Maybe now
> he will transition to Windows completely and give
> the OS/2 community a break by releasing his faded
> OS/2 software through the Warp2000.com site.  At
> least put it to some use.

FOR THE LAST TIME, TIM, WHAT THE HELL GOOD is it going to be to for
Stardock to stop production on their existing OS/2 software, made by paid,
professional software authors who care and have a steak in their
production, and hand over production to several spare-time disorganized
hobbyists?  Do you see this as a good thing for the OS/2 software in
question?  You have yet to answer this question, but you're more than happy
to keep insisting that Stardock do just this.  Is this supporting OS/2?

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               18-Sep-99 16:56:18
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: Look at yourselves

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Tim Martin wrote:
>
> Chris wrote:
>
> > Tim,
> >
> > LOL
> >
> > I have seldom come across such a person as yourself Tim, you are one of a
> > kind alright.
>
> Ditto.
>
> > But tell me, do you think you are causing more harm than good in your
> > vendetta against Brad and his company? I think so. It would be perhaps
> > prudent to work *with* him rather than constantly denegrating his efforts?
>
> Lessee, Brad Wardell and Stardock are devoting their development
> dollars to applications that only run under Microsoft operatings
> systems.  They spent 11 months in these newsgroups hyping
> a vaporware Stardock OS/2 product and Brad Wardell and staff do
> not use OS/2.  Stardock has done more harm to OS/2 than any
> other entity this year.

The more you say it, doesn't make it any more true Tim.  Provide evidence
or admit your lie.

> As an avid OS/2 advocate I'll support those who support OS/2.

With your limited access BSD web server?  That's support?

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               18-Sep-99 15:08:02
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:

> "Adrian Gschwend" <[e-mail]> said:
>
> >We all heard it, Stardock is not allowed to release a new OS/2 client. I
and
> >many other OS/2 users are very disapointed about this.
>
> I'd like to register my disappointment with something else.
>
> Okay, guys, you're having a total blast bashing Stardock.  Have fun.  Have
lots
> of fun.  But the IBM message was NOT a Stardock message.  The IBM message
was
> that no one, not Stardock, not IBM, not anybody would be doing an OS/2
client.

That's bogus.  IBM made no such message at all.  Brad Wardell
made the statement.  No IBM official made any such statement.

> I fail to see how this makes either a great villian out of Stardock or a
hero
> out of IBM.  Let's face it.  IBM doesn't want a popular client; they want a
> "tons-of-money" business system.

Which is why they showed Brad Wardell the door and continue TODAY
to release updates, applications and drivers for OS/2 for FREE.  They simply
won't play the game you want and for that, you bash IBM.  You don't
appear to be happy with OS/2 but would YOU be happy with any operating
system?  Not likely.

> Jim L
> Remove XX from address to Email
> More gun laws will cure the nations ills - just like drug laws do.




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

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

From: [e-mail]                            18-Sep-99 17:51:00
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: [e-mail] (David H. McCoy)

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
> On Sat, 18 Sep 1999 18:32:13 GMT, [e-mail] had a little bit of a
> hissy fit and spewed:
>
> | After the bad news about no OS/2 new client, I decided to add WinNT to my
HD
> | partitions. Ohh boy!. Got many stop errors and it was NOT as friendly as
> | OS/2.  Yup it install faster, BUT even was unable to apply service #4.  5
> | installations aborted.... oh crap!.
>
> Why is it that OS/2 users are always this unlucky when trying out Windows?
> Up to SP5 here, no problems at all...
>
>

Isn't that always the case? OS/2 users seem to be the only ones crashing
Windoes daily. Heck, when I tried NT, it crashed for me less than OS/2
did and gave me better hardware and software support.

I guess I am the exception.

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            18-Sep-99 17:49:19
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: Shhh! OS/2 selling better than expected

From: [e-mail] (David H. McCoy)

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> Do you disagree with the statements or the logic implied?

Both. I don't believe that ZD is against OS/2. OS/2 failed to take off.
That is obvious to anyone and everyone in the business and saying so
doesn't make ZD anti-OS/2. Further, I don't believe that they are taking
any kind of anti-MS stance for PC reasons. I think such a statement is
as ludicrous as saying that OS/2 bashers took the day off.

I think that all of you who condemn ZD, except when they say anything
for OS/2 are hypocrites.

Does that clear it up?

> "David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> > In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> > > Ah no, not exactly. I'll spell it out for the unknowing. Their recent
> > > stance
> > > has change somewhat because ZD is trying to get sold. Catering to M$
> > > because they are M$ is no longer politically acceptable given the
> > > circumstances. Moving to the right and sucking up big blue they are
> > > trying to give themselves the appearance of credibility thus more
> > > readership.
> > > Duh
> >
> > Sure. Keep saying it and belief will follow.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > "David H. McCoy" wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> > > > > For some current news check this out:
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2326830,00.html
> > > > >
> > > > > The bashers "ZDnet" took a day off.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Ahh...that explains why we should now believe ZD. The "bashers"
weren't
> > > > home.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > ---------------------------------------
> > > > David H. McCoy
> > > > dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
> > > > ---------------------------------------
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > ---------------------------------------
> > David H. McCoy
> > dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
> > ---------------------------------------
>
>

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

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

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            18-Sep-99 21:30:04
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: New OS/2 client not to be

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Sat, 18 Sep 1999 09:41:21, Joseph Coughlan <[e-mail]> wrote:

>
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
> On 9-18-99, 3:42:12 PM, jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) wrote
> regarding Re: New OS/2 client not to be:
>
>
> > On Sat, 18 Sep 1999 08:40:30, [e-mail] (M.P. van Dobben de
> > Bruijn) wrote:
>
> > >
> > > > IMHO, the time was ripe for a new OS/2 fat client, but IBM, as usual,
> > > > decided that apparently my money isn't good enough for them.
> > >
> > > He, is this the optimistic and fighting Karel we have encountered
> > > before? Can't be. Of course IBM judged it otherwise than you did.
> > > IBM is not going to spend money on a FAT client. They are going
> > > to transfer their business users with terminals to THIN clients and
> > > those who want the inherent trouble of FAT clients can get some-
> > > thing with another companies or organisations name on it.
> > >
> > The drugs have worn off. <G>
> > Basically I'm not interested in any thin clients. I don't work in a
> > cubicle in some mammoth-sized multi-interstellar company, and I'm
> > surely not interested in renting my software off the internet, so I
> > want my OS fat and juicy, thank you very much. And I *was* interested
> > in a fat client with someone else's name on it (Stardock, remember?),
> > but obviously IBM doesn't want that to happen either.
>
> I don't work in a cubical.  I do basic and applied research.  I like
> thin clients rather and I use compute servers.  I rely on X11R6 for
> this work and it's far less costly to support (I pay) and more
> reliable than a PC or workstation per person.  I can buy into a more
> powerful, shared system using this model.
>
> At home I don;t like to play sysadmin.  I don't like to make rescue
> disk, I don't like to backup financial data and etc.  I welcome any
> thing that would let me do what I like to do rather than play sysadmin
> to a Wintel box.
>
> We can disagree but the majority of users are less interested in the
> workings of a computer than they are in having fun, doing work or
> looking up info.  To them the thin client will appear better, faster
> and cheaper than a Self-maintained box.  While MS says otherwise, they
> are rapidly moving into this market and none but no one dumps a
> customer faster than MS.
>
Well, I'm not "the majority" (never liked that guy anyway <G>), and I
want a computer that *I* can control and that I can f*ck up just the
way I want it. And what do you mean by playing sysadmin? I have OS/2
and Linux set up on a standalone machine; they just run. It's not zero
maintainance, but it comes bloody pretty close.

I know that 90% of computer users nowadays panick if they have to
slide a floppy in the slot, but that's their problem. They can always
use Windows if they want to be dumb.
>
> > Rather than play ostrich, I'm looking for alternatives now. It beats
> > panicking at the last moment. Linux is sort of okay, once you get
> > everything running, and as long as I don't look back to the WPS too
> > often. Beos I know nothing about, so I'm not considering that at the
> > moment (according to rumours, it has even a bigger problem with
> > applications than OS/2 has), and the Mac requires me to throw
> > everything I have out, so that's not good either.
>
> There is a NEW $499 K-6 PC preloaded with the BeOS and a BeOS software
> suite.
> Caldera has the best install utility for detecting and setting up
> LINUX.  It is called LIZARD.
> NewDeal has a great DOS suite based on the GeoWorks codebase.
>
I know Newdeal (heck, I used to run GeoWorks in them olden days!) and
it's nice. I prefer SuSE's YaST over Caldera (tried both). You forgot
the DOS-version of Corel's Office that's still on sale (you have to
dig into their website pretty deep to find it, but it's there). BeOS?
Hmmm... maybe some day. Besides, my Warp partition is not deleted yet.
>
>
>
>

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net
=======================================================
If we could have our cake _and_ eat it,
people would start whining about seconds.
=======================================================

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                     18-Sep-99 15:37:15
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: New OS/2 client not to be

From: Joseph Coughlan <[e-mail]>


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

On 9-18-99, 9:30:09 PM, jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) wrote
regarding Re: New OS/2 client not to be:


> On Sat, 18 Sep 1999 09:41:21, Joseph <[e-mail]> wrote:

> > We can disagree but the majority of users are less interested in the
> > workings of a computer than they are in having fun, doing work or
> > looking up info.  To them the thin client will appear better, faster
> > and cheaper than a Self-maintained box.  While MS says otherwise, they
> > are rapidly moving into this market and none but no one dumps a
> > customer faster than MS.
> >
> Well, I'm not "the majority" (never liked that guy anyway <G>), and I
> want a computer that *I* can control and that I can f*ck up just the
> way I want it. And what do you mean by playing sysadmin? I have OS/2
> and Linux set up on a standalone machine; they just run. It's not zero
> maintainance, but it comes bloody pretty close.

I understand.

To a larger number of users PCs are ill placed.

> I know that 90% of computer users nowadays panick if they have to
> slide a floppy in the slot, but that's their problem. They can always
> use Windows if they want to be dumb.


My point is that these same users are not destined to remain (or
become) Windows users.  The shift off of OS/2 is part of a larger
shift off of PCs.  You don;t have to be one of them but the fact is
the PC has run its course. Wile it will take time to die off as a
consumer device, their  momentum is slowing.

Look at the Dreamcast (it has a 56kbs modem and sells for $199) and
Sony's plans for the Playstation2.   Dreamcast can run any OS since it
has none.  The OS is shipped with the application.  All titles ship
with and run SEGA's OS.  WinCE is an option but no titles and it's
impossiblw for MS to lock a user into WinCE since the Dreamcast OS is
shipped on each application CD as aprt of the application.  WinCE for
Dreamcast doesn't even run a IE browser.  A 3rd party shipped one.
There is no way MS can force a user into running WinCE. It is a neat
model for hardware and applications.  The developer picks the OS.  For
that kind of flexible OS model of business an open source OS is
superior for the developer. They can customize an OS for their titles.
 NetBS and FreeBSD come to mind as an OS they can modify and with BSD
can choose to not release code.


> > There is a NEW $499 K-6 PC preloaded with the BeOS and a BeOS software
> > suite.
> > Caldera has the best install utility for detecting and setting up
> > LINUX.  It is called LIZARD.
> > NewDeal has a great DOS suite based on the GeoWorks codebase.
> >
> I know Newdeal (heck, I used to run GeoWorks in them olden days!)

Me too!   Did my PhD dissertation tables in Geoworks after the more
expensive tools (which I knew) couldn't do WYSIWYG.

> it's nice. I prefer SuSE's YaST over Caldera (tried both). You forgot
> the DOS-version of Corel's Office that's still on sale (you have to
> dig into their website pretty deep to find it, but it's there). BeOS?
> Hmmm... maybe some day. Besides, my Warp partition is not deleted yet.

Cool.  Keeping OS/2 doesn't mean you endorse IBM.




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

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

From: [e-mail]                               18-Sep-99 15:03:22
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Darin McBride wrote:

> On Fri, 17 Sep 1999 23:53:02 -0700, Donald Firestine wrote:
>
> >---------------------------------------------------------------I don't
> >use the usenet at any time,except this!  Your discussion of the
> >situation is very acurate.  I am planning to go to the Warpfest
>
> I'd like to warn you about Timmy a little bit.  You see, he's our local
> paranoid schizophrenic, and has serious delusions of grandeur.

Yes Darin, I am the OS/2 advocate who sat in these
newsgroups blowing the whistle on Stardock's little
game.  There was never any chance in hell that
Stardock would be given the rights to release their
own Stardock Warp 5 client.  All Stardock wanted was
free publicity through their continued misuse of these
newsgroups.  They ran for eleven months hyping a
vaporware Stardock Warp 5 client.  They were helped
along by Stardock leeches such as yourself.

The OS/2 community now pays the price.  News sites
are reporting the death of OS/2 and basing their reports
on the words of Brad Wardell.  Not IBM, not an IBM public
statement but a statement by Brad Wardell.  The same
guy who promised customers a free fix for a buggy
Stardock OD 1.5 and then renegged.  The same guy who
dropped the development of any substantial OS/2 software
and turned immediately to developing for the Microsoft
platforms.  The same guy who posts to these newsgroups
claiming he supports OS/2 and uses NT to say it.  The same
guy who sat in these newsgroups chastising OS/2 users,
calling OS/2 users names, calling us liars, and everything
else he could to convince you leeches with that he had the
holy grail in his grasp.

It was just a matter of time before the smoke cleared
and the mirror was revealed.  Now you want to blame
everybody else but those responsible: Stardock.

Not gonna play here Darin.  The facts speak for themselves.

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                     18-Sep-99 23:22:16
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: Shhh! OS/2 selling better than expected

From: "David D. Huff Jr." <[e-mail]>

--------------39982C67230ECA8681E2DA5C
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Yes exactly every one of the editors currently employed by ZD took
that specific day off. Just so they didn't have to be involved with  the
continuing conspiracy. And the subsequent article was published
by one of our covert operatives.

But in the case that I am mistaken, please tell me why ZDnet would
publish this article?

http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2326830,00.html



"David H. McCoy" wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> > Do you disagree with the statements or the logic implied?
>
> Both. I don't believe that ZD is against OS/2. OS/2 failed to take off.
> That is obvious to anyone and everyone in the business and saying so
> doesn't make ZD anti-OS/2. Further, I don't believe that they are taking
> any kind of anti-MS stance for PC reasons. I think such a statement is
> as ludicrous as saying that OS/2 bashers took the day off.
>
> I think that all of you who condemn ZD, except when they say anything
> for OS/2 are hypocrites.
>
> Does that clear it up?
>
> > "David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >
> > > In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> > > > Ah no, not exactly. I'll spell it out for the unknowing. Their recent
> > > > stance
> > > > has change somewhat because ZD is trying to get sold. Catering to M$
> > > > because they are M$ is no longer politically acceptable given the
> > > > circumstances. Moving to the right and sucking up big blue they are
> > > > trying to give themselves the appearance of credibility thus more
> > > > readership.
> > > > Duh
> > >
> > > Sure. Keep saying it and belief will follow.
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "David H. McCoy" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> > > > > > For some current news check this out:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2326830,00.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The bashers "ZDnet" took a day off.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Ahh...that explains why we should now believe ZD. The "bashers"
weren't
> > > > > home.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > ---------------------------------------
> > > > > David H. McCoy
> > > > > dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
> > > > > ---------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > ---------------------------------------
> > > David H. McCoy
> > > dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
> > > ---------------------------------------
> >
> >
>
> --
> ---------------------------------------
> David H. McCoy
> dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
> ---------------------------------------

--------------39982C67230ECA8681E2DA5C
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
Yes exactly every one of the editors currently employed by ZD took
<br>that specific day off. Just so they didn't have to be involved with
the
<br>continuing conspiracy. And the subsequent article was published
<br>by one of our covert operatives.
<p>But in the case that I am mistaken, please tell me why ZDnet would
<br>publish this article?
<p><a
href="http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2326830,00.html">http://www
.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2326830,00.html</a>
<br><a
href="http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2326830,00.html"></a>

<br><a
href="http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2326830,00.html"></a>

<p>"David H. McCoy" wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
<br>> Do you disagree with the statements or the logic implied?
<p>Both. I don't believe that ZD is against OS/2. OS/2 failed to take off.
<br>That is obvious to anyone and everyone in the business and saying so
<br>doesn't make ZD anti-OS/2. Further, I don't believe that they are taking
<br>any kind of anti-MS stance for PC reasons. I think such a statement
is
<br>as ludicrous as saying that OS/2 bashers took the day off.
<p>I think that all of you who condemn ZD, except when they say anything
<br>for OS/2 are hypocrites.
<p>Does that clear it up?
<p>> "David H. McCoy" wrote:
<br>>
<br>> > In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
<br>> > > Ah no, not exactly. I'll spell it out for the unknowing. Their
recent
<br>> > > stance
<br>> > > has change somewhat because ZD is trying to get sold. Catering
to M$
<br>> > > because they are M$ is no longer politically acceptable given
the
<br>> > > circumstances. Moving to the right and sucking up big blue they
are
<br>> > > trying to give themselves the appearance of credibility thus
more
<br>> > > readership.
<br>> > > Duh
<br>> >
<br>> > Sure. Keep saying it and belief will follow.
<br>> >
<br>> > >
<br>> > >
<br>> > > "David H. McCoy" wrote:
<br>> > >
<br>> > > > In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
<br>> > > > > For some current news check this out:
<br>> > > > >
<br>> > > > > <a
href="http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2326830,00.html">http://www
.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2326830,00.html</a>
<br>> > > > >
<br>> > > > > The bashers "ZDnet" took a day off.
<br>> > > > >
<br>> > > > >
<br>> > > >
<br>> > > > Ahh...that explains why we should now believe ZD. The "bashers"
weren't
<br>> > > > home.
<br>> > > >
<br>> > > > --
<br>> > > > ---------------------------------------
<br>> > > > David H. McCoy
<br>> > > > dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
<br>> > > > ---------------------------------------
<br>> > >
<br>> > >
<br>> >
<br>> > --
<br>> > ---------------------------------------
<br>> > David H. McCoy
<br>> > dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
<br>> > ---------------------------------------
<br>>
<br>>
<p>--
<br>---------------------------------------
<br>David H. McCoy
<br>dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
<br>---------------------------------------</blockquote>
</html>

--------------39982C67230ECA8681E2DA5C--

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             18-Sep-99 23:25:24
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: 2000 - a new IBM release of Warp 5

From: [e-mail]

Jason Bowen writes:

>>>>>>>>>> Douglas Hendrix writes:

>>>>>>>>>>> But it is clear that IBM is very serious about
>>>>>>>>>>> not wanting people to run OS/2 on the desktop.

>>>>>>>>>> Then why is IBM still advertising the client in their catalog?

>>>>>>>>> Is that all you need Dave?

>>>>>>>> Do you consider it somehow insufficient, Jason?  Continued
>>>>>>>> advertising of the client contradicts the notion that IBM is
>>>>>>>> serious about not wanting people to run OS/2 on the desktop.

>>>>>>> So you claim to know IBM's intentions?

>>>>>> I don't need to know IBM's intentions.  I am aware of IBM's actions.

>>>>> Action can mask intentions no?

>>>> In this case, the action contradicts the claim.

>>> Action can mask intentions.

>> In this case, the action contradicts the claim.

> Egad!  You don't know the intention yet argue about it.

The intention is obviously to advertise the product in their catalog.

>>> You haven't proven that IBM advertising the client in a catalog means
>>> that they want people to run it on the desktop.

>> It's illogical to advertise and sell something that you don't want
>> people to use.

> Doesn't matter if it is illogical Dave.

Yes it does matter.

> A buddy of mine  has been upgrading and supporting software that he
> and his company want to die but they are bound by a contract.

Are they advertising it?

Is IBM bound by a contract to advertise OS/2 in their catalog?  Why
would a contractor specify such a requirement?  I asked this once
before, but didn't get a response.  I'm not surprised.

> People call up and ask about it and they have to send them a copy.

Are they advertising it?

> The people read about it from advertisements,

Whose advertisements?  The vendor's?

> the company can't wait till the contract expires.

Why did they enter into the contract in the first place?  Does the
contract require that the product be advertised?

> So you claim that IBM is always logical?

Where did I allegedly make that claim, Jason?

> How do you know this?

You're erroneously presupposing that I made the claim, Jason.

> I like how you can make the claim that IBM's actions support your
> claim without knowing their intentions.

Their intentions are obviously to advertise the product in their catalog.

> You know if I saw OS/2 client advertisements in the trade
> press quite regularly I would agree with you but in a catalog, well that
> is another story imho.

Why is it another story, Jason?

> Go on responding Dave, you can't prove IBM's intentions

I can prove that OS/2 is being advertised for sale in an IBM catalog,
Jason.

> and just because it would be illogical for them to offer it in the
> catalog if they want it to die doesn't mean that it proves that they
> want people to use it.

I wasn't trying to prove that they want people to use it.  I was
demonstrating that the evidence does not support the conclusion
that IBM is "very serious about not wanting people to run OS/2 on
the desktop".  There's a big difference between the two.  I wasn't
making a claim.  I was countering someone else's claim.

> I watch what is happening with OS/2 isv's and OS/2 websites and
> the press sometimes to get the real view.

People have been posting their "real view" in this newsgroup for
YEARS.  Their track record isn't very good.

> The view of somebody that like to argue pedantically should be
> taken with a grain of salt.

The view of somebody arguing illogically (that would be you) should
be taken with a grain of salt.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                      18-Sep-99 22:55:15
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
  Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:

First off, let's all thank Tim greatly for doing his part to help make
c.o.o.a just like the Amiga groups. Way to go Tim!

<snip>

> So far the public OS/2 web site masters are running with his words
> and working to scare away OS/2 users with the worst of headlines:

Or maybe, just maybe, they're (*gasp*) _reporting the news_!

> OS/2 Org:  "NO MORE OS/2 Client !!!!"
>
> WarpCast:  "Judgement Day results"  (Results?  No more OS/2 client)
>
> Bandiera's News & Rumors:  "No New OS/2 Client"
>
> MACarlo (Italian Site): "No New OS/2 Client"
>
> And these are just the sites who tend to post OS/2
> news, gossip and information on a more regular basis.

And just what excatly should they have said? This is it for the
Fat-Client OS/2. Believe me, I'm just as pissed as anybody over this,
but it's time to face the inveitable: IBM just doesn't give a damn
about the SOHO/Home user. You just can't put on your rose-colored
glasses and pretend that everything is all right.

Will fix-packs continue? Sure. Will new device drivers be produced?
Absolutely. Will new applications be developed? Yes. Will OS/2 still
boot-up on my system? Yes. Will IBM produce a new Fat-Client OS/2?
It'll have to be a cold day in a hot-hot place first, if you catch my
drift. Stardock was our last best hope for a Warp5 client, despite what
you think and say, Tim.

See you at Warpstock '99 Tim! (Not that you'd ever bother to show up at
an OS/2 user convention...)

--
-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/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you do
(1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                             18-Sep-99 23:38:00
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: 2000 - a new IBM release of Warp 5

From: [e-mail]

Jason writes:

>>>> Tarquelne writes:

>>>>>> Illogical.  It means that you don't have to worry about IBM not
>>>>>> wanting people to run OS/2 on the desktop.

>>>>> What's "IT"?

>>>> The existence of advertising.  Wasn't that clear from the context?

>>> Obviously not, or he wouldn't have asked the question.

>> Not necessarily.  It wouldn't be the first time somebody asked an
>> unnecessary question.

> Irrelevant

On the contrary, it's quite relevant.

>>>>> A lack of support from IBM?

>>>> What alleged lack of support?

>>> The alleged lack of support that they not only don't want to put into a
>>> package a modern OS/2 that can take advantage of modern hardware, but
>>> they don't even want to put into a package an OS/2 that is updated for
>>> the year 2000.

>> OS/2 is already updated for the year 2000.

> From
>
>
http>//www.indelible-blue.com/ibapps/products.nsf/AH/04D2734F34CA85A08525649C00
4B256A
>
> "You should be aware that OS/2 Warp 4.0 is NOT Y2K compliant out of the
> box -- you must install the fixpack."

The FixPak exists and is available.  Therefore OS/2 has been updated for
the year 2000, as I said.  Note that I said "OS/2", rather than "Warp 4",
for a reason.

>> Where have you been?

> Irrelevant,

On the contrary, it's quite relevant, given that you were apparently
unaware of OS/2's Y2K compliance.

> I've been in Massachusetts

Don't they get news about OS/2 Y2K compliance in Massachusetts?

>>>>>> Extrapolating to "nothing to worry about" is illogical.

>>>>> Actually, extrapolating from "IBM does not support the SOHO user" to
>>>>> "IBM wants the SOHO user to go away" seems pretty logical to me.

>>>> The statement was about "wanting people to run OS/2 on the desktop",
>>>> which doesn't specify SOHO.

>>> Irrelevant, SOHO are people.

>> Illogical, given that not all people are SOHO.

> Illogical, given all SOHO are people

Illogical, given that the statement referred to people, not SOHO.

>>>>> It's not proof, sure, but it's a very bad sign.

>>>> The advertising is a very good sign that IBM does want people to
>>>> run OS/2 on the desktop.

>>> Irrelevant,

>> On the contrary, the evidence is quite relevant.

> Illogical

Explain how.

>>> advertising in their catalog is free and is directed to current users.

>> Why would a current user buy something they already have?

> Because they may want to run different version of OS/2 on different
> computers.

Then they aren't a current user of the product.

>>> Just because they allow users to buy more OS/2 clients if they get
>>> more computers,

>> Additional licenses are usually handled differently than sales of the
>> full product through a catalog.

> Not for SOHO users,

Are you suggesting that the advertising is directed toward SOHO users,
the very users that IBM allegedly doesn't want to use OS/2 on the
desktop?

> especially if you only have the server and want a client.

Are you suggesting that the advertising is directed toward SOHO users,
the very users that IBM allegedly doesn't want to use OS/2 on the
desktop?

>>> doesn't imply that they want users to run OS/2 on the desktop,

>> It certainly doesn't imply that they don't want people to run OS/2 on
>> the desktop.

> Illogical since I never said that it did.

On the contrary, it's quite logical, because I never specified you as
the person who made the statement that I've been countering.

> IBM has told us they don't want people to run through press releases.

Hasn't stopped people from jumping to conclusions triggered by a
Brad Wardell statement.

>>> it only suggests they don't want to piss off their current customers.

>> So, if Microsoft lists Windows NT is a catalog of theirs, does that
>> also only suggest they don't want to piss off their current customers???

> No

Then why did you reach that conclusion on the basis of an IBM catalog ad?

> because they are actively pushing their product into new markets.

Irrelevant, given that the catalog ad is the alleged basis for the
conclusion.

> After Windows 2000 comes out, and if they also only have Windows 4.0
> advertised in their catalog then yes it would imply that they are only
> trying not to piss off their current customers.

The key word here is "if".  Furthermore, if you can't think of other
reasons why an older product might still be offered for sale, that's
your problem.

>>>>> This is an advocacy group, so I get to say:  "You just like saying
>>>>> "illogical" don't you?

>>>> That's an illogical conclusion.

>>> Illogical, since this is an advocacy group he may very well say ""You
>>> just like saying "illogical" don't you?"

>> Just because he may say it doesn't make it logical to do so.

> The arguement wasn't over whether are not it was logical to do so, they
> arguement was that he may.

And I simply said it would be illogical to do so.  I never said anything
about what someone might do.

>>>>> Illlllllogical.  Iiiilllogicalll.  It's fun, admit it."

>>>> Irrelevant.

>>> Typical Invective

>> Illogical.

> Typical and Inncorrect Contradiction.

What's allegedly incorrect about it?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               18-Sep-99 20:20:24
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: New OS/2 client not to be

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Joseph Coughlan wrote:
>
> Look at the Dreamcast (it has a 56kbs modem and sells for $199) and
> Sony's plans for the Playstation2.   Dreamcast can run any OS since it
> has none.  The OS is shipped with the application.  All titles ship
> with and run SEGA's OS.  WinCE is an option but no titles and it's
> impossiblw for MS to lock a user into WinCE since the Dreamcast OS is
> shipped on each application CD as aprt of the application.

What do you mean here?  The OS is part of the game CD, yes.  Do you mean
Dreamcast OS is shipped with every game whether it's used or not?  I don't
believe this is correct.

A user has no choice in the OS that each game runs as it is an inseparable
part of the game.  If the user wants to run a given game, they have to
accept the OS that it was designed for.  Game designers may likely choose
WinCE, however, as it will make porting the games to PC's quite a bit
simpler.  This was the entire reason that WinCE was ported to the Dreamcast
in the first place.  Not for it's multitasking strengths or stability, but
for it's portability to another big game platform, the Win32 PC.

> WinCE for Dreamcast doesn't even run a IE browser.

It wasn't designed to be a complete operating enviroment, it was only
designed for access through a standard API to the hardware.  You won't have
a "desktop" with a "start menu" on your Dreamcast, so of course, there is
no need for a browser.

> A 3rd party shipped one.
> There is no way MS can force a user into running WinCE. It is a neat
> model for hardware and applications.  The developer picks the OS.  For
> that kind of flexible OS model of business an open source OS is
> superior for the developer. They can customize an OS for their titles.

But this limits portability to other platforms.  Customizing the OS may
give them cooler features and a technological edge, but if they can port
their <same codebase> to another platform, they will make far more revenue
much faster.  We've all seen how having a techological edge doesn't always
win a market, haven't we?

>  NetBS and FreeBSD come to mind as an OS they can modify and with BSD
> can choose to not release code.

They almost seem a bit too robust for just game development.  Besides,
neither of these provide a standard way to access "game hardware" such as
3D accelerators and specialized video and sound hardware.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                    19-Sep-99 00:35:27
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

There is just no end to how far you will go to lie.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                            18-Sep-99 20:05:12
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: Shhh! OS/2 selling better than expected

From: [e-mail] (David H. McCoy)

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>Yes exactly every one of the editors currently employed by ZD took
>that specific day off. Just so they didn't have to be involved with  the
>continuing conspiracy. And the subsequent article was published
>by one of our covert operatives.
>
>But in the case that I am mistaken, please tell me why ZDnet would
>publish this article?
>
>http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2326830,00.html

Why wouldn't they publish it? You seem to be fixated on that particular
article.
Why?

>
>
>"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
>> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>> > Do you disagree with the statements or the logic implied?
>>
>> Both. I don't believe that ZD is against OS/2. OS/2 failed to take off.
>> That is obvious to anyone and everyone in the business and saying so
>> doesn't make ZD anti-OS/2. Further, I don't believe that they are taking
>> any kind of anti-MS stance for PC reasons. I think such a statement is
>> as ludicrous as saying that OS/2 bashers took the day off.
>>
>> I think that all of you who condemn ZD, except when they say anything
>> for OS/2 are hypocrites.
>>
>> Does that clear it up?
>>
>> > "David H. McCoy" wrote:
>> >
>> > > In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>> > > > Ah no, not exactly. I'll spell it out for the unknowing. Their recent
>> > > > stance
>> > > > has change somewhat because ZD is trying to get sold. Catering to M$
>> > > > because they are M$ is no longer politically acceptable given the
>> > > > circumstances. Moving to the right and sucking up big blue they are
>> > > > trying to give themselves the appearance of credibility thus more
>> > > > readership.
>> > > > Duh
>> > >
>> > > Sure. Keep saying it and belief will follow.
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > "David H. McCoy" wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>> > > > > > For some current news check this out:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2326830,00.html
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > The bashers "ZDnet" took a day off.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Ahh...that explains why we should now believe ZD. The "bashers"
weren't
>> > > > > home.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > --
>> > > > > ---------------------------------------
>> > > > > David H. McCoy
>> > > > > dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
>> > > > > ---------------------------------------
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > ---------------------------------------
>> > > David H. McCoy
>> > > dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
>> > > ---------------------------------------
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> ---------------------------------------
>> David H. McCoy
>> dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
>> ---------------------------------------
>

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            18-Sep-99 20:07:03
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: [e-mail] (David H. McCoy)

In article <7s1590$mhm$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>Sure. Will new device drivers be produced?
>Absolutely.

But in numbers needed to keep up with new hardware?
No.

>Will new applications be developed? Yes.

But in numbers needed to attract or even retain users?
No.

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]@Vi...               19-Sep-99 01:05:28
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

Message sender: [e-mail]@Videotron.ca

From: [e-mail]@Videotron.ca (Michel A Goyette)

Sat, 18 Sep 1999 19:45:51, [e-mail] a écrit:

> "Adrian Gschwend" <[e-mail]> said:
>
> >We all heard it, Stardock is not allowed to release a new OS/2 client. I
and
> >many other OS/2 users are very disapointed about this.
>
> I'd like to register my disappointment with something else.
>
> Okay, guys, you're having a total blast bashing Stardock.  Have fun.  Have
lots
> of fun.  But the IBM message was NOT a Stardock message.  The IBM message
was
> that no one, not Stardock, not IBM, not anybody would be doing an OS/2
client.

    I, for my part, haven't seen the IBM message yet, only the one from
Brad.  From what I read, it only said the IBM wouldn't allow Stardock
to put out a new client release because that doesn't fit in their
strategy (for whatever that means).  THAT'S ALL!!!

    Now, if you are in the secret of the gods and know what is their
strategy, please go on and enlighten us.

> I fail to see how this makes either a great villian out of Stardock or a
hero
> out of IBM.  Let's face it.  IBM doesn't want a popular client; they want a
> "tons-of-money" business system.

    If that goes through a popular client, they'll sure get there.  Now,
for some crystal ball readings...Windows 2000 isn't recommended by
high respectable analysis society (IDC and alike) and IT and managers
are usually following their opinions (that's why a lot of people are,
in part, stuck with Windows), Linux is going through a push but
configuration is still not for the faint of heart.  I guess between
those two, OS/2 can have a really good chance due to some killer apps
entering the arena (StarOffice and alike).  ;-)

Salut,

    Michel (sur OS/2 Warp 4.07)
    ICQ #13376913
    http://pages.infinit.net/exovede

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                   19-Sep-99 01:25:07
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: Look at yourselves

From: [e-mail] (Mike Trettel)

On Sat, 18 Sep 1999 15:16:43 +0100, Chris <[e-mail]> wrote:
>True, but as the saying goes:
>
>Together we stand, divided we fall......
>
>
>Chris
>Using Win 98, looking at RedHat Linux 6....hmmm
>
>

You're far better off with Suse 6.2.  It's half the price, doesn't
dribble core files all over itself, and has far more ready to go apps
included with the distribution.  Throw in a copy of WP8 and you're good
to go.

--
===========
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]                          19-Sep-99 04:40:22
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: Ilgaz Ocal <[e-mail]>

I am an IBM global network customers, as it has acquired by AT&T I know
the old times...
As a customer of IBM that will trust no "successor" systems of IBM
anymore, I would like to point some local newsgroups on IBM Global
Network...
What the *sad* thing is, whole IBM staff giving support to users there
are using Windows systems!
When I saw and understood that, whole my thought on IBM' s support on
OS/2 has changed...
A system, even not used by it' s staff..
Shame IBM!
Ilgaz Ocal
OS/2 Warp 3 owner... Linux user..

[e-mail] wrote:

> After the bad news about no OS/2 new client, I decided to add WinNT to
> my HD partitions. Ohh boy!. Got many stop errors and it was NOT as
> friendly as OS/2.  Yup it install faster, BUT even was unable to apply
> service #4.  5 installations aborted.... oh crap!.
>
> OS/2 is the *REAL* OS alternative.  It is very Sad IBM managers don't
> get the point that the pc community deserves an alternative a choice
> against Windows.  They think OS/2 is a bad thing for IBM. They are
> wrong.  IMO, IBM have the *social responsibility* to provide OS
> alternatives and fight against MS monopoly.
>
> Hopefully, someday IBM will release OS/2 source code.  It is a sad
> day, because we are OS/2 and OS/2 is everyone of us. It will live as
> we continue to use it, advocate for it, and more important those few
> OS/2 developers, improve it.  Thanks for danis506 and other excellent
> software out-there.
>
> It is sad that IBM, quits against MS. Forget about Be or other OS's.
> The choice against Windows *still* is OS/2.
>
> Regards
>
> Edfel J. Rivera

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                     18-Sep-99 18:59:00
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: New OS/2 client not to be

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


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

On 9-19-99, 12:20:49 AM, Marty <[e-mail]> wrote regarding Re:
New OS/2 client not to be:


> Joseph Coughlan wrote:
> >
> > Look at the Dreamcast (it has a 56kbs modem and sells for $199) and
> > Sony's plans for the Playstation2.   Dreamcast can run any OS since it
> > has none.  The OS is shipped with the application.  All titles ship
> > with and run SEGA's OS.  WinCE is an option but no titles and it's
> > impossiblw for MS to lock a user into WinCE since the Dreamcast OS is
> > shipped on each application CD as aprt of the application.

> What do you mean here?  The OS is part of the game CD, yes.  Do you
mean
> Dreamcast OS is shipped with every game whether it's used or not?  I
don't
> believe this is correct.

WinCE is on the CD that loads the games or apps that need WinCE.
SEGA's OS is on the games that use the SEGA OS.  I can;t see how you'd
have a game with out loading an OS.

> A user has no choice in the OS that each game runs as it is an
inseparable
> part of the game.  If the user wants to run a given game, they have to
> accept the OS that it was designed for.

I think the user has a choice.  If the fact the OS choice is made with
the application purchase then you can squabble about that DIFFERENCE
from the PC.  I see a difference and it allows for choice.  A user is
not forced to use WinCE software because WinCE is part of the
Dreamcast console or loaded on the device.  Sega has a neat idea here.
 I have a choice.  A developer or 3rd party has the choice to ship
their own OS with the Dreamcast.  It is easily upgraded via CD.


> Game designers may likely choose
> WinCE, however, as it will make porting the games to PC's quite a bit
> simpler.  This was the entire reason that WinCE was ported to the
Dreamcast
> in the first place.  Not for it's multitasking strengths or stability,
but
> for it's portability to another big game platform, the Win32 PC.

I think you have it backwards.  I've read WinCE, according to MS,
allows for the support of SOME DirectX APIs and that the DirectX
implementation on Dreamcast was very hardware specific.  MS was not
encouraging about porting but it is supposed to better than a rewrite.
 The goal is to port legacy PC titles to the Dreamcast to kick start
the platform.  The speed is supposed to be compromised but the real
benefit of Wince is for apps line browsers.

MS failed to even appear at the launch of the console but with the
dreamcast success they now claim to have 15 titles in development for
WinCE/Dreamcast.

> > WinCE for Dreamcast doesn't even run a IE browser.

> It wasn't designed to be a complete operating enviroment, it was only
> designed for access through a standard API to the hardware.  You won't
have
> a "desktop" with a "start menu" on your Dreamcast, so of course, there
is
> no need for a browser.

WinCE was designed to be a complete operating environment for the
dreamcast with IE.  MS has screwed up IE.  It is late.  Surprised?

http://www.techweb.com/se/directlink.cgi?EET19990524S0043
                Irimajiri stressed that Internet functionality is
Dreamcast's
                differentiation point. A recent contract with Iomega
for a
                customized Zip drive for Dreamcast is billed as
preparation for a
                slew of Internet-based applications-not only Web
browsing but
                also networked games and other interactive services.


> > A 3rd party shipped one.
> > There is no way MS can force a user into running WinCE. It is a neat
> > model for hardware and applications.  The developer picks the OS.  For
> > that kind of flexible OS model of business an open source OS is
> > superior for the developer. They can customize an OS for their titles.

> But this limits portability to other platforms.  Customizing the OS
may
> give them cooler features and a technological edge, but if they can
port
> their <same codebase> to another platform, they will make far more
revenue
> much faster.  We've all seen how having a techological edge doesn't
always
> win a market, haven't we?

I disagree.
How do you port the current Dreamcast titles ?  You don't.  What's the
significance of your complaint that titles would not be portable?
Little if any.  Yes, technological edges don't guarantee success -
alone.  It is still good to have an edge - people work long hard days
to get that edge.  I can't see any sense arguing against technology.

What do I think is important about the OS on the CD?  A developer like
AOL can decide the Dreamcast is a good host for AOL and build an AOL
CD with an OS.  In fact AOL is planning a non-PC device they are using
NetBSD technology for the OS and X as the graphics layer.  So it is
possible to run this on the dreamcast being the device is not locked
into one OS like a PC.  It's a guess.  Technically, the OS is as
installable as putting in a new CD.

Even  WinCE developer can use the latest MS WinCE build and ship the
latest edition of WinCE with their PC port to the Dreamcast.

> >  NetBS and FreeBSD come to mind as an OS they can modify and with BSD
> > can choose to not release code.

> They almost seem a bit too robust for just game development.  Besides,
> neither of these provide a standard way to access "game hardware" such
as
> 3D accelerators and specialized video and sound hardware.

Too robust?  That's a funny comment.  Robust is good and too robust
makes no sense in the case of free, open code.  You pay nothing.

As for the hardware comment - that is bunk. "game hardware" is
hardware.  It is accessible and I've hired people who have used BSD to
build multi-spectral sensors and other specialized video hardware.  It
does well for embedded systems acessing unique hardware.

FYI Sony's Playstation development environment is LINUX.





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

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

From: [e-mail]                                18-Sep-99 22:56:12
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

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

On Sat, 18 Sep 1999 21:01:35 +0200, Gerben Bergman wrote:

>On Sat, 18 Sep 1999 18:32:13 GMT, [e-mail] had a little bit of a
>hissy fit and spewed:
>
>| After the bad news about no OS/2 new client, I decided to add WinNT to my
HD
>| partitions. Ohh boy!. Got many stop errors and it was NOT as friendly as
>| OS/2.  Yup it install faster, BUT even was unable to apply service #4.  5
>| installations aborted.... oh crap!.
>
>Why is it that OS/2 users are always this unlucky when trying out Windows?
>Up to SP5 here, no problems at all...
>

In regards to NT installing faster:  That *feature* is apparently eliminated
in Win2000.  I have 'had' to install various betas of it, and not one has
completed in less than 90 minutes.

In regards to os/2 users having problems in NT:  Its because we're used to
being able to run every app we have simultaneously without problems.  Gotta
be careful w/ NT.  It can't handle the load.  <g>

regards,

Jim G








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

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

From: [e-mail]                               18-Sep-99 19:16:28
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]>,
>   Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> First off, let's all thank Tim greatly for doing his part to help make
> c.o.o.a just like the Amiga groups. Way to go Tim!

That's why your here!

> <snip>
>
> > So far the public OS/2 web site masters are running with his words
> > and working to scare away OS/2 users with the worst of headlines:
>
> Or maybe, just maybe, they're (*gasp*) _reporting the news_!
>
> > OS/2 Org:  "NO MORE OS/2 Client !!!!"
> >
> > WarpCast:  "Judgement Day results"  (Results?  No more OS/2 client)
> >
> > Bandiera's News & Rumors:  "No New OS/2 Client"
> >
> > MACarlo (Italian Site): "No New OS/2 Client"
> >
> > And these are just the sites who tend to post OS/2
> > news, gossip and information on a more regular basis.
>
> And just what excatly should they have said?

The truth.  That Stardock will not be offering a Warp 5
client.  None of these sites have any official statement
from IBM stating IBM will not be (eventually) offering
a Warp 5 client.  What they have is a statement, unsanctioned
by IBM, from Brad Wardell.  You know him, he's the same
guy who promised a free fix to OD v1.5 and then renegged,
upgraded the product with a few new icons and sold it for
$69.95.  He's the same guy who sits in these newsgroups
proclaiming his devotion to OS/2 all the while using NT
to make such bogus claims.  He's the same guy who sits
in these newsgroups and calls real OS/2 advocates liars,
jerks, idiots and a host of other derogatory names because
they dare to question his ethics or complain about his products.
He's the same guy who spent some eleven months in these
newsgroup hyping Stardock and a vaporware product called
Stardock's Warp 5.  That product was going to be 'enhanced'
with Stardock's own technology.  The very same tecnology
that was going to be found in the free fix for OD1.5.

AND, he's the very same guy who has supporters such as
yourself.  People who are helping to drive as many OS/2
users away from OS/2 by supporting his public message
that OS/2 is dead.

> See you at Warpstock '99 Tim! (Not that you'd ever bother to show up at
> an OS/2 user convention...)
>

How do you know a Warp City staffer has NOT been
to every Warpstock event?  You don't.  We're there.
In droves.

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               18-Sep-99 19:23:24
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:23
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Michel A Goyette wrote:

> Sat, 18 Sep 1999 19:45:51, [e-mail] a écrit:
>
> > "Adrian Gschwend" <[e-mail]> said:
> >
> > >We all heard it, Stardock is not allowed to release a new OS/2 client. I
and
> > >many other OS/2 users are very disapointed about this.
> >
> > I'd like to register my disappointment with something else.
> >
> > Okay, guys, you're having a total blast bashing Stardock.  Have fun.  Have
lots
> > of fun.  But the IBM message was NOT a Stardock message.  The IBM message
was
> > that no one, not Stardock, not IBM, not anybody would be doing an OS/2
client.
>
>         I, for my part, haven't seen the IBM message yet, only the one from
> Brad.

There is not message from IBM.  NONE.  All this "OS/2 is dead"
information is being generated by no one but Brad Wardell.

> From what I read, it only said the IBM wouldn't allow Stardock
> to put out a new client release because that doesn't fit in their
> strategy (for whatever that means).  THAT'S ALL!!!

You may have missed it but in Brad's message he apparently
feels he has the right to speak for IBM because he says, "IBM
has indicated that they have no plans for an OS/2 based
client of their own."  It is this statement that is giving rise to
the "OS/2 is dead" headlines now appearing at so many OS/2
news sites.  Rather than question the source of the statement
(as having no right to speak for IBM) they are running with it
as gospel.  Afterall, Brad Wardell, KING of OS/2, has said so.

Won't someone PUH leeease pull back the curtain and see that
the King is wearing NT and producing software for Microsoft
systems only?  Are they all that blind and stupid?

>         Now, if you are in the secret of the gods and know what is their
> strategy, please go on and enlighten us.
>
> > I fail to see how this makes either a great villian out of Stardock or a
hero
> > out of IBM.  Let's face it.  IBM doesn't want a popular client; they want
a
> > "tons-of-money" business system.
>
>         If that goes through a popular client, they'll sure get there.  Now,
> for some crystal ball readings...Windows 2000 isn't recommended by
> high respectable analysis society (IDC and alike) and IT and managers
> are usually following their opinions (that's why a lot of people are,
> in part, stuck with Windows), Linux is going through a push but
> configuration is still not for the faint of heart.  I guess between
> those two, OS/2 can have a really good chance due to some killer apps
> entering the arena (StarOffice and alike).  ;-)
>
> Salut,
>
>         Michel (sur OS/2 Warp 4.07)
>         ICQ #13376913
>         http://pages.infinit.net/exovede

You got it!  OS/2 continues to be THE Killer OS today.  No other
desktop operating system on the market today can equal the
power, stability and quality of OS/2.  NONE!

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                            18-Sep-99 19:40:06
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:23
Subj: 50 cents/Minute Phone Dating 5429

From: [e-mail]

Want to meet someone tonight?

Only 50 Cents per minute!

CALL:   1-888-335-HOTT

*These girls are not tired phonesex workers. They call for phonesex with horny
guys and girls like you. You   are free to arrange a meeting with anyone you
meet on this line. Give it a try!!!

18+ Only





g1zj);vv``

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

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

From: [e-mail]                      19-Sep-99 14:10:24
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:23
Subj: OS/2 is still on my desktop!

From: [e-mail] (Khairil Yusof)

Man.. how many times do we have to go through this? :)

I admit, I felt the same way earlier this year. I was THIS >.< close to
switching over to Linux. Then realized that OS/2 is still better for me. If
you're still using it, then it must still be the best OS out there for you.
Nothing is perfect but unless OS/2 does not have something that you really
need, then there is no reason to change is there? The UI is still the best out
there in my opinion (having used quite a lot of all of these the WPS, Gnome
with E, KDE, CDE, Win9x, WinNT, Mac, BeOS).

Also why change because of a statement in a newsgroup? I was about to change,
but then I learnt about the power of Xfree86/OS2 and emx applications. Then
there was my WPS desktop. If it's so archaic or old, why do people running
BeOS and Linux come to my room and say they really like the UI and my OS/2
desktop?

I still will continue to use OS/2 because:

WPS!
PMMail/2 and integrated PGP support and the ease of use of the filters
Netscape 4.61, it sux but it's supported by my Uni.
Networking! - TCP/IP, NFS, NETBEUI etc..
ProNews/2 - any better?
Smartsuite
 - I love WordPro!! Awesome for long essays and reports.
 - Organizer! - my life will be a mess without it.

EMX & Xfree86/OS2
 - Enlightenment/2, Gimp 1.1.9
 - Any unix application I want to run off my friend's Linux box
   (or my own if I buy a new computer)
 - Any unix application off my university servers
 - Xitami/Apache and heaps of other emx applications

MP3
 - PM123, Z!, Bladeenc, Leech, CD2MP3PM, enough for me

All these running just fine on my P233 with 64mbs at the same time and because
it is all I need, then it's fine with me.

I don't have time for playing computer games (would rather play basketball,
draw, take photos, go out with girlfriend and friends, drive to the beach, go
camping, cycle, dance parties, learn other languages, study).

It's enough for me to listen to music, do my work, getting news
(newsreader/netscape) and communicating with friends (Email, ICQ). And I like
both my WPS desktop and Enlightenment/2 desktop when I run applications to do
the above.

I'm sure other people have other needs and OS/2 might be the wrong choice. But
until such a time when I can't do any of the above, then I'll look at
alternatives. Until then, unless IBM officially says, it will no longer
support OS/2 Warp 4 (no new drivers, fixpacks, no new sales of Warp4) then
I'll stick with OS/2.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                          19-Sep-99 04:52:00
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:23
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>Gerben Bergman
>Why is it that OS/2 users are always this unlucky when trying out Windows?

I don't think that it's quite as much luck as it is competence. To be
frank, based upon what I've seen of OS/2 users in newsgroups such as
this, they don't seem to be too savvy in general. Mostly, they just
seem to be overly exuberant about a particular niche OS, but
otherwise, do not have any particular skills that would prevent them
from having difficulty doing something like installing and running
Windows

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

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

From: [e-mail]                     19-Sep-99 05:01:07
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:23
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

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

On Sat, 18 Sep 1999 15:03:44 -0700, Tim Martin wrote:

>>
>> I'd like to warn you about Timmy a little bit.  You see, he's our local
>> paranoid schizophrenic, and has serious delusions of grandeur.
>
>Yes Darin, I am the OS/2 advocate who sat in these
>newsgroups blowing the whistle on Stardock's little
>game.  There was never any chance in hell that

You're also the nut who sat in these newsgroups creating the "Stardock game".

>Stardock would be given the rights to release their
>own Stardock Warp 5 client.  All Stardock wanted was

The fact that there were *any* negotiations indicated that there was a
chance.  Nice try.

>free publicity through their continued misuse of these
>newsgroups.  They ran for eleven months hyping a

YOU were the only one misusing the newsgroups:

* YOU were the only one that continually brought up Stardock's possible OS/2
OEM client.
* YOU were (and still are) the only one who continually hyped(/hypes) his own
website.

>vaporware Stardock Warp 5 client.  They were helped
>along by Stardock leeches such as yourself.

Leeches?  Okay, so I own a coupla Stardock products ... but I *paid* for
them, I didn't *leech* them.

>The OS/2 community now pays the price.  News sites

??? What price?

>are reporting the death of OS/2 and basing their reports

??? The only ones I've seen are the ones saying, "Nope - IBM ain't releasing
their client, even through a third party."  Completely true.  Nothing says
OS/2 is dead - it's still going until at least 2002.

>on the words of Brad Wardell.  Not IBM, not an IBM public
>statement but a statement by Brad Wardell.  The same
>guy who promised customers a free fix for a buggy
>Stardock OD 1.5 and then renegged.  The same guy who
>dropped the development of any substantial OS/2 software
>and turned immediately to developing for the Microsoft
>platforms.  The same guy who posts to these newsgroups

??? September 13:

[9/13] Stellar Frontier 0.99.3
for OS/2 and Windows has
been released. Grab the
update.

Right from their own website.  Looks like they still write OS/2 software.

>claiming he supports OS/2 and uses NT to say it.  The same

Hmmm... maybe I should start reading this newsgroup from tin on my Linux box
...

>guy who sat in these newsgroups chastising OS/2 users,
>calling OS/2 users names, calling us liars, and everything

No - as far as I can tell, Brad has pretty much only called YOU a liar.  Your
delusions of grandeur are poking through again.

>else he could to convince you leeches with that he had the
>holy grail in his grasp.

I wasn't convinced.  I didn't even feel that anyone (but you) was trying to
convince me.

>It was just a matter of time before the smoke cleared
>and the mirror was revealed.  Now you want to blame
>everybody else but those responsible: Stardock.

Stardock is responsible for no new client?  What type of drugs are you on,
anyway???

>Not gonna play here Darin.  The facts speak for themselves.

Fact #1: Tim Martin is full of shit.
Fact #2: Tim Martin won't admit he's wrong.
Fact #3: Tim Martin has a personal vendetta against Brad Wardell and/or
Stardock Corp. and is trying to hide behind twisted interpretations of
reality to keep this fact quiet.

Yup, pretty much.
---
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]                                 19-Sep-99 05:27:04
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:23
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Marty wrote:
>
> Joseph wrote:
> >
> > Marty wrote:
> >
> > > Bennie Nelson wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Steven C. Den Beste" wrote:
> > > > >
> > >
> >
> > > > > But you're right about one thing: you *don't* have any money riding
on it.
> > > > >
> > > > > I do. Brad does. We're backing our opinions with cold, hard cash in
> > > > > non-trivial amounts. That demonstrates that we're a lot more certain
about
> > > > > our opinions than you seem to be.
> > > > >
> > > > > There's an aphorism I like: "True expertise on a subject is
demonstrated by
> > > > > the ability to win a series of wagers." The correlary is that
someone who
> > > > > refuses to bet isn't really as certain as they try to sound.
> > > >
> > > > Your corollary does not allow for those who won't bet because they
oppose
> > > > betting on moral grounds.  Thus, refusing to bet says nothing about
their
> > > > certainty.
> > >
> > > Nor does it include those who are forbidden by law due to age, nor those
> > > incapable of speech and motion, nor those who are comatose... but what's
> > > your point?  You're wildly and inappropriately misusing his metaphor.
> >
> > What metaphore?  The man is being literal.
>
> If it wasn't a metaphor, then why would one "oppose to wager on moral
> grounds"?
>
> > He owns stock in MS so he's more qualifed to speak than those who do not.

Not necessarily.

>
> Is it immoral to speculate in the stock market?

Some people believe it is.

>
> > Brad develops for Win32 so he is more qualifed to speak.  The more you
> > put at risk, the greater your qualification.
>
> Is it immoral to produce Win32 applications?

Is it gambling?

>
> - Marty

Regards,
Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 01:17:15
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:23
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Tim Martin wrote:
>
> He's the same guy who sits in these newsgroups and calls real
> OS/2 advocates liars, jerks, idiots and a host of other derogatory
> names because they dare to question his ethics or complain about
> his products.

I haven't seen him do this once to an OS/2 advocate.  Provide some evidence
if you can.

> He's the same guy who spent some eleven months in these
> newsgroup hyping Stardock and a vaporware product called
> Stardock's Warp 5.

And where is your evidence for this one?  Why, nowhere to be seen!

You can proclaim until you're blue in the face, but until you provide some
evidence everyone is left to assume you're talking out of your ass.

> AND, he's the very same guy who has supporters such as
> yourself.  People who are helping to drive as many OS/2
> users away from OS/2 by supporting his public message
> that OS/2 is dead.

I can see someone else doing a much better job at driving away OS/2 users.

> > See you at Warpstock '99 Tim! (Not that you'd ever bother to show up at
> > an OS/2 user convention...)
>
> How do you know a Warp City staffer has NOT been
> to every Warpstock event?  You don't.  We're there.
> In droves.

Are you challenging him for not providing evidence?  How ironic!

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 01:22:28
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:23
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Jeff Glatt wrote:
>
> >Gerben Bergman
> >Why is it that OS/2 users are always this unlucky when trying out Windows?
>
> I don't think that it's quite as much luck as it is competence. To be
> frank, based upon what I've seen of OS/2 users in newsgroups such as
> this, they don't seem to be too savvy in general. Mostly, they just
> seem to be overly exuberant about a particular niche OS, but
> otherwise, do not have any particular skills that would prevent them
> from having difficulty doing something like installing and running
> Windows

Need I remind you that this group does not represent people who use OS/2 in
any way, shape, or form?  That's like looking at a Jewish murderer and
saying that all Jews must be cruel immoral people.

It seems the reverse of your general argument is true too.  A lot of
Windoze users that formerly used OS/2 had a lot of problems with it
(speaking of crashes and instability they had), hence they switched.  Does
this mean they were unskilled?

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 19-Sep-99 05:24:23
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:23
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Marty wrote:
>
> Bennie Nelson wrote:
> >
> > Marty wrote:
> > >
> > > Bennie Nelson wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Steven C. Den Beste" wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, 12 Sep 1999 21:31:56 -0400, Joseph recycled some holes into
the
> > > > > following pattern:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Steven C. Den Beste wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Another possibility is that he already has all the data he needs.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> He's already determined, by direct experiment,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >When you talk about direct experiments you make me laugh.  Let him
speak for himself
> > > > > >and you can speak for yourself.  We'll also respect the opinions of
the Gartner
> > > > > >Group, GIGA and Forrester.
> > > > >
> > > > > "We"? You and your tape worm? I'll continue ignoring them, just like
I have
> > > > > been. I don't care in the slightest what they think about it. I
don't give
> > > > > their opinions any credence at all.
> > > > >
> > > > > >> Your pathetic attempt at a FUD campaign on this subject comes off
as
> > > > > >> whistling in the graveyard. What are you so afraid of? That Win2K
might be
> > > > > >> yet another massive commercial success? You do realize that you
have no
> > > > > >> power to change that, don't you?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Fear huh?  Who's posting on which news group?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >It's great to see expectations build up for W2K and to have high
expectations for
> > > > > >software compatibility.  If the argument for W2K compatibility
comes down to personal
> > > > > >experiences of people in this news group (so far it has) then that
is a very very bad
> > > > > >sign.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Now W2K may be a massive commercial success -- I haven't any money
riding on it.  I
> > > > > >don't see CITIRX running scared but I have seen the top PC OEMs
building Thin Clients
> > > > > >based on WinCE or LINUX.  I have also seen Compaq dump W2K on ALPHA
and pick up
> > > > > >LINUX.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I've also seen IBM making a massive investment in Win2K. What has
any of
> > > > > this got to do with the price of tea in Beijing?
> > > > >
> > > > > But you're right about one thing: you *don't* have any money riding
on it.
> > > > >
> > > > > I do. Brad does. We're backing our opinions with cold, hard cash in
> > > > > non-trivial amounts. That demonstrates that we're a lot more certain
about
> > > > > our opinions than you seem to be.
> > > > >
> > > > > There's an aphorism I like: "True expertise on a subject is
demonstrated by
> > > > > the ability to win a series of wagers." The correlary is that
someone who
> > > > > refuses to bet isn't really as certain as they try to sound.
> > > >
> > > > Your corollary does not allow for those who won't bet because they
oppose
> > > > betting on moral grounds.  Thus, refusing to bet says nothing about
their
> > > > certainty.
> > >
> > > Nor does it include those who are forbidden by law due to age, nor those
> > > incapable of speech and motion, nor those who are comatose... but what's
> > > your point?  You're wildly and inappropriately misusing his metaphor.
> > >
> > > - Marty
> >
> > You left out those that are mentally incompetent.  Actually, my point was
in
> > the portion you chose to not quote in your reply.
>
> If your point is based on this interpretation of his metaphor than it too
> is inappropriate.  In the case to which Steven is referring, there are only
> two reasons why one would "refuse to wager" because 1] they are not certain
> enough to accept the risk, or 2] they can't afford it with or without the
> risk factor.  Morals have nothing to do with it.
>
> - Marty

Morals have every thing to do with it.  The aphorism he cited is incorrect,
because true expertise on a subject can be demonstrated apart from gambling.
The objection to using gambling as a means to determine such expertise need
not be because of uncertainty, but simply because one has moral objections
to the means for establishing truth.

Regards,
Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 19-Sep-99 05:33:19
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:23
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Marty wrote:
>
> Joseph wrote:
> >
> > Marty wrote:
> >
> > > Joseph wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Marty wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Bennie Nelson wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Steven C. Den Beste" wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > But you're right about one thing: you *don't* have any money
riding on it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I do. Brad does. We're backing our opinions with cold, hard cash
in
> > > > > > > non-trivial amounts. That demonstrates that we're a lot more
certain about
> > > > > > > our opinions than you seem to be.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > There's an aphorism I like: "True expertise on a subject is
demonstrated by
> > > > > > > the ability to win a series of wagers." The correlary is that
someone who
> > > > > > > refuses to bet isn't really as certain as they try to sound.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your corollary does not allow for those who won't bet because they
oppose
> > > > > > betting on moral grounds.  Thus, refusing to bet says nothing
about their
> > > > > > certainty.
> > > > >
> > > > > Nor does it include those who are forbidden by law due to age, nor
those
> > > > > incapable of speech and motion, nor those who are comatose... but
what's
> > > > > your point?  You're wildly and inappropriately misusing his
metaphor.
> > > >
> > > > What metaphore?  The man is being literal.
> > >
> > > If it wasn't a metaphor, then why would one "oppose to wager on moral
> > > grounds"?
> >
> > ?!?
>
> If you're trying to quote QBert, it's "@!#?@!"
>
> > If it WERE a metaphore then one would NOT oppose it on moral grounds.  It
is a
> > metaphore.
>
> Oppose what?  The metaphor or the gambling?

Gambling.

>
> Let's cut to the chase here, without getting into semantics, Steven made a
> very specific reference to the fact that he's back up his beliefs with
> dollars.  That's a form of speculation.  It is not immoral to back up your
> beliefs with money, so long as what you are backing up is not illegal
> itself.  This is certainly the case with Steven's statement.  Morals have
> nothing to do with what he was referring to.  The introduction of morals
> served only to confuse the subject matter and had nothing to do with the
> argument.  Thus it was a misuse of the given metaphor.

The aphorism is untrue, because it disregards the reality of morals.  It is
not a misuse of the aphorism to state that: it is a rebuttal.

>
> > If it were NOT then it WOULD be opposed on moral grounds.  It would be
literal.  I
> > saw the comments as literal.  He is betting, wagering, which to some is
immoral and
> > to many more who know about stock investing is plain foolish.
>
> Tell that to my father, a stock broker on the NYSE.  Who knew that a little
> rat-hole company like AOL or eXcite or Yahoo! would ever do so well.  Those
> that "wagered" on them didn't feel it was foolish.  Do you?
>
> > > > He owns stock in MS so he's more qualifed to speak than those who do
not.
> > >
> > > Is it immoral to speculate in the stock market?
> >
> > Yes it can be.
>
> Only if you have insider information which has nothing to do with this
> discussion.  Stop grasping at straws.
>
> > So can drinking Coke or using a leather belt.  The point made was it
> > could be immoral and that would preclude people.
>
> A better point might be that some might not have the currency needed to
> invest.  Applied to the context of Steven's statement the morality argument
> doesn't make any sense.

Steven introduced the concept of wagering as a means of determining truth.  I
rebutted his claim.

>
> > When the words Wager and Bet are
> > used the meaning of the activity is clear and could be argued immoral.  Of
course
> > you're also using a different word -- speculate -- not wager or bet.  You
have to be
> > careful since morality implies intent. Wage and bet are not the same as
speculate..
> >
> > FYI Historically Christians and Muslims were forbidden to charge interest,
and
> > speculate.  The word moral is often, but not exclusively linked to a
religious
> > belief.
>
> This is completely off-topic.

Yet, it is perfectly germaine to the discussion.

>
> > > > Brad develops for Win32 so he is more qualifed to speak.  The more you
> > > > put at risk, the greater your qualification.
> > >
> > > Is it immoral to produce Win32 applications?
> >
> > Welll stop and ask yourself if your quesiton sounds absured then it might
be based on
> > an unreasonable interpretation.
> >
> > Morality can be found by looking at the intention of the act.
>
> What's more absurd than being immoral by drinking a can of Coke??
>
> > Any act that is seen
> > and argued as a wager or bet can be found to be immoral by those who find
gambling,
> > wagering and betting immoral -- or addictive.   Not everyone wagers or
bets.  Not all
> > beliefs and knowledge are measured by the magnitude of risk.
>
> Come back down to Earth and realize the context of his statements.  There
> is nothing immoral in Steven's form of "gambling."
>
> - Marty

In your eyes, maybe.  In other people's views, any form of wagering is
immoral.
Therefore, the morals of some people are a rebuttal to the aphorism.

Regards,
Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 14:21:27
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:06
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

From: Stefan Schwarzer <[e-mail]>

Hello Juvenaly,

juvenaly schrieb:
>      Question: Similar to Linux, could OS/2 users band together and
> develop and market (à la Red Hat) a package that would in effect be an
> update to OS/2 v.4, complete with convenient installation, etc. -- in
> effect an unofficial v.5?

If I understood your question: Something like this is already
under development, please look at http://en.os2.org/projects/osk/ :)

Regards
 Stefan

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 08:15:10
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:06
Subj: Re: OS/2 Death Knell!

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

David T. Johnson <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
> Brad Wardell of Stardock Software has publicly announced today that IBM
> will not license OS/2 to Stardock.  In his announcement, he said is
> part:
>
> "The call has been made -- there will be no new client from Stardock and
> IBM has indicated that they have no plans for an OS/2-based client of
> their own.  Though IBM indicated Stardock had the strongest proposal,
> they have decided that it is currently not in IBM's or their customer's
> interests to license any current OS/2 technology on an OEM-basis."

Good, maybe now he can finish his work on a Win32 Galactic Civilizations.
I've been GalCiv-free, made it through re-hab and now living independently,
in the two years since I wiped my OS/2 partition.




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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 19-Sep-99 12:30:05
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:06
Subj: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: [e-mail] (Mooo)

Craig Benbow <[e-mail]> wrote:

>What is required is a deliberately targeted campaign to convince IBM to
update the
>client.

Yes, and we need to present to IBM as a large group, not a disparete
bunch of whining users.

For instance, Warp 4.5 usable as a client (although large) already
exists.  It is the basis for Warp Server for e-Business and the
foundation to which all the server components of that package work
through.

If the Bank of Brasil, or the German reserve bank ring up Lou Gerstner
and say 'Lou, would you mind if we replace all our Warp 4 clients with
Warp4.5 and pay you an upgrade fee for those existing seats, and a
whole new licence fee for new seats' what do you think the answer
would be?

'Nah, we don't need to make 10 million this month, but thanks anyway'
??

I doubt it.  I'm going to ask my IBM rep on Monday her feelings on
exactly this issue.  If I install WSeB would they have any major
objections to me using Warp 4.5 as the client?  There probably will be
objections, but then, I'm small fry (I'll ask anyway).

The OS/2 community needs to get behind one of the high profile lobby
groups that already exist and put their money where their mouth is.
This needs to be a serious effort however.  Don't front IBM and ask
what their opinion would be if asked to provide Warp Client 4.5 to 20
users.  Ask them, quite bluntly, to supply 20,000 copies of Warp
Client 4.5, and when they say 'yes' have the money ready (lets see,
20,000 x AU$300 approx per client = AU$6Mill. - about US$3.9Mill).

This idea is not new, in fact its been bouncing off the walls of
usenet and other places for about a year.  But ideas are worth nothing
without a financial backing.

When an enterprise goes to a supplier like IBM trying to make a deal
for something, they (generally) have money to back them up.  Talking
'potential' sales to an enterprise focused sales team will get you
nowhere.  They must know that should a deal be organised the money
will be forthcoming...now...not in dribs and drabs over the next five
years.

Those who have had a look at WSeB know that it would take almost no
effort at all to strip out the server component, and package the
client part of Warp 4.5.  Seriously!  Strip out the server options
from the install REXX script, remove the stuff from the CD and boom,
you have it.

What IBM most definately does not want to entertain is being held to
account by literally thousands of tiny organisations or worse single
users.  Its simply not worth their while.  Huge companies have their
own IT support staff, and even better, buy large value support
agreements from IBM.  Its all about money folks, dont fight it.

We all need to take a deep breath right now and think corporate.
Forget paying US$100 for a client, lets start at something like
US$300.  Any idea what something like SCO Unix costs?  Yep AU$3000.00
a shot.  When you're in a minority you simply have to pay through the
nose as economies of scale are not realised with small user bases.

IBM would get their share of the US$300 per client (I've no real idea
of what a business partner pays for a Warp4 licence...$100??), the
rest to a community formed company with support staff and sales staff
and whatnot.  They would present to IBM like a homogeneous enterprise
corporation with 10-15 thousand seats (at least).  Everyone from users
to businesses smaller than fortune 500 could work through such an
organisation for support, sales etc.

Its now bluff calling time.  If what we, as a community, really want
is a free OS, supported for free, for the rest of time then we are
going to die, and whats more we deserve what we get.  If all the chest
beaters out there are just making noise, well, fine, but if it all
amounts to no money, we as a community will probably last until about
2002 the final support date for Warp4.  In the mean time all ISV's
will vanish.  ISV's even now have a hard time trying to make a roadmap
of the future, even through the next 2 years!

My own view is that IBM is probably willing to let OS/2 die as natural
death.  Its up to us to make sure this doesnt happen and the only way
to do that is to present IBM with a continuous revenue stream - money
guys n gals.

Has anyone thought of basically copying IBM's sales adventure as
regarding Software Choice?  What a central organising corporation,
working on behalf of the worldwide community of OS/2 users needs most
is cash.  Users could perhaps pay a subscription to the OS/2 company,
not an insubstantial pocket change type of affair, but real money
US$300-400 per year.  For this, they could perhaps gain access to
selected OS/2 applications licences, revenue based on licences could
then be fed back to the ISV's concerned in big fat quarterly chunks.

Small potatoes compared with the windows market?  You bet, but I'd
think probably a lot larger than most are currently getting through
the OS/2 shareware world.

How about a Credit Union type of set up?  (I'm brainstorming here),
whereby those diehard OS/2 users who really care, and care enough to
front money, provide the startup capital for the OS/2 corporation via
the purchase of shares?  Those with the most shares have the most
votes etc etc.  You don't get access to the 'union' until you buy at
least one parcel of shares..this type of thing.  You want access to
Warp Client 4.5 as well as a swag of other OS/2 apps?  Fine, buy into
OS/2 Corporation, then as a member, you have access to all this fine
software at corporate rates.  Big bucks?  You bet, I'd imagine, in all
reality, if all you want is Warp Client 4.5 its gonna cost you US$600+
(remember we would need to buy the software -and- support the
underlying corporate structure...help staff, adminstrators etc).  Per
software pricing would get a lot better should you wish to partake in
the purchase of several packages.

The crunch in all schemes of this type, and I've been watching with
interest for over a year, is that someone, and in fact a -lot- of
someones, has to make the first move.  A OS/2 corporation such as
thing can only be a success if it is large, and I mean that in IBM
terms.

The underlying theme is that at no time does IBM receive a call from a
disgruntled user who cant get his 'dial other internet providers'
working.  All this user support is handled by OS/2 Corporation paid
support staff.

If this sort of money is viewed as unrealistic, then my opinion is
that our requests for continued support from IBM is also unrealistic
and OS/2 will in fact die...slowly and horribly.


Craig

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Nothing I say is my own opinion (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 08:21:17
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:06
Subj: Re: Look at yourselves

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

Jim Larson <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
..
> Jim Larson
> (really torqued now, since NT on my Thinkpad just up and decided it
> doesn't want to boot anymore).

You need to renew your license agreement.  :)


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 14:16:00
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:06
Subj: Re: Shhh! OS/2 selling better than expected

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Sat, 18 Sep 1999 23:22:33, "David D. Huff Jr." <[e-mail]>
wrote:
| Yes exactly every one of the editors currently employed by ZD took
| that specific day off. Just so they didn't have to be involved with  the
| continuing conspiracy. And the subsequent article was published
| by one of our covert operatives.
|
| But in the case that I am mistaken, please tell me why ZDnet would
| publish this article?
|
| http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2326830,00.html

I wrote it because it was true and because it was of interest to our
readers (originally at ZD's Sm@rt Reseller's site at
http://www.zdnet.com/sr, before ZDNN asked to "reprint" it). Is there
any other reason to report news?

Incidentally, you're a little out of date. That news was released a
couple of weeks ago. (note the date, please)

--Esther Schindler
  Technology Editor, Sm@rt Reseller
  also program chair, Phoenix OS/2 Society

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 19-Sep-99 15:11:04
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:06
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Marty wrote:
>
> Bennie Nelson wrote:
> >
> > Marty wrote:
> > >
> > > Bennie Nelson wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Marty wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Bennie Nelson wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Steven C. Den Beste" wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sun, 12 Sep 1999 21:31:56 -0400, Joseph recycled some holes
into the
> > > > > > > following pattern:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >Steven C. Den Beste wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> Another possibility is that he already has all the data he
needs.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> He's already determined, by direct experiment,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >When you talk about direct experiments you make me laugh.  Let
him speak for himself
> > > > > > > >and you can speak for yourself.  We'll also respect the
opinions of the Gartner
> > > > > > > >Group, GIGA and Forrester.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "We"? You and your tape worm? I'll continue ignoring them, just
like I have
> > > > > > > been. I don't care in the slightest what they think about it. I
don't give
> > > > > > > their opinions any credence at all.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> Your pathetic attempt at a FUD campaign on this subject comes
off as
> > > > > > > >> whistling in the graveyard. What are you so afraid of? That
Win2K might be
> > > > > > > >> yet another massive commercial success? You do realize that
you have no
> > > > > > > >> power to change that, don't you?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >Fear huh?  Who's posting on which news group?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >It's great to see expectations build up for W2K and to have
high expectations for
> > > > > > > >software compatibility.  If the argument for W2K compatibility
comes down to personal
> > > > > > > >experiences of people in this news group (so far it has) then
that is a very very bad
> > > > > > > >sign.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >Now W2K may be a massive commercial success -- I haven't any
money riding on it.  I
> > > > > > > >don't see CITIRX running scared but I have seen the top PC OEMs
building Thin Clients
> > > > > > > >based on WinCE or LINUX.  I have also seen Compaq dump W2K on
ALPHA and pick up
> > > > > > > >LINUX.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I've also seen IBM making a massive investment in Win2K. What
has any of
> > > > > > > this got to do with the price of tea in Beijing?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But you're right about one thing: you *don't* have any money
riding on it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I do. Brad does. We're backing our opinions with cold, hard cash
in
> > > > > > > non-trivial amounts. That demonstrates that we're a lot more
certain about
> > > > > > > our opinions than you seem to be.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > There's an aphorism I like: "True expertise on a subject is
demonstrated by
> > > > > > > the ability to win a series of wagers." The correlary is that
someone who
> > > > > > > refuses to bet isn't really as certain as they try to sound.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your corollary does not allow for those who won't bet because they
oppose
> > > > > > betting on moral grounds.  Thus, refusing to bet says nothing
about their
> > > > > > certainty.
> > > > >
> > > > > Nor does it include those who are forbidden by law due to age, nor
those
> > > > > incapable of speech and motion, nor those who are comatose... but
what's
> > > > > your point?  You're wildly and inappropriately misusing his
metaphor.
> > > > >
> > > > > - Marty
> > > >
> > > > You left out those that are mentally incompetent.  Actually, my point
was in
> > > > the portion you chose to not quote in your reply.
> > >
> > > If your point is based on this interpretation of his metaphor than it
too
> > > is inappropriate.  In the case to which Steven is referring, there are
only
> > > two reasons why one would "refuse to wager" because 1] they are not
certain
> > > enough to accept the risk, or 2] they can't afford it with or without
the
> > > risk factor.  Morals have nothing to do with it.
> > >
> > > - Marty
> >
> > Morals have every thing to do with it.  The aphorism he cited is
incorrect,
> > because true expertise on a subject can be demonstrated apart from
gambling.
> > The objection to using gambling as a means to determine such expertise
need
> > not be because of uncertainty, but simply because one has moral objections
> > to the means for establishing truth.
>
> He didn't say it was the <only> way of demonstrating expertise.

Actually, he did.  He said that lack of winning bets on a subject is proof
that
that person is not as expert in that subject as someone who wins a series of
wagers on the subject.  His assertion is incorrect in that the conclusion
is based upon the flawed premise that success at betting is THE way for
determining expertise.  In other words, that if a person doesn't win bets
in the subject it is because a) the position was proven wrong and the bet was
lost, or b) the person would not bet because they were not sure enough to
wager
anything.

So, I said that a person who declines a wager may do so based SOLELY upon
moral principle.  In that case, the lack of winning bets says NOTHING about
that person's expertise in the subject.  No valid conclusions about expertise
can be drawn in such case.

Winning a
> series of wagers is indicative of expertise in an area.  His form of
> wagering is known as capitalism, and while some may consider this immoral,
> it is a close-minded approach.
>
> Now please quit your tangential logic and argue a real issue for a change.
>
> - Marty

Regards,
Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            19-Sep-99 11:53:19
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:06
Subj: Re: Shhh! OS/2 selling better than expected

From: [e-mail] (David H. McCoy)

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] says...
>On Sat, 18 Sep 1999 23:22:33, "David D. Huff Jr." <[e-mail]>
>wrote:
>| Yes exactly every one of the editors currently employed by ZD took
>| that specific day off. Just so they didn't have to be involved with  the
>| continuing conspiracy. And the subsequent article was published
>| by one of our covert operatives.
>|
>| But in the case that I am mistaken, please tell me why ZDnet would
>| publish this article?
>|
>| http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2326830,00.html
>
>I wrote it because it was true and because it was of interest to our
>readers (originally at ZD's Sm@rt Reseller's site at
>http://www.zdnet.com/sr, before ZDNN asked to "reprint" it). Is there
>any other reason to report news?
>
>Incidentally, you're a little out of date. That news was released a
>couple of weeks ago. (note the date, please)
>
>--Esther Schindler
>  Technology Editor, Sm@rt Reseller
>  also program chair, Phoenix OS/2 Society
>

Sure. The great conspiracy to hamper OS/2 and its noble users!

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

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

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

From: os2@still_here.net                                19-Sep-99 16:36:04
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: OS/2 is still on my desktop!

From: os2@still_here.net

On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 04:10:49, [e-mail] (Khairil
Yusof) wrote:

> Man.. how many times do we have to go through this? :)
>
> I admit, I felt the same way earlier this year. I was THIS >.< close to
switching over to Linux. Then realized that OS/2 is still better for me. If
you're still using it, then it must still be the best OS out there for you.
Nothing is perfect but unless OS/2 does not have something that you really
need, then there is no reason to change is there? The UI is still the best out
there in my opinion (having used quite a lot of all of these the WPS, Gnome
with E, KDE, CDE, Win9x, WinNT, Mac, BeOS).
>
> Also why change because of a statement in a newsgroup? I was about to
change, but then I learnt about the power of Xfree86/OS2 and emx applications.
Then there was my WPS desktop. If it's so archaic or old, why do people
running BeOS and Linux come to my room and say they really like the UI and my
OS/2 desktop?
>
> I still will continue to use OS/2 because:
>
> WPS!
> PMMail/2 and integrated PGP support and the ease of use of the filters
> Netscape 4.61, it sux but it's supported by my Uni.
> Networking! - TCP/IP, NFS, NETBEUI etc..
> ProNews/2 - any better?
> Smartsuite
>  - I love WordPro!! Awesome for long essays and reports.
>  - Organizer! - my life will be a mess without it.
>
> EMX & Xfree86/OS2
>  - Enlightenment/2, Gimp 1.1.9
>  - Any unix application I want to run off my friend's Linux box
>    (or my own if I buy a new computer)
>  - Any unix application off my university servers
>  - Xitami/Apache and heaps of other emx applications
>
> MP3
>  - PM123, Z!, Bladeenc, Leech, CD2MP3PM, enough for me
>
> All these running just fine on my P233 with 64mbs at the same time and
because it is all I need, then it's fine with me.
>
> I don't have time for playing computer games (would rather play basketball,
draw, take photos, go out with girlfriend and friends, drive to the beach, go
camping, cycle, dance parties, learn other languages, study).
>
> It's enough for me to listen to music, do my work, getting news
(newsreader/netscape) and communicating with friends (Email, ICQ). And I like
both my WPS desktop and Enlightenment/2 desktop when I run applications to do
the above.
>
> I'm sure other people have other needs and OS/2 might be the wrong choice.
But until such a time when I can't do any of the above, then I'll look at
alternatives. Until then, unless IBM officially says, it will no longer
support OS/2 Warp 4 (no new drivers, fixpacks, no new sales of Warp4) then
I'll stick with OS/2.
>

We could add:
1-DSAV
2-Colorworks v2 (available through underground/2)
3-PMView
4-Watcom 11b (available through underground/2)
5-File Manager/2
6-StarOffice 5.x (Free)
7-PhotoGraphics Pro (Free through email request for reg code)
8-VisualAge for Java
9-Emtec FTP
10-Post Road Mailer (Now Free)
11-and =MANY= =EXCELLENT= *FREE* utilities
(Sysbench,danis506,configmaint, etc, etc, etc)

So we could CONTINUE enjoying OS/2... don't allow Winblows fans take
our peace and delightment with OS/2!.. OS/2 is still on this desktop
too and will continue to be as long as Fixpacks are released (by IBM
or by whatever)......











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

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

From: os2@is_here_&_there.com                           19-Sep-99 17:02:10
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: OS/2 is ALIVE! [8-)

From: os2@is_here_&_there.com

Yes!.

OS/2 is veryone of us, WE are OS/2!.  And we are ALIVE!. As long as
YOU and ME and HIM continue to use, support, advocate and love OS/2,
this marvelous OS will be ALIVE.  Our war has not yet been lost, we
could lost various battles but *IF* we have energies, hope and
assertiveness we could eventually achieve our goals, and dreams.

There are some issues still in the OS arena: the most relevant is the
DOJ/MS trial.  We could bet that an unfavorable decision against MS,
will have an IMPACT in those IBM executives and IBM itself. The point
is: Let's keep Going!!.

This is an opportunity for us to re-think what the OS/2 community
should do...

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

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

From: [e-mail]                 19-Sep-99 12:40:05
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Raphael Tennenbaum)

[e-mail] wrote:

>[e-mail]@Videotron.ca (Michel A Goyette) said: > From
what
>I read, it only said the IBM wouldn't allow Stardock
>>to put out a new client release because that doesn't fit in their  strategy
>>(for whatever that means).  THAT'S ALL!!!
>
>I quote:
>
>>>The call has been made -- there will be no new client from Stardock
>>>and IBM has indicated that they have no plans for an OS/2 based
>>>client of their own.
>
>Note the wording:  "IBM has indicated that they have no plans for an OS/2
based
>client of their own."

Even if you don't consider the significantly unreliable
source, in press-release speak this means nothing.  IBM
speaks, or not, for itself.

Or if you prefer, it means "IBM hasn't said anything about a
Warp5 client in two years."  Or it might mean, "When I asked
the guy in the brown suit if the reason they weren't going
to give it to me was because they were bringing one out
themselves, he shrugged and picked his nose."  (IMO what it
means is, "Hey all you OS/2 fans, IBM sucks but we at
Stardock are great, we did our best and got a lot of
publicity.")

--
Ray Tennenbaum        '99 YZF-R6
readme@ http://www.ray-field.com

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: AT&T WorldNet Services (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 17:09:15
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: Look at yourselves

From: [e-mail] (Jim Larson)

On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 13:21:35, "Christian Gustafson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> > Jim Larson
> > (really torqued now, since NT on my Thinkpad just up and decided it
> > doesn't want to boot anymore).
>
> You need to renew your license agreement.  :)
>

I'll have to get out the little NT manual that came with the thing and
investigate. But somehow, I doubt that is the problem. If it is, then
they need someone else to create their practical jokes for them. I
boot, get to CAD login screen, and it freezes. IT WON'T EVEN POWER
OFF, god damn it. I have to remove the AC plug and take out the
battery to get it operational again.

Jim Larson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            19-Sep-99 13:54:03
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: OS/2 is ALIVE! [8-)

From: [e-mail] (David H. McCoy)

In article <[e-mail]>, os2
@is_here_&_there.com says...
>Yes!.
>
>OS/2 is veryone of us, WE are OS/2!.  And we are ALIVE!. As long as
>YOU and ME and HIM continue to use, support, advocate and love OS/2,
>this marvelous OS will be ALIVE.  Our war has not yet been lost, we
>could lost various battles but *IF* we have energies, hope and
>assertiveness we could eventually achieve our goals, and dreams.
>
>There are some issues still in the OS arena: the most relevant is the
>DOJ/MS trial.  We could bet that an unfavorable decision against MS,
>will have an IMPACT in those IBM executives and IBM itself. The point
>is: Let's keep Going!!.
>
>This is an opportunity for us to re-think what the OS/2 community
>should do...
>

Right! After all, let's look at the successes that Netscape 4.61, Open32, NCs,

and Java all had for OS/2.

With successes like this, who needs failures?
--
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 10:26:06
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Please see my response to your private email.
I would like to ask that those of you responding
to public postings do so publicly NOT privately.

Tim Martin
The OS/2 Guy
Warp City
http://warpcity.com
"E-ride the wild surf to Warp City!"

Craig Benbow wrote:

> For cripes sakes Tim keep your hair on.  It is only an OS after all and
bagging anyone
> is pointless.
>
> What is required is a deliberately targeted campaign to convince IBM to
update the
> client.  Note I say update.  We don't need a new OS we need an enhaced
version of what
> we have now.  This will take time and therefore a lot of patience.  I also
see the work
> of Netlabs to be crucial to the whole process and we all need to help at the
grass
> roots level with advocacy.  If you or anyone else has a problem with helping
to line
> IBM's pockets then get out of the game because that is all IBM stock holders
have an
> interest in.
> Have a coffee then get down to what we all do best, maintaining and
enhancing OS/2's
> reputation worldwide.
>
> Bottoms up
>
> Craig
>

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

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

From: [e-mail]                              19-Sep-99 13:48:07
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: Brad Barclay <[e-mail]>

Tim Martin wrote:

> >     Maybe the facts as you assume you know them.  Darin and myself both
work
> > inside the big blue wall however, and have a whole lot more information to
go
> > on than you do.  And it's not good.
>
> Then you'd better check with you own co-workers - especially
> those attending Warpstock today.  They are telling a much
> different story.  In fact - the whole reporting by Brad Wardell
> of such a meeting even taking place is now in question.  They
> say no such meeting took place.

    I have sufficient proof to say otherwise.

> You'd also better check with those same IBM officials.  They
> say OS/2 will generate more than 100 million for IBM this year
> and that IBM is spending some 12 million on drivers and
> additional maintenance releases.  That's pretty damn good
> for a so-called dead operating system.

    And it probably will.  What you're missing is that this figure has very
little
to do with the OS/2 client, and instead represents sales of OS/2 WARP Server,
WorkSpace on Demand, DB2 (which IIRC pulls in the bulk of that figure), the
VisualAge family, and everything else that runs under OS/2 that IBM sells.

    In short, the figure is very misleading.  Besides which, the point is not
that
IBM is or isn't making a profit from OS/2 - it's wether or not there is going
to be
a new fat client version.  And right now, based on all publicly available
info, as
the magic 8 ball says "all indications point to no".

Brad BARCLAY


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: via Internet Direct - http://www.mydirect.com/ (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 14:46:18
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Bennie Nelson wrote:
>
> > Now please quit your tangential logic and argue a real issue for a change.

Note:  no response.

If you don't have any intention of arguing real issues, Bennie, just let me
know right now.  It'll make things easier on both of us.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 10:48:05
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:

> [e-mail]@Videotron.ca (Michel A Goyette) said: > From
what
> I read, it only said the IBM wouldn't allow Stardock
> >to put out a new client release because that doesn't fit in their  strategy
> >(for whatever that means).  THAT'S ALL!!!
>
> I quote:
>
> >>The call has been made -- there will be no new client from Stardock
> >>and IBM has indicated that they have no plans for an OS/2 based
> >>client of their own.
>
> Note the wording:  "IBM has indicated that they have no plans for an OS/2
based
> client of their own."
>
> Jim L
> Remove XX from address to Email
> More gun laws will cure the nations ills - just like drug laws do.

And please note:  It is written by Brad Wardell.  It is not an
official statement by IBM.  What constitutes "indicated" in
Brad's mind means nothing in the real world.  ZDNet and
Mary Jo Folly "indicated" OS/2 was dead years ago yet I
still use it, IBM still updates it and I still get new applications
to run on it.

IBM has no made official statement regarding the death of
OS/2 or eventual release of a Warp 5 client.  NONE.  What
they have said is that they have no plans to release a Warp
5 client this year.  It took three years after Warp 3 for the
release of Warp 4.  Warp 4 is just two years old and still
outperforms anything Microsoft is offering todate.

For all of those who believe there will never be a Warp 5
client take faith, there is every likelihood IBM will release
a Warp 5 AFTER the year 2000.

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                   19-Sep-99 17:53:09
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: New OS/2 client not to be

From: [e-mail]

In <7ru5s5$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jason
Bowen) writes:
|In article <[e-mail]>,
|David T. Johnson <[e-mail]> wrote:
||
||
||Jason Bowen wrote:
|||
||| Oh well, how long till the service packs stop coming?
||
||In OS/2, these are called "fixpacks."  In Windows NT, they are called
||"service packs."
|
|...and I grab patches, you know what I was talking about.    OK, how long
|till the OS/2 fixpacks stop being released?

Why should this matter to you?

Guido

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

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

From: advocate@hard_to_kill-os.com                      19-Sep-99 18:20:23
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: OS/2 is ALIVE! [8-)

From: advocate@hard_to_kill-os.com

On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 17:54:06, [e-mail] (David H. McCoy)
wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]>, os2
> @is_here_&_there.com says...
> >Yes!.
> >
> >OS/2 is veryone of us, WE are OS/2!.  And we are ALIVE!. As long as
> >YOU and ME and HIM continue to use, support, advocate and love OS/2,
> >this marvelous OS will be ALIVE.  Our war has not yet been lost, we
> >could lost various battles but *IF* we have energies, hope and
> >assertiveness we could eventually achieve our goals, and dreams.
> >
> >There are some issues still in the OS arena: the most relevant is the
> >DOJ/MS trial.  We could bet that an unfavorable decision against MS,
> >will have an IMPACT in those IBM executives and IBM itself. The point
> >is: Let's keep Going!!.
> >
> >This is an opportunity for us to re-think what the OS/2 community
> >should do...
> >
>
> Right! After all, let's look at the successes that Netscape 4.61, Open32,
NCs,
> and Java all had for OS/2.
>
> With successes like this, who needs failures?

Thats NOT true NS 4.61 runs pretty well here, Open32 allowed the
development of Lotus Smart Suite v1.1 for Warp 4, and NC's are selling
very well among *large* corporations. So, *you* don't have the facts
nor the credibility to talk about these issues.  Your only goal is to
distract attention from highly capable OS/2 persons to argument with
you.

MS and BG may be paying your participation here.  IF OS/2 is 'dead' as
you state, why you *STILL* hang here????.  You hang here because you
*KNOW* we are 200% COMMITTED to our OS.

Go see dad Bill and tell him, it is going to take much more lies, time
and illegal actions to kill OS/2.





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


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 11:10:05
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Bob Stan wrote:

> On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 10:48:10 -0700, Tim Martin wrote:
>
> >And please note:  It is written by Brad Wardell.  It is not an
> >official statement by IBM.  What constitutes "indicated" in
> >Brad's mind means nothing in the real world.  ZDNet and
> >Mary Jo Folly "indicated" OS/2 was dead years ago yet I
> >still use it, IBM still updates it and I still get new applications
> >to run on it.
> >
> >IBM has no made official statement regarding the death of
> >OS/2 or eventual release of a Warp 5 client.  NONE.  What
> >they have said is that they have no plans to release a Warp
> >5 client this year.  It took three years after Warp 3 for the
> >release of Warp 4.  Warp 4 is just two years old and still
> >outperforms anything Microsoft is offering todate.
> >
> >For all of those who believe there will never be a Warp 5
> >client take faith, there is every likelihood IBM will release
> >a Warp 5 AFTER the year 2000.
>
> I have no vested interest in Stardock or IBM.  However, seeing as Brad and
> Stardock were involved in this attempt over a period of time, including face
> to face meetings with the upper echelons of IBM, I am inclined to accept his
> appraisal.

And yet an IBM official attending Warp Expo West
stated publicly yesterday that no such meeting
took place - and he should know, he is on the
committee.   He said it was cancelled due to travel
problems.  He also said Brad was wrong.  AND he
said IBM has made no decision on whether or not
they will release a Warp 5 client 'this year'.

Stardock has a vested financial interest in all this
free publicity.  Brad does not and cannot speak for IBM.

> I wish there would be a new client, but I think it unlikely.

And I see the glass as half full.  I say there will be a
Warp 5 client.  Just not in 1999.

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                    19-Sep-99 14:01:15
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

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

On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 10:48:10 -0700, Tim Martin wrote:

>And please note:  It is written by Brad Wardell.  It is not an
>official statement by IBM.  What constitutes "indicated" in
>Brad's mind means nothing in the real world.  ZDNet and
>Mary Jo Folly "indicated" OS/2 was dead years ago yet I
>still use it, IBM still updates it and I still get new applications
>to run on it.
>
>IBM has no made official statement regarding the death of
>OS/2 or eventual release of a Warp 5 client.  NONE.  What
>they have said is that they have no plans to release a Warp
>5 client this year.  It took three years after Warp 3 for the
>release of Warp 4.  Warp 4 is just two years old and still
>outperforms anything Microsoft is offering todate.
>
>For all of those who believe there will never be a Warp 5
>client take faith, there is every likelihood IBM will release
>a Warp 5 AFTER the year 2000.

I have no vested interest in Stardock or IBM.  However, seeing as Brad and
Stardock were involved in this attempt over a period of time, including face
to face meetings with the upper echelons of IBM, I am inclined to accept his
appraisal.

I wish there would be a new client, but I think it unlikely.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 15:24:27
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Jim Stuyck wrote:
>
> Wonder why Tholen (our very own twice-elected Kook of the Month)
> hasn't commented on this?  Let me guess:  He can't read everything.  Bet
> he reads THIS post.  ;-)

Incorrect Stuyck (aka "Little Boy")

;-)

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 12:30:05
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: Credibility

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Esther Schindler wrote:

> This discussion really belongs in comp.os.os2.advocacy; I'm pointing
> at both newsgroups at the moment so that c.o.o.m participants can
> follow it there if they choose. Followups to cooa please.
>
> On Thu, 16 Sep 1999 04:13:02, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
> | This simply follows  Esther's recent article posted to ZDNet
> | regarding OS/2 sales exceeding IBM's expectations.  Go
> | back and read her article.  She offers NOT ONE verifiable
> | source that can  confirm her claims.   When the article came
> | out we checked our IBM sources and they were perplexed at
> | her claims.  Some even laughed.  And I can say this about
> | our IBM sources, they are actual IBM employees who subscribe
> | to Warp City.  They have email addresses ending in ibm.com
> | not ibm.net.  Look for Esther (and her husband) at Warpstock.
>
> Tim,
>
> Please *do* confirm your sources before you report -- or even imply --
> inaccurate information. You have no idea who my sources are.
> Therefore, you have no leg on which to stand when you imply that my
> information is wrong.

You still do not provide one verifiable source in your
article.  You expect -because you believe you are the
self-proclaimed queen of OS/2- people to believe you.
I see you only as an employee of Ziff Davis publications
and that is not a dubious honor (at least to me).

> You expect the participants here to rely on _your_ credibility,
> instead.

Some do some don't.  I use OS/2.  I manage the largest
private OS/2-only subscription site on the 'Net.  My
credibility is just as good as anything you spread around.

> Well, so be it. The lurkers are perfectly capable of making their own
> judgements about whose word is more reliable. (Hint: another batch of
> whining about how awful I am probably won't help your cause.)

No, just another stab at how persecuted you want people
to think you are because someone questions the credibility
of one of your writings.  Apparently OS/2 users are to never
question what Esther writes.

> The unfortunate truth is that IBM was no longer willing to announce
> _good_ news about OS/2 sales. The OS/2 community took the sales report
> as generally good news, however, which was as I intended; I find it
> curious that you actually object to hearing positive news about OS/2
> sales. (Lurkers are welcome to speculate whether Tim thinks that good
> news about OS/2 is less important than his attempts to damage my
> credibility.)

I don't object at all if it is presented with some kind of
verfiable backup.  I object to you reporting it at this
precarious time - with Warpstock just around the corner.
You are not an official member of the Steering Committee
but it is understood you wield considerable weight.

Write an article to make  OS/2 users feel good about how
well OS/2 is doing and it is sure to increase Warpstock
ticket sales where OS/2 users will get a chance to meet
the self-proclaimed queen of OS/2  - and isn't your
husband offering some sort of programming seminar?
Oh wait, don't we also have a SMACK product to promote?

> Oh... and, unfortunately, I won't be able to make it to Warpstock this
> time, as my travel schedule prohibits it. (I've been in 4 states in
> the last 7 days, and have more trips upcoming.) I hope and expect that
> Warpstock's attendees will have a marvelous weekend; I wish that Bill
> and I could join them.

Gee, I don't think this news has been disseminated to
the masses just yet.  Many folks believe you will be
there based on all your previous postings.  I assume
from what you say above that Bill will not be providing
his seminar either.

> I attended Warp Expo West yesterday, and had a wonderful time. The
> people who put on the event, at http://www.scoug.com, are to be
> commended for orchestrating a superb event. It was a class act, from
> the awesome lineup of speakers to the tiny details, such as fruit and
> cookies in the exhibit hall. For _real_ OS/2 advocacy, I'd delight in
> a discussion from some of the OS/2 users who attended, who'll take the
> opportunity to cheer about the strong sense of community.
>
> Too bad you missed Warp Expo West, Tim.

But I didn't Esther.  In fact, I'm running a variety of gossip
items on it at Warp City as we speak.  Warp City is well
represented at Warp Expo.  You just may be unaware of it
by not having authorized access.

> Too bad you've missed Warpstock, both years.

And again, you need to get your ducks (facts) in order
Esther.  You often complain of that to me.

Whether I was or was not in attendance at any of the
Warpstock events is no one's business but my own.
Warp City was well represented at both events and
will be well represented again next month.

> Too bad you were unable or unwilling to participate in the last OS/2
> user get-together in the Bay Area, Tim.

But I don't live in the "Bay Area" Esther so whether
I was willing or unwilling is irrelevant.  What is relevant
is being invited to participate in a user get-together with
a Ziff Davis reporter - of which I have no desire whatsoever.

> Too bad you didn't go to Solutions 99, where you might have gotten
> official word from IBM on several matters (including, mind you, good
> news about their developer programs).

Yet I'm not a developer.  Still we had Warp City members
present and they reported on all those 'official' words on
all those matters you refer to.  Silly us.

> Too bad you couldn't make it to the OS/2 Marketplace conference a
> couple of years ago.

How do you know I couldn't make it?  Because you couldn't
pick me out of the crowd?

> Too bad... well hey... you haven't attended ANY of the OS/2 community
> events, have you?

Yes I have.  I am in attendance -one way or another- at
all of them.

> --Esther

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                      19-Sep-99 19:27:21
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Nothing to fear... this news is good news

From: [e-mail] ([e-mail])


                        There is nothing to fear

                Stardock is going to keep on pumping out
                all those useful, problem-solving solutions
                that have made OS2 the popular OS that it is.




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

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

From: [e-mail]                      19-Sep-99 14:39:05
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

From: Jason <[e-mail]>

juvenaly <[e-mail]> wrote:

:      Question: Similar to Linux, could OS/2 users band together and
: develop and market (à la Red Hat) a package that would in effect be an
: update to OS/2 v.4, complete with convenient installation, etc. -- in
: effect an unofficial v.5?

Their are two such efforts underway.  Check out Warp Up at indelible blue

http://www.indelible-blue.com/ibapps/products.nsf/by+partnumber/IBI202

And check out OSK

http://en.os2.org/projects/osk/

-Jason

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

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

From: [e-mail]                      19-Sep-99 14:48:29
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: 2000 - a new IBM release of Warp 5

From: Jason <[e-mail]>

Actually Tholen, the whole arguement was irrelevant.  But I thought what
the hell, why miss the chance to be in at least one tholen arguement
before I start fade out of the newsgroup.

-Jason

[e-mail] wrote:
: Jason writes:

:>>>> Tarquelne writes:

:>>>>>> Illogical.  It means that you don't have to worry about IBM not
:>>>>>> wanting people to run OS/2 on the desktop.

:>>>>> What's "IT"?

:>>>> The existence of advertising.  Wasn't that clear from the context?

:>>> Obviously not, or he wouldn't have asked the question.

:>> Not necessarily.  It wouldn't be the first time somebody asked an
:>> unnecessary question.

:> Irrelevant

: On the contrary, it's quite relevant.

:>>>>> A lack of support from IBM?

:>>>> What alleged lack of support?

:>>> The alleged lack of support that they not only don't want to put into a
:>>> package a modern OS/2 that can take advantage of modern hardware, but
:>>> they don't even want to put into a package an OS/2 that is updated for
:>>> the year 2000.

:>> OS/2 is already updated for the year 2000.

:> From
:>
:>
http>//www.indelible-blue.com/ibapps/products.nsf/AH/04D2734F34CA85A08525649C00
4B256A
:>
:> "You should be aware that OS/2 Warp 4.0 is NOT Y2K compliant out of the
:> box -- you must install the fixpack."

: The FixPak exists and is available.  Therefore OS/2 has been updated for
: the year 2000, as I said.  Note that I said "OS/2", rather than "Warp 4",
: for a reason.

:>> Where have you been?

:> Irrelevant,

: On the contrary, it's quite relevant, given that you were apparently
: unaware of OS/2's Y2K compliance.

:> I've been in Massachusetts

: Don't they get news about OS/2 Y2K compliance in Massachusetts?

:>>>>>> Extrapolating to "nothing to worry about" is illogical.

:>>>>> Actually, extrapolating from "IBM does not support the SOHO user" to
:>>>>> "IBM wants the SOHO user to go away" seems pretty logical to me.

:>>>> The statement was about "wanting people to run OS/2 on the desktop",
:>>>> which doesn't specify SOHO.

:>>> Irrelevant, SOHO are people.

:>> Illogical, given that not all people are SOHO.

:> Illogical, given all SOHO are people

: Illogical, given that the statement referred to people, not SOHO.

:>>>>> It's not proof, sure, but it's a very bad sign.

:>>>> The advertising is a very good sign that IBM does want people to
:>>>> run OS/2 on the desktop.

:>>> Irrelevant,

:>> On the contrary, the evidence is quite relevant.

:> Illogical

: Explain how.

:>>> advertising in their catalog is free and is directed to current users.

:>> Why would a current user buy something they already have?

:> Because they may want to run different version of OS/2 on different
:> computers.

: Then they aren't a current user of the product.

:>>> Just because they allow users to buy more OS/2 clients if they get
:>>> more computers,

:>> Additional licenses are usually handled differently than sales of the
:>> full product through a catalog.

:> Not for SOHO users,

: Are you suggesting that the advertising is directed toward SOHO users,
: the very users that IBM allegedly doesn't want to use OS/2 on the
: desktop?

:> especially if you only have the server and want a client.

: Are you suggesting that the advertising is directed toward SOHO users,
: the very users that IBM allegedly doesn't want to use OS/2 on the
: desktop?

:>>> doesn't imply that they want users to run OS/2 on the desktop,

:>> It certainly doesn't imply that they don't want people to run OS/2 on
:>> the desktop.

:> Illogical since I never said that it did.

: On the contrary, it's quite logical, because I never specified you as
: the person who made the statement that I've been countering.

:> IBM has told us they don't want people to run through press releases.

: Hasn't stopped people from jumping to conclusions triggered by a
: Brad Wardell statement.

:>>> it only suggests they don't want to piss off their current customers.

:>> So, if Microsoft lists Windows NT is a catalog of theirs, does that
:>> also only suggest they don't want to piss off their current customers???

:> No

: Then why did you reach that conclusion on the basis of an IBM catalog ad?

:> because they are actively pushing their product into new markets.

: Irrelevant, given that the catalog ad is the alleged basis for the
: conclusion.

:> After Windows 2000 comes out, and if they also only have Windows 4.0
:> advertised in their catalog then yes it would imply that they are only
:> trying not to piss off their current customers.

: The key word here is "if".  Furthermore, if you can't think of other
: reasons why an older product might still be offered for sale, that's
: your problem.

:>>>>> This is an advocacy group, so I get to say:  "You just like saying
:>>>>> "illogical" don't you?

:>>>> That's an illogical conclusion.

:>>> Illogical, since this is an advocacy group he may very well say ""You
:>>> just like saying "illogical" don't you?"

:>> Just because he may say it doesn't make it logical to do so.

:> The arguement wasn't over whether are not it was logical to do so, they
:> arguement was that he may.

: And I simply said it would be illogical to do so.  I never said anything
: about what someone might do.

:>>>>> Illlllllogical.  Iiiilllogicalll.  It's fun, admit it."

:>>>> Irrelevant.

:>>> Typical Invective

:>> Illogical.

:> Typical and Inncorrect Contradiction.

: What's allegedly incorrect about it?

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 12:47:02
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: Nothing to fear... this news is good news

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

"[e-mail]" wrote:

>                         There is nothing to fear
>
>                 Stardock is going to keep on pumping out
>                 all those useful, problem-solving solutions
>                 that have made OS2 the popular OS that it is.

LOL!  You think they'll do it using NT?


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 19:03:24
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Credibility

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

This discussion really belongs in comp.os.os2.advocacy; I'm pointing
at both newsgroups at the moment so that c.o.o.m participants can
follow it there if they choose. Followups to cooa please.

On Thu, 16 Sep 1999 04:13:02, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
| This simply follows  Esther's recent article posted to ZDNet
| regarding OS/2 sales exceeding IBM's expectations.  Go
| back and read her article.  She offers NOT ONE verifiable
| source that can  confirm her claims.   When the article came
| out we checked our IBM sources and they were perplexed at
| her claims.  Some even laughed.  And I can say this about
| our IBM sources, they are actual IBM employees who subscribe
| to Warp City.  They have email addresses ending in ibm.com
| not ibm.net.  Look for Esther (and her husband) at Warpstock.

Tim,

Please *do* confirm your sources before you report -- or even imply --
inaccurate information. You have no idea who my sources are.
Therefore, you have no leg on which to stand when you imply that my
information is wrong.

You expect the participants here to rely on _your_ credibility,
instead.

Well, so be it. The lurkers are perfectly capable of making their own
judgements about whose word is more reliable. (Hint: another batch of
whining about how awful I am probably won't help your cause.)

The unfortunate truth is that IBM was no longer willing to announce
_good_ news about OS/2 sales. The OS/2 community took the sales report
as generally good news, however, which was as I intended; I find it
curious that you actually object to hearing positive news about OS/2
sales. (Lurkers are welcome to speculate whether Tim thinks that good
news about OS/2 is less important than his attempts to damage my
credibility.)

Oh... and, unfortunately, I won't be able to make it to Warpstock this
time, as my travel schedule prohibits it. (I've been in 4 states in
the last 7 days, and have more trips upcoming.) I hope and expect that
Warpstock's attendees will have a marvelous weekend; I wish that Bill
and I could join them.

I attended Warp Expo West yesterday, and had a wonderful time. The
people who put on the event, at http://www.scoug.com, are to be
commended for orchestrating a superb event. It was a class act, from
the awesome lineup of speakers to the tiny details, such as fruit and
cookies in the exhibit hall. For _real_ OS/2 advocacy, I'd delight in
a discussion from some of the OS/2 users who attended, who'll take the
opportunity to cheer about the strong sense of community.

Too bad you missed Warp Expo West, Tim.

Too bad you've missed Warpstock, both years.

Too bad you were unable or unwilling to participate in the last OS/2
user get-together in the Bay Area, Tim.

Too bad you didn't go to Solutions 99, where you might have gotten
official word from IBM on several matters (including, mind you, good
news about their developer programs).

Too bad you couldn't make it to the OS/2 Marketplace conference a
couple of years ago.

Too bad... well hey... you haven't attended ANY of the OS/2 community
events, have you?

--Esther

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                     19-Sep-99 11:50:19
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


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

On 9-19-99, 9:42:13 AM, Marty <[e-mail]> wrote regarding Re:
WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility:


> Bennie Nelson wrote:

> > Morals have every thing to do with it.  The aphorism he cited is
incorrect,
> > because true expertise on a subject can be demonstrated apart from
gambling.
> > The objection to using gambling as a means to determine such expertise
need
> > not be because of uncertainty, but simply because one has moral
objections
> > to the means for establishing truth.

> He didn't say it was the <only> way of demonstrating expertise.  Winning
a
> series of wagers is indicative of expertise in an area.  His form of
> wagering is known as capitalism, and while some may consider this
immoral,
> it is a close-minded approach.

No.  What Steven said was direct to me and I'm a capitalist.  He
didn't use the words or terms of capitalism.  You are.  You can't
speak for him and it's not up to you to police the responses to him.

It is not closed minded to argue with a man who thinks stock ownership
is a qualification or an indication of confidence.  I am very
confident about a product or technology but know better than to
express that confidence as a stock purchase being there are far ore
variables and opportunity costs for investing.  I'm a capitalist and
opportunity costs alone would stop me from investing into things I was
limited to knowing by my profession.

Others, many others, think speculation, day trading, gambling and risk
taking is immoral.  It's not a reach to object to Stevenns argument on
moral grounds.  I can also object to it based on it is unsound
investing.

> Now please quit your tangential logic and argue a real issue for a
change.

When you correct people they are allowed to respond.  If that response
is called off topic then the original correction was off topic.



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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 15:42:13
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Joseph wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
> On 9-19-99, 9:42:13 AM, Marty <[e-mail]> wrote regarding Re:
> WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility:
>
> > Bennie Nelson wrote:
>
> > > Morals have every thing to do with it.  The aphorism he cited is
> incorrect,
> > > because true expertise on a subject can be demonstrated apart from
> gambling.
> > > The objection to using gambling as a means to determine such expertise
> need
> > > not be because of uncertainty, but simply because one has moral
> objections
> > > to the means for establishing truth.
>
> > He didn't say it was the <only> way of demonstrating expertise.  Winning
> a
> > series of wagers is indicative of expertise in an area.  His form of
> > wagering is known as capitalism, and while some may consider this
> immoral,
> > it is a close-minded approach.
>
> No.  What Steven said was direct to me and I'm a capitalist.  He
> didn't use the words or terms of capitalism.  You are.

Do you feel such a "wager" would or could be immoral?  He didn't used the
word, but he used the idea.

> You can't speak for him and it's not up to you to police the responses
> to him.

And Bennie can't speak for you and it's not up to him to police the
responses to you.

> It is not closed minded to argue with a man who thinks stock ownership
> is a qualification or an indication of confidence.

Nor did I say it was:
> > His form of wagering is known as capitalism, and while some may
> > consider this immoral, it is a close-minded approach.

I said it was close-minded to consider capitalism immoral.

> I am very
> confident about a product or technology but know better than to
> express that confidence as a stock purchase being there are far ore
> variables and opportunity costs for investing.  I'm a capitalist and
> opportunity costs alone would stop me from investing into things I was
> limited to knowing by my profession.

I have no problem with that.  My problem is with considering an investment
as immoral.

> Others, many others, think speculation, day trading, gambling and risk
> taking is immoral.  It's not a reach to object to Stevenns argument on
> moral grounds.

Gambling and stock market speculation are completely different issues.
Bundling them together is inappropriate.  Bundling them together and
calling the group "possibly immoral" is even more inappropriate and doesn't
diminish the context or validity of Steven's original statement.

> I can also object to it based on it is unsound investing.

To which Steven already replied that it indicates you are not as certain
about the investment as he would be.

> > Now please quit your tangential logic and argue a real issue for a
> change.
>
> When you correct people they are allowed to respond.  If that response
> is called off topic then the original correction was off topic.

So what would that make your response?

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 11:52:09
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Brad Barclay wrote:

> Tim Martin wrote:
>
> > >     Maybe the facts as you assume you know them.  Darin and myself both
work
> > > inside the big blue wall however, and have a whole lot more information
to go
> > > on than you do.  And it's not good.
> >
> > Then you'd better check with you own co-workers - especially
> > those attending Warpstock today.  They are telling a much
> > different story.  In fact - the whole reporting by Brad Wardell
> > of such a meeting even taking place is now in question.  They
> > say no such meeting took place.
>
>     I have sufficient proof to say otherwise.

Yet if you check with WarpExpo attendees you'll find the
IBM official actually made a rather lengthy statement on
the subject and (let me add) - indicated a second company
is also in negotiations to release a Warp 5 client.  Will Stardock
provide a Warp 5 client in all 35-40 languages which is an IBM
requirement or are they trying to limit 'their' Stardock Warp 5
client to just English-only?  Can IBM afford to do that to their
world-wide customers?  Germany, the largest user of OS/2,
would most likely be outraged.

You'll notice Stardock has suddenly gone mum.  Was this
public message from Wardell a strategic move to force IBM
to go his way?  Scare the hell out of the OS/2 community,
tell them there will never be a Warp 5 client (in essence,
declaring the death of OS/2) and anger the OS/2 masses
against IBM?  Risky move.  Maybe not.  If IBM were to cave
in to his proposal (English only) the good news of a Stardock
Warp 5 client release would overwhelm any "gosh we're sorry,
we were wrong" statement out of Stardock.

Our (Warp City) German members are pretty angry right now.
They say Stardock's message is crushing OS/2 users in their
neck of the woods (Stardock's statement is doing more and
more damage here every second).

I wouldn't be surprised if IBM were to release some kind of
public or official statement.  Stardock's message is the most
negative and damaging to OS/2 than anything this year.

>
> > You'd also better check with those same IBM officials.  They
> > say OS/2 will generate more than 100 million for IBM this year
> > and that IBM is spending some 12 million on drivers and
> > additional maintenance releases.  That's pretty damn good
> > for a so-called dead operating system.
>
>     And it probably will.  What you're missing is that this figure has very
little
> to do with the OS/2 client, and instead represents sales of OS/2 WARP
Server,
> WorkSpace on Demand, DB2 (which IIRC pulls in the bulk of that figure), the
> VisualAge family, and everything else that runs under OS/2 that IBM sells.
>
>     In short, the figure is very misleading.  Besides which, the point is
not that
> IBM is or isn't making a profit from OS/2 - it's wether or not there is
going to be
> a new fat client version.  And right now, based on all publicly available
info, as
> the magic 8 ball says "all indications point to no".

But IBM has said categorically there will be no new 'fat' client this
year.  They have NEVER said they will not eventually release
a Warp 5 client.  Wardell is saying just that.  Someone has to either
confirm or deny it because Wardell's statement is just too
damaging and evidenced by the headlines appearing at the
public OS/2 web sites.

> Brad BARCLAY

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                            19-Sep-99 15:57:19
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

From: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
  juvenaly <[e-mail]> wrote:


> I'm tired of the OS/2 name, and the endless rumors of its
> death etc., but a lot is looking up for the OS -- e.g. the 3
> expos going on

d'accord

>
>Question: Similar to Linux, could OS/2 users band together and
>develop and market (α la Red Hat) a package that would in effect
>be an update to OS/2 v.4, complete with convenient installation, etc.
>-- in effect an unofficial v.5?

Isn't the Warp-up package from Indelible Blue almost there?

The one thing that is missing is a (Rexx?) script to build/update
the boot disks to match current drivers. Such a script would save
Trevor Helmsey from posting (patiently and repeatedly) instructions
for those who can't get the first boot from the GA packages.

Maybe there is one of those Linux sniffers that can be ported?

IBM already supplies the instructions (in IBMese) and the drivers for
the update as well as disk images for boot disks so it shouldn't be too
close to the legal edge to make such a script.

Regards

Ian


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you do
(1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 16:22:15
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 06:05:29, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:

| Then you'd better check with you own co-workers - especially
| those attending Warpstock today.  They are telling a much
| different story.  In fact - the whole reporting by Brad Wardell
| of such a meeting even taking place is now in question.  They
| say no such meeting took place.

Oh? Were you there at Warp Expo West?

Gee, Tim. I looked for you, but saw no "Tim Martin" nametag.

--Esther

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          19-Sep-99 20:12:00
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

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

I really haven't seen anyone blast Brad or Stardock because a few
d*ckheads in expensive suits at IBM have sh*t for brains.

Insert your favourite vowel for the * in the message. Maybe it's an "i"

:-)

Cheers 'n too much to drink

Wayne


On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 01:05:57 GMT, Michel A Goyette wrote:

:>Sat, 18 Sep 1999 19:45:51, [e-mail] a ┌crit:
:>
:>> "Adrian Gschwend" <[e-mail]> said:
:>>
:>> >We all heard it, Stardock is not allowed to release a new OS/2 client. I
and
:>> >many other OS/2 users are very disapointed about this.
:>>
:>> I'd like to register my disappointment with something else.
:>>
:>> Okay, guys, you're having a total blast bashing Stardock.  Have fun.  Have
lots
:>> of fun.  But the IBM message was NOT a Stardock message.  The IBM message
was
:>> that no one, not Stardock, not IBM, not anybody would be doing an OS/2
client.
******************************************************
Wayne Bickell
Tokyo, Japan
[e-mail]
******************************************************
           Posted with PMINews 2 for OS/2
******************************************************



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: AT&T Internet Service (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                          19-Sep-99 14:26:16
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: test

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

test. sorry


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 16:26:11
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 06:28:29, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:

| It was reported today at Warp Expo West that IBM will make
| $100,000 million from ALL OS/2 this year.  It was also reported
| that IBM is spending some $12million on drivers and other
| OS/2 enhancements.  IBM has committed to support OS/2 until
| the year 2009.

None of which translates into "a new Warp client."

--Esther

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                19-Sep-99 11:51:07
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail]

[e-mail]@Videotron.ca (Michel A Goyette) said: > From
what
I read, it only said the IBM wouldn't allow Stardock
>to put out a new client release because that doesn't fit in their  strategy
>(for whatever that means).  THAT'S ALL!!!

I quote:

>>The call has been made -- there will be no new client from Stardock
>>and IBM has indicated that they have no plans for an OS/2 based
>>client of their own.

Note the wording:  "IBM has indicated that they have no plans for an OS/2
based
client of their own."

Jim L
Remove XX from address to Email
More gun laws will cure the nations ills - just like drug laws do.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 10:37:16
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]>,
>   Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> > [e-mail] wrote:
> >
> > > In article <[e-mail]>,
> > >   Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > >
> > > First off, let's all thank Tim greatly for doing his part to help
> > > make c.o.o.a just like the Amiga groups. Way to go Tim!
> >
> > That's why your here!
>
> That's "you're" Tim, short for "you are", as in "You're and idiot."

Get a grip.  At 2:am I don't give a hoot as long as the
reader gets the gist of the statement.  It also helps to
drive anal retentive freaks such as yourself nuts and
that's a warm fuzzy feeling for me.

>
> <snip>
>
> > The truth.  That Stardock will not be offering a Warp 5
> > client.  None of these sites have any official statement
> > from IBM stating IBM will not be (eventually) offering
> > a Warp 5 client.
>
> <snip>
>
> And I'm sure you have evidence to the contrary? If you do, please
> present it. We're all waiting with baited breath.

I have evidence that none of these sites have any official
statement from IBM stating IBM will not (eventually)
offering a Warp 5 client.  No official IBM statement has
ever been made.  If they have evidence to the contrary
they should present it.  What they are presenting is Brad's
unauthorized "OS/2 is dead" statement and nothing more.

> > > See you at Warpstock '99 Tim! (Not that you'd ever bother to show
> > > up at an OS/2 user convention...)
> >
> > How do you know a Warp City staffer has NOT been
> > to every Warpstock event?  You don't.  We're there.
> > In droves.
>
> LOL! I'm sure they were all wearing their "WarpCity Rulze!" buttons
> too, right?

Why would we identify ourselves with idiots like you in
attendance?

> Isn't this the same Tim "I'm telling WarpCity members not
> to go to WarpStock"

This is a lie, as usual.  I've never told any Warp City member
not to attend Warpstock.  We simply don't encourage
them to do so as long as the current non-elected members
of the Steering Committee are in control.  Warp City's
detractors love to make up lies.

> Martin who boycotted WS'98 and didn't bother going
> to WS'97 despite the fact it was within driving distance?

You have no idea where I live or what my reasons for
attending or not attending any Warpstock event is.
Warp City has always had a Warp City reporter at
these events, if not two or three.  Warp City has a
membership in the thousands, each in themselves
mini-reporters, and many attend these events.  Warp
City is always in attendance.

>
> Tim: I will have a crisp, new, $50.00 bill for you if you actually have
> the balls to show up this year. I'm completely serious about this.
>

Make it a $50,000 cashier's check and I'll seek you
out personally.



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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 19-Sep-99 02:07:25
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:18
Subj: This too shall pass

From: juvenaly <[e-mail]>

As one who (ordinarily) never accesses the OS/2 newsgroups, , I have
read the statements by Brad Wardell, NetLabs, and many messages on this
newsgroup. My guess is that OS/2, once again, is not dead. I am sure IBM
is doing what is most profitable for itself. Perhaps, as some suggest,
they are making a lot of money fixing NT systems, so they don't want to
compete head on with MS. Whatever the reason, OS/2 must be making money
for them, otherwise they would announce its demise.
    I, for my part, think it's too early to drop WARP yet. (Anyway, what
would I put in its place?) I am even considering building some new
machines for our institution and putting it on them.
    I'm tired of the OS/2 name, and the endless rumors of its death
etc., but a lot is looking up for the OS -- e.g. the 3 expos going on --

     Question: Similar to Linux, could OS/2 users band together and
develop and market (à la Red Hat) a package that would in effect be an
update to OS/2 v.4, complete with convenient installation, etc. -- in
effect an unofficial v.5?
   Cheers.
    Juvenaly

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               18-Sep-99 23:05:14
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:18
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Brad Barclay wrote:

> Tim Martin wrote:
>
> > > I'd like to warn you about Timmy a little bit.  You see, he's our local
> > > paranoid schizophrenic, and has serious delusions of grandeur.
> >
> > The OS/2 community now pays the price.  News sites
> > are reporting the death of OS/2 and basing their reports
> > on the words of Brad Wardell.  Not IBM, not an IBM public
> > statement but a statement by Brad Wardell.
>
> ...
>
> > Not gonna play here Darin.  The facts speak for themselves.
>
>     Maybe the facts as you assume you know them.  Darin and myself both work
> inside the big blue wall however, and have a whole lot more information to
go
> on than you do.  And it's not good.

Then you'd better check with you own co-workers - especially
those attending Warpstock today.  They are telling a much
different story.  In fact - the whole reporting by Brad Wardell
of such a meeting even taking place is now in question.  They
say no such meeting took place.

You'd also better check with those same IBM officials.  They
say OS/2 will generate more than 100 million for IBM this year
and that IBM is spending some 12 million on drivers and
additional maintenance releases.  That's pretty damn good
for a so-called dead operating system.

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               18-Sep-99 23:23:28
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:18
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Tim Martin wrote:

> Brad Barclay wrote:
>
> > Tim Martin wrote:
> >
> > > > I'd like to warn you about Timmy a little bit.  You see, he's our
local
> > > > paranoid schizophrenic, and has serious delusions of grandeur.
> > >
> > > The OS/2 community now pays the price.  News sites
> > > are reporting the death of OS/2 and basing their reports
> > > on the words of Brad Wardell.  Not IBM, not an IBM public
> > > statement but a statement by Brad Wardell.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > Not gonna play here Darin.  The facts speak for themselves.
> >
> >     Maybe the facts as you assume you know them.  Darin and myself both
work
> > inside the big blue wall however, and have a whole lot more information to
go
> > on than you do.  And it's not good.
>
> Then you'd better check with you own co-workers - especially
> those attending Warpstock today.

Sorry, I meant to say Warp Expo West.


> They are telling a much
> different story.  In fact - the whole reporting by Brad Wardell
> of such a meeting even taking place is now in question.  They
> say no such meeting took place.
>
> You'd also better check with those same IBM officials.  They
> say OS/2 will generate more than 100 million for IBM this year
> and that IBM is spending some 12 million on drivers and
> additional maintenance releases.  That's pretty damn good
> for a so-called dead operating system.
>
> 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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               18-Sep-99 23:28:14
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:18
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

juvenaly wrote:

> As one who (ordinarily) never accesses the OS/2 newsgroups, , I have
> read the statements by Brad Wardell, NetLabs, and many messages on this
> newsgroup. My guess is that OS/2, once again, is not dead. I am sure IBM
> is doing what is most profitable for itself. Perhaps, as some suggest,
> they are making a lot of money fixing NT systems, so they don't want to
> compete head on with MS. Whatever the reason, OS/2 must be making money
> for them, otherwise they would announce its demise.

It was reported today at Warp Expo West that IBM will make
$100,000 million from ALL OS/2 this year.  It was also reported
that IBM is spending some $12million on drivers and other
OS/2 enhancements.  IBM has committed to support OS/2 until
the year 2009.

>     I, for my part, think it's too early to drop WARP yet. (Anyway, what
> would I put in its place?) I am even considering building some new
> machines for our institution and putting it on them.
>     I'm tired of the OS/2 name, and the endless rumors of its death
> etc., but a lot is looking up for the OS -- e.g. the 3 expos going on --
>
>      Question: Similar to Linux, could OS/2 users band together and
> develop and market (à la Red Hat) a package that would in effect be an
> update to OS/2 v.4, complete with convenient installation, etc. -- in
> effect an unofficial v.5?

No.  Not without IBM's approval or authorization.  IBM OWNS OS/2.
IBM is NOT COURTING the home user -at this time- so there is no
reason to provide a new Warp 5 client with all that you indicate
above.  IBM is providing all you need for free download.

>
>    Cheers.
>     Juvenaly




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

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

From: [e-mail]                                   19-Sep-99 20:34:25
  To: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 00:54:18
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

To: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>
From: Craig Benbow <[e-mail]>

For cripes sakes Tim keep your hair on.  It is only an OS after all and
bagging anyone
is pointless.

What is required is a deliberately targeted campaign to convince IBM to update
the
client.  Note I say update.  We don't need a new OS we need an enhaced version
of what
we have now.  This will take time and therefore a lot of patience.  I also see
the work
of Netlabs to be crucial to the whole process and we all need to help at the
grass
roots level with advocacy.  If you or anyone else has a problem with helping
to line
IBM's pockets then get out of the game because that is all IBM stock holders
have an
interest in.
Have a coffee then get down to what we all do best, maintaining and enhancing
OS/2's
reputation worldwide.

Bottoms up

Craig

Tim Martin wrote:

> Michel A Goyette wrote:
>
> > Sat, 18 Sep 1999 19:45:51, [e-mail] a écrit:
> >
> > > "Adrian Gschwend" <[e-mail]> said:
> > >
> > > >We all heard it, Stardock is not allowed to release a new OS/2 client.
I and
> > > >many other OS/2 users are very disapointed about this.
> > >
> > > I'd like to register my disappointment with something else.
> > >
> > > Okay, guys, you're having a total blast bashing Stardock.  Have fun.
Have lots
> > > of fun.  But the IBM message was NOT a Stardock message.  The IBM
message was
> > > that no one, not Stardock, not IBM, not anybody would be doing an OS/2
client.
> >
> >         I, for my part, haven't seen the IBM message yet, only the one
from
> > Brad.
>
> There is not message from IBM.  NONE.  All this "OS/2 is dead"
> information is being generated by no one but Brad Wardell.
>
> > From what I read, it only said the IBM wouldn't allow Stardock
> > to put out a new client release because that doesn't fit in their
> > strategy (for whatever that means).  THAT'S ALL!!!
>
> You may have missed it but in Brad's message he apparently
> feels he has the right to speak for IBM because he says, "IBM
> has indicated that they have no plans for an OS/2 based
> client of their own."  It is this statement that is giving rise to
> the "OS/2 is dead" headlines now appearing at so many OS/2
> news sites.  Rather than question the source of the statement
> (as having no right to speak for IBM) they are running with it
> as gospel.  Afterall, Brad Wardell, KING of OS/2, has said so.
>
> Won't someone PUH leeease pull back the curtain and see that
> the King is wearing NT and producing software for Microsoft
> systems only?  Are they all that blind and stupid?
>
> >         Now, if you are in the secret of the gods and know what is their
> > strategy, please go on and enlighten us.
> >
> > > I fail to see how this makes either a great villian out of Stardock or a
hero
> > > out of IBM.  Let's face it.  IBM doesn't want a popular client; they
want a
> > > "tons-of-money" business system.
> >
> >         If that goes through a popular client, they'll sure get there.
Now,
> > for some crystal ball readings...Windows 2000 isn't recommended by
> > high respectable analysis society (IDC and alike) and IT and managers
> > are usually following their opinions (that's why a lot of people are,
> > in part, stuck with Windows), Linux is going through a push but
> > configuration is still not for the faint of heart.  I guess between
> > those two, OS/2 can have a really good chance due to some killer apps
> > entering the arena (StarOffice and alike).  ;-)
> >
> > Salut,
> >
> >         Michel (sur OS/2 Warp 4.07)
> >         ICQ #13376913
> >         http://pages.infinit.net/exovede
>
> You got it!  OS/2 continues to be THE Killer OS today.  No other
> desktop operating system on the market today can equal the
> power, stability and quality of OS/2.  NONE!
>
> 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: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 05:42:06
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:18
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Bennie Nelson wrote:
>
> Marty wrote:
> >
> > Bennie Nelson wrote:
> > >
> > > Marty wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Bennie Nelson wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > "Steven C. Den Beste" wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, 12 Sep 1999 21:31:56 -0400, Joseph recycled some holes
into the
> > > > > > following pattern:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Steven C. Den Beste wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Another possibility is that he already has all the data he
needs.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> He's already determined, by direct experiment,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >When you talk about direct experiments you make me laugh.  Let
him speak for himself
> > > > > > >and you can speak for yourself.  We'll also respect the opinions
of the Gartner
> > > > > > >Group, GIGA and Forrester.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "We"? You and your tape worm? I'll continue ignoring them, just
like I have
> > > > > > been. I don't care in the slightest what they think about it. I
don't give
> > > > > > their opinions any credence at all.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Your pathetic attempt at a FUD campaign on this subject comes
off as
> > > > > > >> whistling in the graveyard. What are you so afraid of? That
Win2K might be
> > > > > > >> yet another massive commercial success? You do realize that you
have no
> > > > > > >> power to change that, don't you?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Fear huh?  Who's posting on which news group?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >It's great to see expectations build up for W2K and to have high
expectations for
> > > > > > >software compatibility.  If the argument for W2K compatibility
comes down to personal
> > > > > > >experiences of people in this news group (so far it has) then
that is a very very bad
> > > > > > >sign.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Now W2K may be a massive commercial success -- I haven't any
money riding on it.  I
> > > > > > >don't see CITIRX running scared but I have seen the top PC OEMs
building Thin Clients
> > > > > > >based on WinCE or LINUX.  I have also seen Compaq dump W2K on
ALPHA and pick up
> > > > > > >LINUX.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I've also seen IBM making a massive investment in Win2K. What has
any of
> > > > > > this got to do with the price of tea in Beijing?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But you're right about one thing: you *don't* have any money
riding on it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I do. Brad does. We're backing our opinions with cold, hard cash
in
> > > > > > non-trivial amounts. That demonstrates that we're a lot more
certain about
> > > > > > our opinions than you seem to be.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There's an aphorism I like: "True expertise on a subject is
demonstrated by
> > > > > > the ability to win a series of wagers." The correlary is that
someone who
> > > > > > refuses to bet isn't really as certain as they try to sound.
> > > > >
> > > > > Your corollary does not allow for those who won't bet because they
oppose
> > > > > betting on moral grounds.  Thus, refusing to bet says nothing about
their
> > > > > certainty.
> > > >
> > > > Nor does it include those who are forbidden by law due to age, nor
those
> > > > incapable of speech and motion, nor those who are comatose... but
what's
> > > > your point?  You're wildly and inappropriately misusing his metaphor.
> > > >
> > > > - Marty
> > >
> > > You left out those that are mentally incompetent.  Actually, my point
was in
> > > the portion you chose to not quote in your reply.
> >
> > If your point is based on this interpretation of his metaphor than it too
> > is inappropriate.  In the case to which Steven is referring, there are
only
> > two reasons why one would "refuse to wager" because 1] they are not
certain
> > enough to accept the risk, or 2] they can't afford it with or without the
> > risk factor.  Morals have nothing to do with it.
> >
> > - Marty
>
> Morals have every thing to do with it.  The aphorism he cited is incorrect,
> because true expertise on a subject can be demonstrated apart from gambling.
> The objection to using gambling as a means to determine such expertise need
> not be because of uncertainty, but simply because one has moral objections
> to the means for establishing truth.

He didn't say it was the <only> way of demonstrating expertise.  Winning a
series of wagers is indicative of expertise in an area.  His form of
wagering is known as capitalism, and while some may consider this immoral,
it is a close-minded approach.

Now please quit your tangential logic and argue a real issue for a change.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             19-Sep-99 10:42:27
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:18
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

From: [e-mail]

Marty writes [to Bennie Nelson]:

> Now please quit your tangential logic and argue a real issue for a change.

How ironic, coming from someone who used "tengential logic" involving a
certain analogy that wasn't even an analogy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                      19-Sep-99 11:30:20
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:18
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
  Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:

> [e-mail] wrote:
>
> > In article <[e-mail]>,
> >   Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > First off, let's all thank Tim greatly for doing his part to help
> > make c.o.o.a just like the Amiga groups. Way to go Tim!
>
> That's why your here!

That's "you're" Tim, short for "you are", as in "You're and idiot."

<snip>

> The truth.  That Stardock will not be offering a Warp 5
> client.  None of these sites have any official statement
> from IBM stating IBM will not be (eventually) offering
> a Warp 5 client.

<snip>

And I'm sure you have evidence to the contrary? If you do, please
present it. We're all waiting with baited breath.

> > See you at Warpstock '99 Tim! (Not that you'd ever bother to show
> > up at an OS/2 user convention...)
>
> How do you know a Warp City staffer has NOT been
> to every Warpstock event?  You don't.  We're there.
> In droves.

LOL! I'm sure they were all wearing their "WarpCity Rulze!" buttons
too, right? Isn't this the same Tim "I'm telling WarpCity members not
to go to WarpStock" Martin who boycotted WS'98 and didn't bother going
to WS'97 despite the fact it was within driving distance?

Tim: I will have a crisp, new, $50.00 bill for you if you actually have
the balls to show up this year. I'm completely serious about this.

--
-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/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you do
(1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]               19-Sep-99 13:32:22
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: No decision regarding OS/2 client was made???

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

According to words around the WarpExpo West, the IBM meeting did not take
place due to storm concern.  No decision was made regarding the OEM version
of OS/2.

If this were true, one can only assume that there has been a terrible
mis-communication between IBM and the parties involved regarding this issue.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                           19-Sep-99 16:33:05
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: To summarize in one word....

From: Kevin Salisbury <[e-mail]>

Damn.

Ok, so one word doesn't quite cut it.

I don't thnk that I will ever understand IBM. It's too bad that they
won't spin off the software division in charge of OS/2. Using a poor
comparison here: Pepsi owned KFC, Taco Bell and Pizza Hut (among other
restraunts). The Coke sales force would use this against Pepsi by
stating to other restraunt chains something to this effect, "Look, if
you buy Pepsi products your effectively helping your competition. Buy
Coke instead." <Change Pepsi to IBM and Coke to MS, now reread the
statement. Doesn't this sound a little like what M$ did to IBM in the
early 90's?> The restraunt businesses Pepsi owned also were cyclical and

full of managerial problems - but for the most part they made money.
Pepsi didn't close all the divisions - the spun them off as a new
company called TriFoods. This allowed Pepsi to concentrate on its "core"

businesses of snack foods and syrup, while allowing the restraunt chains

to try and make it on their own. TriFoods has turned things around and
has done well. On a smaller scale I feel IBM could have done <still
could> this with the entire OS/2 division. Why kill a project that so
much development time and money has been spent on? I don't understand.

It's also sad that they are probably going to lose a lot of good people
who work on and support OS/2 - I know that even if I worked on the
Aurora Server product - I would start looking for another job soon. Why
bother sticking around when you know that the platform will be dead in a

few years.

Damn.

Kevin Salisbury



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

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

From: [e-mail]                            19-Sep-99 16:19:11
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Re: OS/2 is ALIVE! [8-)

From: [e-mail] (David H. McCoy)

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>>
>> Right! After all, let's look at the successes that Netscape 4.61, Open32,
NCs,
>> and Java all had for OS/2.
>>
>> With successes like this, who needs failures?
>
>What do you know about how any of the above mentioned items run in OS/2?
>
>- Marty
>

Are you even bothering to read the thread? This person who is 200% commited to

an application seems to feel that the the DOJ/MS trial will have some positive

effect on IBM, and therefore OS/2.

If you believe that, you are living in a dream world. All of the software I
mentioned, was supposed to have a similarly benefial, ie, reviving affect on
this very beleagured operating system and all failed.

As for what I know about how any of those particular items run, what would you

like to know? I know that all run or in the case of NCs, have a software
solution (WSOD) to run.

What do you want to know?

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 19-Sep-99 20:27:19
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Marty wrote:
>
> Bennie Nelson wrote:
> >
> > > Now please quit your tangential logic and argue a real issue for a
change.
>
> Note:  no response.
>
> If you don't have any intention of arguing real issues, Bennie, just let me
> know right now.  It'll make things easier on both of us.
>
> - Marty

No response?  I believe silence is a proper response to some points.  You have
made several posts regarding my post, and I have replied ( as have others)
with
posts that further explain my original point.  I really hadn't intended to
post this many articles on the subject, but since you seemed quite willing
to continue the discussion, I have continued also.  If this subthread is not
a "real issue" and if it should be dropped, then why didn't you take your
own advice?

Thanks for the reply,
Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                    19-Sep-99 20:10:28
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Re: OS/2 is ALIVE! [8-)

From: Gerben Bergman <[e-mail]>

Deciphering a text in Pig-Dethek from os2@is_here_&_there.com, we find:

| OS/2 is everyone of us, WE are OS/2!.  And we are ALIVE!.  As long as YOU
| and ME and HIM continue to use, support, advocate and love OS/2, this
| marvelous OS will be ALIVE.  Our war has not yet been lost, we could lost
| various battles but *IF* we have energies, hope and assertiveness we could
| eventually achieve our goals, and dreams.

<chuckle> Remember, people, that we're talking about a PC operating system.
A software product. A collection of ones and zeroes. I suggest that the guy
who wrote the above paragraph, as well as those that got a "You said it,
dude!" feeling after reading it, switch off their computers and get out of
the house for a while. Take a walk. Ride your bikes. Reacquaint yourselves
with that crazy little thing called life. Trust me, the situation will look
a lot less grim afterwards. :)

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 17:56:23
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Re: OS/2 is ALIVE! [8-)

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> >>
> >> Right! After all, let's look at the successes that Netscape 4.61, Open32,
NCs,
> >> and Java all had for OS/2.
> >>
> >> With successes like this, who needs failures?
> >
> >What do you know about how any of the above mentioned items run in OS/2?
> >
> >- Marty
> >
>
> Are you even bothering to read the thread? This person who is 200% commited
to
> an application seems to feel that the the DOJ/MS trial will have some
positive
> effect on IBM, and therefore OS/2.

If I wanted to respond to that statement, I'd respond to the original
poster.

> If you believe that, you are living in a dream world. All of the software I
> mentioned, was supposed to have a similarly benefial, ie, reviving affect on
> this very beleagured operating system and all failed.

That's not my argument.

> As for what I know about how any of those particular items run, what would
you
> like to know? I know that all run or in the case of NCs, have a software
> solution (WSOD) to run.

Your statement says that all of those things you mentioned were failures.

> What do you want to know?

In what way were they failures?  Did they not do what they were supposed
to?

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]@Vi...               19-Sep-99 20:29:13
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

Message sender: [e-mail]@Videotron.ca

From: [e-mail]@Videotron.ca (Michel A Goyette)

Sun, 19 Sep 1999 15:51:15, [e-mail] a écrit:

> [e-mail]@Videotron.ca (Michel A Goyette) said: > From
what
> I read, it only said the IBM wouldn't allow Stardock
> >to put out a new client release because that doesn't fit in their  strategy
> >(for whatever that means).  THAT'S ALL!!!
>
> I quote:
>
> >>The call has been made -- there will be no new client from Stardock
> >>and IBM has indicated that they have no plans for an OS/2 based
> >>client of their own.
>
> Note the wording:  "IBM has indicated that they have no plans for an OS/2
based
> client of their own."

    Yes, I saw this post from Brad.  However, I haven't seen the IBM
official stands on this.

Salut,

    Michel (sur OS/2 Warp 4.07)
    ICQ #13376913
    http://pages.infinit.net/exovede

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             19-Sep-99 22:12:23
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: [e-mail]

Good idea and there are already such organizations in existence: the several
non-profit large OS/2 user groups, such as POSSI, SCOUG, etc. Either
individually or
as a joint venture, such groups could buy special licenses of WSEB 4.5 and
redistribute a client version to members, only. Apple has somewhat similar
agreements with user groups to distribute certain older software (at no
charge).

This could be *much* better than the present and historical situation. User
groups
(UGs) are much better situated to provide support than a megacorp. IBM could
provide better bug fixes faster and cheaper if reports were funneled through a

few UG contacts. Increased revenues from sales and membership fees could allow

UGs to fund ISVs. I've long hoped a group of sharp WPS and device driver
programmers would join together and form team -- called Portsmiths Group, or
such --
-- to port other-platform applications and devices to OS/2. With salaries or
retainers
from UGs, good programmers wouldn't have to face shareware starvation to do
OS/2 work. Such a team could also contract with mainstream vendors to produce
(good) OS/2 versions, with little risk and overhead. And, so on...

If IBM were to take this route, they could serve their existing customer base
and
hedge their bets on NT in case the courts have the courage to call naked naked

and in some substantive way break up the emperor's monopoly. And, they could
do so without granting an OS/2 monopoly to any one commercial concern.

Any UGs up to this task?

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Mooo) writes:
>How about a Credit Union type of set up?  (I'm brainstorming here),
>whereby those diehard OS/2 users who really care, and care enough to
>front money, provide the startup capital for the OS/2 corporation via
>the purchase of shares?  Those with the most shares have the most
>votes etc etc.  You don't get access to the 'union' until you buy at
>least one parcel of shares..this type of thing.  You want access to
>Warp Client 4.5 as well as a swag of other OS/2 apps?  Fine, buy into
>OS/2 Corporation, then as a member, you have access to all this fine
>software at corporate rates.  Big bucks?  You bet, I'd imagine, in all
>reality, if all you want is Warp Client 4.5 its gonna cost you US$600+
>(remember we would need to buy the software -and- support the
>underlying corporate structure...help staff, adminstrators etc).  Per
>software pricing would get a lot better should you wish to partake in
>the purchase of several packages.
>
>The crunch in all schemes of this type, and I've been watching with
>interest for over a year, is that someone, and in fact a -lot- of
>someones, has to make the first move.  A OS/2 corporation such as
>thing can only be a success if it is large, and I mean that in IBM
>terms.
>
>The underlying theme is that at no time does IBM receive a call from a
>disgruntled user who cant get his 'dial other internet providers'
>working.  All this user support is handled by OS/2 Corporation paid
>support staff.
>
>If this sort of money is viewed as unrealistic, then my opinion is
>that our requests for continued support from IBM is also unrealistic
>and OS/2 will in fact die...slowly and horribly.

selectric.net? think international business machines, instead.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 16:00:19
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Re: Credibility

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Tim Martin wrote:
>
> Esther Schindler wrote:
>
> > This discussion really belongs in comp.os.os2.advocacy; I'm pointing
> > at both newsgroups at the moment so that c.o.o.m participants can
> > follow it there if they choose. Followups to cooa please.
> >
> > On Thu, 16 Sep 1999 04:13:02, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > | This simply follows  Esther's recent article posted to ZDNet
> > | regarding OS/2 sales exceeding IBM's expectations.  Go
> > | back and read her article.  She offers NOT ONE verifiable
> > | source that can  confirm her claims.   When the article came
> > | out we checked our IBM sources and they were perplexed at
> > | her claims.  Some even laughed.  And I can say this about
> > | our IBM sources, they are actual IBM employees who subscribe
> > | to Warp City.  They have email addresses ending in ibm.com
> > | not ibm.net.  Look for Esther (and her husband) at Warpstock.
> >
> > Tim,
> >
> > Please *do* confirm your sources before you report -- or even imply --
> > inaccurate information. You have no idea who my sources are.
> > Therefore, you have no leg on which to stand when you imply that my
> > information is wrong.
>
> You still do not provide one verifiable source in your
> article.

How ironic.

> You expect -because you believe you are the self-proclaimed queen of
> OS/2- people to believe you.

And where is your evidence here?

> I see you only as an employee of Ziff Davis publications
> and that is not a dubious honor (at least to me).
>
> > You expect the participants here to rely on _your_ credibility,
> > instead.
>
> Some do some don't.  I use OS/2.  I manage the largest
> private OS/2-only subscription site on the 'Net.  My
> credibility is just as good as anything you spread around.

You also encourage piracy and leeching of OS/2 software, and try to
encourage OS/2 ISV's to halt their production of OS/2 software and give it
away for free.  You also lie about Stardock "advertising" the "new OS/2
client."  Your credibility is very much in question here.

> > Well, so be it. The lurkers are perfectly capable of making their own
> > judgements about whose word is more reliable. (Hint: another batch of
> > whining about how awful I am probably won't help your cause.)
>
> No, just another stab at how persecuted you want people
> to think you are because someone questions the credibility
> of one of your writings.

How ironic seeing how you persecute an OS/2 ISV because they called you on
lies about their own company.

> Apparently OS/2 users are to never question what Esther writes.

Are we to blindly believe you, Tim?

> > The unfortunate truth is that IBM was no longer willing to announce
> > _good_ news about OS/2 sales. The OS/2 community took the sales report
> > as generally good news, however, which was as I intended; I find it
> > curious that you actually object to hearing positive news about OS/2
> > sales. (Lurkers are welcome to speculate whether Tim thinks that good
> > news about OS/2 is less important than his attempts to damage my
> > credibility.)
>
> I don't object at all if it is presented with some kind of
> verfiable backup.

How ironic.

> I object to you reporting it at this
> precarious time - with Warpstock just around the corner.
> You are not an official member of the Steering Committee
> but it is understood you wield considerable weight.
>
> Write an article to make  OS/2 users feel good about how
> well OS/2 is doing and it is sure to increase Warpstock
> ticket sales where OS/2 users will get a chance to meet
> the self-proclaimed queen of OS/2  - and isn't your
> husband offering some sort of programming seminar?
> Oh wait, don't we also have a SMACK product to promote?

Who's "we" Tim?  I thought you weren't going.

> > Oh... and, unfortunately, I won't be able to make it to Warpstock this
> > time, as my travel schedule prohibits it. (I've been in 4 states in
> > the last 7 days, and have more trips upcoming.) I hope and expect that
> > Warpstock's attendees will have a marvelous weekend; I wish that Bill
> > and I could join them.
>
> Gee, I don't think this news has been disseminated to
> the masses just yet.  Many folks believe you will be
> there based on all your previous postings.  I assume
> from what you say above that Bill will not be providing
> his seminar either.
>
> > I attended Warp Expo West yesterday, and had a wonderful time. The
> > people who put on the event, at http://www.scoug.com, are to be
> > commended for orchestrating a superb event. It was a class act, from
> > the awesome lineup of speakers to the tiny details, such as fruit and
> > cookies in the exhibit hall. For _real_ OS/2 advocacy, I'd delight in
> > a discussion from some of the OS/2 users who attended, who'll take the
> > opportunity to cheer about the strong sense of community.
> >
> > Too bad you missed Warp Expo West, Tim.
>
> But I didn't Esther.  In fact, I'm running a variety of gossip
> items on it at Warp City as we speak.  Warp City is well
> represented at Warp Expo.  You just may be unaware of it
> by not having authorized access.

If they're so well represented, then how come no one knows they're there?

> > Too bad you've missed Warpstock, both years.
>
> And again, you need to get your ducks (facts) in order
> Esther.  You often complain of that to me.

How ironic.

> Whether I was or was not in attendance at any of the
> Warpstock events is no one's business but my own.

Pulling a den Beste?

> Warp City was well represented at both events and
> will be well represented again next month.

But no one will know it.

> Yes I have.  I am in attendance -one way or another- at
> all of them.

And I was in attendence at Woodstock this year because a few skin flakes
came off of me as I drove past it in my car.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         19-Sep-99 21:16:11
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Re: OS/2

From: Adrian Suri <[e-mail]>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------61B61152205AF6F36E3EAE57
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Sorry but I can't resist this one... the main question in all this is missing,

1)Why has IBM decided to drop OS/2 Client

2) What effect will this have on the Server Market

Personally if I owned a large company and was thinking about moving over to
OS/2
Server,
I would think twice about it, given the way IBM drops it's client base without
a
word's notice
Think about it, an OS will only work with both Hardware and Software support,
yes I know IBM is going in the Java direction, but you still need solid driver
support


Regards

and to IBM So long and thanks for the fish..................................


Adrian

Chip wrote:

> I am very happy with my current version of OS/2 (v4) thank you. But It would
> be nice to know and would be greatly anticipated if there was another
> version coming out.
>
> You know I started out with OS/2 version 2.11 and back then it was a far
> superior operating system than Win3.0 and Win3.1. While my friends who were
> running these operating these systems were constantly crashing their apps, I
> was rarely experiencing such problem.
>
> Then OS/2 Warp v3.0 came out and it proved to be a greater improvement and
> even more stable than v2.11, not to mention I had the a better web
> browser(OS/2 v3.0 had alot of free goodies with the op.sys) than anyone at
> the time compared to what Win3.1 or Win95 had.
>
> Then I got OS/2 v4.0 and it proved to be even better in every way and
> provided even more power to my desktop and it's system requirements are far
> easier to meet than Win95 or Win98 will ever be.
>
> I have waited for every version of OS/2 with great a anticipation, it is a
> ashame that it seems that IBM has abandoned its superb operating system. I
> think that perhaps IBM should release OS/2 freely to the public and allow
> programmers who love the operating system to build upon it and release it to
> the public at large like "Linux".
>
> After all if IBM gave up on its operating system and is waiting for its user
> base to slowly disapear, it has already thrown its money in the toilet since
> they do not care anymore.
>
> Why not give it away and allow others to breathe life into the system?
>
> Dennis Peterson <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> news:[e-mail]...
> > Chip wrote:
> > >
> > > I run OS/2 version 4 for my operating system, now my question is when is
> IBM
> > > going to release OS/2 version 5? I would really like to know since I
> would
> > > love to upgrade to version 5 rather than upgrade to any type of windows
> > > operating system.
> > >
> > > I would really appreciate any help with information. Thanks ahead of
> time
> > > ;-)
> >
> > I'm very interested to know what is deficient in your current version of
> > OS/2. It seems to me to be a very complete, mature OS, especially when
> > compared to some of the other offerings.
> >
> > As for a newer release, that probably isn't going to happen any time
> > soon if ever for the client product but IBM is still tweaking the server
> > version. There are few significant differences between the server and
> > the client version if all you need is the client version, but it does
> > cost a bit more. On the other hand, the server version has a lot of nice
> > tools that are worth exploring should you decide to got that upgrade
> > path. Many of them have limited value without a networked environment
> > but they are great for self-education.
> >
> > dp
>
> Dennis Peterson <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> news:[e-mail]...
> > Chip wrote:
> > >
> > > I run OS/2 version 4 for my operating system, now my question is when is
> IBM
> > > going to release OS/2 version 5? I would really like to know since I
> would
> > > love to upgrade to version 5 rather than upgrade to any type of windows
> > > operating system.
> > >
> > > I would really appreciate any help with information. Thanks ahead of
> time
> > > ;-)
> >
> > I'm very interested to know what is deficient in your current version of
> > OS/2. It seems to me to be a very complete, mature OS, especially when
> > compared to some of the other offerings.
> >
> > As for a newer release, that probably isn't going to happen any time
> > soon if ever for the client product but IBM is still tweaking the server
> > version. There are few significant differences between the server and
> > the client version if all you need is the client version, but it does
> > cost a bit more. On the other hand, the server version has a lot of nice
> > tools that are worth exploring should you decide to got that upgrade
> > path. Many of them have limited value without a networked environment
> > but they are great for self-education.
> >
> > dp

--
[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-----


--------------61B61152205AF6F36E3EAE57
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

--------------61B61152205AF6F36E3EAE57--

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 20:55:14
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Re: Credibility

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 19:30:10, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
| > Please *do* confirm your sources before you report -- or even imply --
| > inaccurate information. You have no idea who my sources are.
| > Therefore, you have no leg on which to stand when you imply that my
| > information is wrong.
|
| You still do not provide one verifiable source in your
| article.  You expect -because you believe you are the
| self-proclaimed queen of OS/2- people to believe you.
| I see you only as an employee of Ziff Davis publications
| and that is not a dubious honor (at least to me).

It's quite true that I didn't name a source in my article. That is
obvious to the most casual observer. It's also true that, sometimes,
sources cannot be named because they would (minimally) get in trouble
for "speaking for" the company without permission or (at worst) be
fired for disseminating information that the company wants to keep
others from discovering. This is not specific to the computer
industry, by the way; please read your history books about Watergate.

If you disagree with the above, then I invite you to name _your_
sources here, publicly. No? That's priviledged information? Then why
hold me to a different standard... especially when *I WAS REPORTING
POSITIVE NEWS ABOUT OS/2.* Why are you trying so _VERY_ hard to imply
that OS/2 sales were _down_, Tim?

Oh, please *do* answer that question, instead of skipping over it as
you did before.

Dubious honor or no, I'm a writer for the largest company publishing
computer magazines. I have the job because I've earned a reputation
for writing accurate articles -- whether they're news items about what
IBM doesn't want you to know, or reviews of OS/2 applications, or
articles on dozens, maybe hundreds, of other topics.

But let's look at this item a little more carefully. You criticize me
for being a Ziff Davis employee (and thus suspect to the OS/2
community). You pour oil on the fire, trying it make it seem that a ZD
writer couldn't possibly represent an accurate view of the industry in
regard to OS/2.

Yet, yesterday, at the invitation of the Southern California OS/2 User
Group, TWO ZIFF DAVIS EMPLOYEES (and another independent writer) sat
in front of dozens of OS/2 users and gave their views on IBM, OS/2,
and the treatment in the media. You criticize me (not to mention my
co-workers and my employer) for presenting inaccurate information, and
yet _WE_ have the courage to stand up in front of a crowd of OS/2
users and answer any question they choose to ask.

In contrast, YOU won't even admit if you were among the 150-200 people
at the event, with a fake name or otherwise.

If the lurkers believe that this makes your credibility "as good as
anything you spread around," well, that's up to them.

I don't proclaim that I'm the queen of OS/2. I have decent contacts
inside of IBM, I'm on good terms with just about any OS/2 ISV
past-or-present, and I'm a member of the world's largest OS/2 user
group -- which is open to any OS/2 user who cares to join. (I'm told
that quite a few did so, yesterday.) Nobody has to wheedle to ask for
permission or promise not to admit publicly that he's a member. Pay
the nominal dues -- just as I do -- and you're in. Then you can vote
on who the officers should be, just like anybody else. And no one has
to take my comments about the Phoenix OS/2 Society on faith; everybody
has the ability to ask for a free sample of the magazine at
http://www.possi.org. The user group invites OS/2 users to make the
own judgement about the value of the organization, and join if they
think it's worth it.

I don't believe, in the least, that I'm persecuted. I merely step in
to correct inaccurate statements, and it appears that you've made
quite a few recently.

I also *invite* people to question what I write... and, for that
matter, what anybody writes. The purpose of both public discourse and
its on-paper equivalent is to help all of us humans learn, and more
importantly gain enough knowledge to make their own decisions. As I've
said here many times, it's fine if people disagree with me, and when
I'm wrong I'm quite happy to apologize. (I've done so publicly, on a
few occasions.)

| I don't object at all if it is presented with some kind of
| verfiable backup.  I object to you reporting it at this
| precarious time - with Warpstock just around the corner.
| You are not an official member of the Steering Committee
| but it is understood you wield considerable weight.

I'm not quite sure I follow you, Tim.

I wrote an article two weeks ago, saying that OS/2 sales were up, and
in fact they were higher than IBM expected. I'm not sure how this
could be construed as bad news for the OS/2 community, "at this
precarious time" or otherwise. Nor do I understand what relationship
this has with Warpstock... or how any of it affects my relationship
with the Warpstock Steering Committee.

In point of fact, I'm not a member of the Warpstock Steering
Committee, officially *or* unofficially. Though it's amusing that
here, you say that I "wield considerable weight" while a few
paragraphs earlier you said "I see you only as an employee of Ziff
Davis publications." This is self-contradictory.

Oh, but wait -- you think it's because I want people to see me... at
an event I won't attend:

| Write an article to make  OS/2 users feel good about how
| well OS/2 is doing and it is sure to increase Warpstock
| ticket sales where OS/2 users will get a chance to meet
| the self-proclaimed queen of OS/2  - and isn't your
| husband offering some sort of programming seminar?
| Oh wait, don't we also have a SMACK product to promote?

Even if I were able to attend Warpstock, you imply that I'd have a
vested interest in many people attending the event. That's when it's
openly known that this is a wholly volunteer run event, put on by
dedicated OS/2 users who don't make a cent from donating their time
and energy.

In fact, my only vested interest is as an advocate of the OS/2
community, which I believe benefits by events that provide education
about the operating system. Are you saying that you *don't* believe
that the OS/2 community benefits by learning about OS/2? That's sure
what it sounds like you're saying.

|Many folks believe you will be
| there based on all your previous postings.  I assume
| from what you say above that Bill will not be providing
| his seminar either.

Tim, in the last several weeks I've said multiple times on the
*public* Warpstock email discussion list that I won't be attending the
event. There is, and never has been, a seminar scheduled this year
with either Bill or me as the speaker.

Which "many folks" believe otherwise? Oh please DO tell us all...
after all, you just criticized me for not naming names in my article.
Surely you can cite individuals who wrongly assumed that I'd be
attending, and show why they said so?

| But I didn't Esther.  In fact, I'm running a variety of gossip
| items on it at Warp City as we speak.  Warp City is well
| represented at Warp Expo.  . . .

| Whether I was or was not in attendance at any of the
| Warpstock events is no one's business but my own.
| Warp City was well represented at both events and
| will be well represented again next month.

Ah. I see. You didn't attend personally. You report by heresay -- and
don't even report who your reporters are. You won't actually admit
whether you-in-the-flesh attended a single one of these events.

And you criticize me for not naming IBM employees when I present
positive statistics about OS/2 sales.

| > Too bad you couldn't make it to the OS/2 Marketplace conference a
| > couple of years ago.
|
| How do you know I couldn't make it?  Because you couldn't
| pick me out of the crowd?

<laughing out loud>

Oh, Tim, you are _too_ precious.

Even if you _were_ there in person -- and you and I know you were not
-- then you just admitted that you would sign up for a weekend
conference under a false name. THERE WAS NO TIM MARTIN REGISTERED FOR
THAT EVENT.

I know every single person who attended the OS/2 Marketplace. I even
know a few who attended the conference that are (or were) members of
Warp City... but I _do_ know that I could have "picked you out of the
crowd" individually because of the size and scope of that event. I saw
every registration record, and I know (or knew) every company
represented.

You really gave yourself away with this one, Tim. You're trying to
imply that you just _might_ have been there, when in fact I know _with
utter confidence_ that you were not. And yet you're trying to hide the
fact from me.

Thanks for letting the world know that, at a minimum, you operate
under false pretenses.

--Esther

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          19-Sep-99 13:28:24
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Perhaps Stardock is wrong?

From: [e-mail] (Kendall Bennett)

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...

> In a few days we'll see what Stardock and Wardell have
> wrought with their very public announcements:  PCWeek,
> TechWeek, ZDNet, and all the familiar commercial news
> sites will be running full blown stories on how IBM has
> literally killed OS/2.  The proof?  Why Brad Wardell, speaking
> for IBM, says so.  And what will the big quote be?  Brad Wardell's
> public statement that appears to speak for IBM when it says,
> "IBM has indicated that they have no plans for an OS/2 based
> client of their own."
>
> Brad Wardell has no authority to speak for IBM.  None.

I don't usually get involved in advocacy battles, but I was quite
surprised by Brad Wardell's announcement about the demise of an OS/2 Warp
5 client. Surprised because of the above quote indicating that IBM has no
plans for a Warp 5 client.

Why does this surprise me? Because it goes against the information I have
received from people I work with closely at IBM (on developing our
SciTech Display Doctor for OS/2 product). I have asked a couple of times
during meetings, what the status of a Warp 5 client for OS/2 would be.
The answer has always been something along the lines of "No Comment", or
"We'll see". The announcement also goes against my own personal feelings
about IBM's commitment to OS/2 (which is based on an announcement we will
be making soon).

OS/2 *has* been doing well for IBM recently, they *have* released Warp
Server for e-Business and Workspace On Demand is doing well. It would
seem to me that perhaps IBM is not ready for a Warp 5 client just yet.
Their focus is after all on the business end of the OS/2 spectrum, but to
me an updated Warp 5 client *does* make a lot of sense for IBM, but
perhaps they are just not ready for it yet. IBM has made absolutely no
public statements about this, and when IBM does a press release stating
that there will never be a Warp 5 client, then I will believe it. Until
then I personally believe IBM is biding their time until it makes sense
to release a Warp 5 client.

> There is absolutely no reason to be mad at IBM.  They've
> been telling us all year long they have no intention of
> offering a Warp 5 client this year (in 1999).

This is something I personally believe. It does not make a lot of
business sense for IBM to try and release a new Warp 5 client late in
1999. The Y2K issue is a big one, and any OS/2 shop worth their salt is
*not* going to do a major upgrade of *any* Warp 5 clients before the
Millenium, whether it comes from IBM or Stardock. A major OS/2 Warp 5
client upgrade will require significant amounts of time for the OS/2
customer to develop proper test and deployment plans for their company.
At a time when most places are going nuts trying to solve all their Y2K
related issues, do you think they will even consider the option of
upgrading their client machine OS'es?? Upgrading a server is one thing,
but upgrading all clients is something completely different.

Just my $0.02 worth...

--

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
|      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]                               19-Sep-99 17:49:15
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Bennie Nelson wrote:
>
> Marty wrote:
> >
> > Bennie Nelson wrote:
> > >
> > > > Now please quit your tangential logic and argue a real issue for a
change.
> >
> > Note:  no response.
> >
> > If you don't have any intention of arguing real issues, Bennie, just let
me
> > know right now.  It'll make things easier on both of us.
> >
> > - Marty
>
> No response?  I believe silence is a proper response to some points.  You
have
> made several posts regarding my post, and I have replied ( as have others)
with
> posts that further explain my original point.  I really hadn't intended to
> post this many articles on the subject, but since you seemed quite willing
to
> continue the discussion, I have continued also.  If this subthread is not
> a "real issue" and if it should be dropped, then why didn't you take your
> own advice?

It's not my thread to "drop."  I didn't start it.

Do you or do you not ever intend to respond to a real issue?  Please answer
yes or no.  I don't care either way, just tell me your intention so I can
deal with it appropriately.

- Marty

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

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            19-Sep-99 21:49:11
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 18:52:18, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Brad Barclay wrote:
>
> > Tim Martin wrote:
> >
> > > >     Maybe the facts as you assume you know them.  Darin and myself
both work
> > > > inside the big blue wall however, and have a whole lot more
information to go
> > > > on than you do.  And it's not good.
> > >
> > > Then you'd better check with you own co-workers - especially
> > > those attending Warpstock today.  They are telling a much
> > > different story.  In fact - the whole reporting by Brad Wardell
> > > of such a meeting even taking place is now in question.  They
> > > say no such meeting took place.
> >
> >     I have sufficient proof to say otherwise.
>
> Yet if you check with WarpExpo attendees you'll find the
> IBM official actually made a rather lengthy statement on
> the subject and (let me add) - indicated a second company
> is also in negotiations to release a Warp 5 client.  Will Stardock
> provide a Warp 5 client in all 35-40 languages which is an IBM
> requirement or are they trying to limit 'their' Stardock Warp 5
> client to just English-only?  Can IBM afford to do that to their
> world-wide customers?  Germany, the largest user of OS/2,
> would most likely be outraged.
>
Tim,

I would *really* love to believe you.

However, your credibility record being as it is on coo*, I will need a
*lot* more than those statements.

What "IBM official" was it you are quoting?
What second company is negotiating the release of a Warp client?
Stardock (or you) never made a secret of their negotiations.
When did Stardock state they would limit their client to just an
English version?
If you can answer those questions, we're a step closer to home.

> You'll notice Stardock has suddenly gone mum.  Was this
> public message from Wardell a strategic move to force IBM
> to go his way?  Scare the hell out of the OS/2 community,
> tell them there will never be a Warp 5 client (in essence,
> declaring the death of OS/2) and anger the OS/2 masses
> against IBM?  Risky move.  Maybe not.  If IBM were to cave
> in to his proposal (English only) the good news of a Stardock
> Warp 5 client release would overwhelm any "gosh we're sorry,
> we were wrong" statement out of Stardock.
>
Admitted, it is interesting how we haven't heard anything from
Stardock's people after the "leaked" message, but it could also be
that the matter hasn't been resolved yet. You really shouldn't try to
"put strategies into their mouths". And again you mention the unproven
English-only Warp (not that I'd care, mind you; I'm running English
now, because no more Dutch version apparently).

> Our (Warp City) German members are pretty angry right now.
> They say Stardock's message is crushing OS/2 users in their
> neck of the woods (Stardock's statement is doing more and
> more damage here every second).
>
In all fairness, the way you've been reacting does help to keep up
those emotions.

> I wouldn't be surprised if IBM were to release some kind of
> public or official statement.  Stardock's message is the most
> negative and damaging to OS/2 than anything this year.
>
> >
> > > You'd also better check with those same IBM officials.  They
> > > say OS/2 will generate more than 100 million for IBM this year
> > > and that IBM is spending some 12 million on drivers and
> > > additional maintenance releases.  That's pretty damn good
> > > for a so-called dead operating system.
> >
> >     And it probably will.  What you're missing is that this figure has
very little
> > to do with the OS/2 client, and instead represents sales of OS/2 WARP
Server,
> > WorkSpace on Demand, DB2 (which IIRC pulls in the bulk of that figure),
the
> > VisualAge family, and everything else that runs under OS/2 that IBM sells.
> >
> >     In short, the figure is very misleading.  Besides which, the point is
not that
> > IBM is or isn't making a profit from OS/2 - it's wether or not there is
going to be
> > a new fat client version.  And right now, based on all publicly available
info, as
> > the magic 8 ball says "all indications point to no".
>
> But IBM has said categorically there will be no new 'fat' client this
> year.  They have NEVER said they will not eventually release
> a Warp 5 client.  Wardell is saying just that.  Someone has to either
> confirm or deny it because Wardell's statement is just too
> damaging and evidenced by the headlines appearing at the
> public OS/2 web sites.
>
Did IBM ever emphasise "this year"? I'd say that simply the fact that
they haven't reacted to this issue (Stardock nono new fat client)
could be considered the writing on the wall. Oh well, I guess I can
wait until the end of next week...

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net
=======================================================
If we could have our cake _and_ eat it,
people would start whining about seconds.
=======================================================

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 19:19:20
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Re: OS/2 is ALIVE! [8-)

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:
> >> >>
> >> >> Right! After all, let's look at the successes that Netscape 4.61,
Open32, NCs,
> >> >> and Java all had for OS/2.
> >> >>
> >> >> With successes like this, who needs failures?
> >> >
> >> >What do you know about how any of the above mentioned items run in OS/2?
> >> >
> >> >- Marty
> >> >
> >>
> >> Are you even bothering to read the thread? This person who is 200%
commited to
> >> an application seems to feel that the the DOJ/MS trial will have some
positive
> >> effect on IBM, and therefore OS/2.
> >
> >If I wanted to respond to that statement, I'd respond to the original
> >poster.
>
> I am responding to that person. By implication, any response to my response
is
> a support or condemnation of that persons statement. That's why we have
> threads.

My response is a condemnation of your statement.  That's why we have
Replies.

> >> If you believe that, you are living in a dream world. All of the software
I
> >> mentioned, was supposed to have a similarly benefial, ie, reviving affect
on
> >> this very beleagured operating system and all failed.
> >
> >That's not my argument.
>
> Fine. That's my argument. If you don't want to discuss that, move on.
>
> >> As for what I know about how any of those particular items run, what
would you
> >> like to know? I know that all run or in the case of NCs, have a software
> >> solution (WSOD) to run.
> >
> >Your statement says that all of those things you mentioned were failures.
>
> Indeed.
>
> >> What do you want to know?
> >
> >In what way were they failures?  Did they not do what they were supposed
> >to?
>
> <cut-and-paste>
> If you believe that, you are living in a dream world. All of the software I
> mentioned, was supposed to have a similarly benefial, ie, reviving affect on
> this very beleagured operating system and all failed.
> </cut-and-paste>

Last time I looked, Netscape was supposed to allow me to browse the web,
Java was supposed to allow me to run Java apps, ...

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                  19-Sep-99 23:17:06
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: Jim Stuyck <[e-mail]>


[e-mail] wrote:

> Jim "little boy" Stuyck writes:
>
> > Wonder why Tholen (our very own twice-elected Kook of the Month)
> > hasn't commented on this?
>
> There is no such person, Stuyck (little boy).

Illogical.  How can "no such person" respond to a Usenet posting?  Why did
YOU respond?


> > Let me guess:  He can't read everything.
>
> On the contrary, in theory I could read everything (in this newsgroup,
> I presume you mean), assuming that everything made its way to some
> news server to which I have access.  That doesn't mean I do read
> everything.

And your excuse for not countering the bias, unfariness, FUD, whatever
of "Tim Martin" would be?

I could ask if anyone ever saw "Dave Tholen" and "Tim Martin" in the same room
together, but then no one ever saw "FREESPEECH" and/or "Nick Marc" and/or
"Tim Martin" and/or "Dave Tholen" in the same room together, either.
Coincidence?
I think not.  But then -- what am I saying -- the "cast of characters" at
"Chauvet &
Company/Warp City" have carried on electronic converstations with themselves
for years.  ;-)

> > Bet he reads THIS post.  ;-)
>
> Your name caught my eye, Stuyck (little boy).

I win the bet.  It was a "sure thing."

Jim Stuyck


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: J. D. Stuyck and Associates -- Retired (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                    19-Sep-99 17:04:12
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Dan Casey)

In article <[e-mail]>,
Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>And yet an IBM official attending Warp Expo West
>stated publicly yesterday that no such meeting
>took place - and he should know, he is on the
>committee.   He said it was cancelled due to travel
>problems.  He also said Brad was wrong.  AND he
>said IBM has made no decision on whether or not
>they will release a Warp 5 client 'this year'.
>
>Stardock has a vested financial interest in all this
>free publicity.  Brad does not and cannot speak for IBM.
>
>> I wish there would be a new client, but I think it unlikely.
>
>And I see the glass as half full.  I say there will be a
>Warp 5 client.  Just not in 1999.

Here's the explanation for the non-meeting "meeting". This is in
response to a question regarding the  report at os2.org stating that
no meeting took place. The following  is the answer I received from
an IBMer close to the proceedings:

==================================================

Brad's statement and this one are not inconsistent.

The meeting didn't take place because there was a meeting ahead of the
meeting,
at which it was decided there wasn't any need to have a meeting
because IBM was
not going to pursue Stardock's proposal (and the "agreement in
principle"
between IBM and Stardock).  (You see, you only have *that* meeting to
*approve*
agenda items.)

IBM hasn't ruled any third party out of offering a new client, but it
hasn't
ruled any third party (or itself) *in*, either.  (IBM almost never
rules
anything out.)  Brad's statement was accurate; Stardock anticipates no
change in
IBM's stance.

Brad's statement was also accurate that IBM has received more than one
offer.
Thus far IBM has rejected all of them "at this time."

======================================================

--
**************************************************************
*  Dan Casey                                                 *
*  President                                                 *
*  V.O.I.C.E. (Virtual OS/2 International Consumer Education *
*  http://www.os2voice.org                                   *
*  Abraxas on IRC                                            *
*  http://members.iquest.net/~dcasey                         *
*  Charter Associate member, Team SETI                       *
*  Warpstock 99 in Atlanta  http://www.warpstock.org         *
**************************************************************
*  E-Mail (subject: Req. PGP Key) for Public Key             *
**************************************************************

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: V.O.I.C.E., Indianapolis, IN (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                             19-Sep-99 22:28:21
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: [e-mail]

Jim "little boy" Stuyck writes:

> Wonder why Tholen (our very own twice-elected Kook of the Month)
> hasn't commented on this?

There is no such person, Stuyck (little boy).

> Let me guess:  He can't read everything.

On the contrary, in theory I could read everything (in this newsgroup,
I presume you mean), assuming that everything made its way to some
news server to which I have access.  That doesn't mean I do read
everything.

> Bet he reads THIS post.  ;-)

Your name caught my eye, Stuyck (little boy).

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 16:03:11
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Re: No decision regarding OS/2 client was made???

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Kim Cheung wrote:

> According to words around the WarpExpo West, the IBM meeting did not take
> place due to storm concern.  No decision was made regarding the OEM version
> of OS/2.
>
> If this were true, one can only assume that there has been a terrible
> mis-communication between IBM and the parties involved regarding this issue.

Terrible... LOL!  I'd say it is much more than terrible.

We reported this information (and much more at Warp City)
last night.  Thanks for the confirmation.  Other web sites
have now picked it up.

Tim Martin
The OS/2 Guy
Warp City
http://warpcity.com
"E-ride the wild surf to Warp City!"

"It's alive, it's Alive!  God Damn it OS/2 is ALIVE!!!!" :-)

I know because we have it at Warp City! :-)

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             19-Sep-99 22:35:24
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

From: [e-mail]

Marty writes [to Bennie Nelson]:

> If you don't have any intention of arguing real issues, Bennie, just
> let me know right now.  It'll make things easier on both of us.

How ironic, coming from someone who admitted to playing "infantile
games".

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                            19-Sep-99 18:44:06
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Re: OS/2 is ALIVE! [8-)

From: [e-mail] (David H. McCoy)

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>>
>> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>> >"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Right! After all, let's look at the successes that Netscape 4.61,
Open32, NCs,
>> >> and Java all had for OS/2.
>> >>
>> >> With successes like this, who needs failures?
>> >
>> >What do you know about how any of the above mentioned items run in OS/2?
>> >
>> >- Marty
>> >
>>
>> Are you even bothering to read the thread? This person who is 200% commited
to
>> an application seems to feel that the the DOJ/MS trial will have some
positive
>> effect on IBM, and therefore OS/2.
>
>If I wanted to respond to that statement, I'd respond to the original
>poster.

I am responding to that person. By implication, any response to my response is

a support or condemnation of that persons statement. That's why we have
threads.

>> If you believe that, you are living in a dream world. All of the software I
>> mentioned, was supposed to have a similarly benefial, ie, reviving affect
on
>> this very beleagured operating system and all failed.
>
>That's not my argument.

Fine. That's my argument. If you don't want to discuss that, move on.

>> As for what I know about how any of those particular items run, what would
you
>> like to know? I know that all run or in the case of NCs, have a software
>> solution (WSOD) to run.
>
>Your statement says that all of those things you mentioned were failures.

Indeed.

>> What do you want to know?
>
>In what way were they failures?  Did they not do what they were supposed
>to?

<cut-and-paste>
If you believe that, you are living in a dream world. All of the software I
mentioned, was supposed to have a similarly benefial, ie, reviving affect on
this very beleagured operating system and all failed.
</cut-and-paste>


>- Marty
>

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 22:42:09
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 22:12:46, [e-mail] wrote:
|
| Any UGs up to this task?

The Phoenix OS/2 Society would entertain such a proposal.

(Like anything else, such a project needs someone to step forward as
"champion.")

--Esther

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 16:15:09
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Re: Please people ... wake up!

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Jim Larson wrote:

> My concise view of the SWARP 5 situation:
>
> http://www.jvlnet.com/~jwlarson/fishhooks.html
>
> Please read and respond to me via e-mail. I will compile and publish
> on a web  page.
>
> Jim Larson

I'll give you a 'leg up' and spotlight your view at Warp City!

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 23:57:27
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Re: Please people ... wake up!

From: [e-mail] (Jim Larson)

On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 23:15:19, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I'll give you a 'leg up' and spotlight your view at Warp City!

Oh, Lord.

Jim Larson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 16:05:11
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Re: No decision regarding OS/2 client was made???

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

"[e-mail]" wrote:

> Kim Cheung? ([e-mail]?) wrote (19 Sep 1999
13:32:4
> >According to words around the WarpExpo West, the IBM meeting did not take
> >place due to storm concern.  No decision was made regarding the OEM version
>
>                         Spaceships have landed at Stardock!
>                         and have removed all his OS2 developers.
>                         I understand they were probed first,
>                         but didn't go away screaming.

Why Captain Wardell... is that a space gun in your pocket?


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

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

From: [e-mail]                     19-Sep-99 22:45:24
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Re: OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Byron Desnoyers Winmill)

Adrian Suri ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Sorry but I can't resist this one...
: the main question in all this is missing,

: 1)Why has IBM decided to drop OS/2 Client

There is better money in developing software for the Windows client, and
it would be too difficult to raise OS/2 from the ashes (mostly, of the
continual line of bad press).

: 2) What effect will this have on the Server Market

If companies ignore the "support issue", there will be no impact.  You
will also note that IBM is not the only company which leaves clients with
negligable support.  Apple is one.  Microsoft is another (to be specific,
Microsoft will not ensure Windows 3.1 is Y2K compliant.  If you don't think
that this is a problem, consider how much money is being lost on both OS
and hardware upgrades as a result of the Y2K problem).  IBM is not the
worse of the bunch when it comes to dropping clients, not the worse by
far.

If anything, the OS/2 client was more of a liability to Warp Server than
anything else.

: Think about it, an OS will only work with both Hardware and Software
support,

When it comes down to the Intel PC, it is far easier to tailor the machine
to the OS than it is to make the OS run on every machine.  Most applications
will *never* run on a server either.  So hardware and software is a non-issue
for the server market, provided that suitable hardware and software exist
for maintaining servers.

--
Stopped (SIGTTOU)         byron.
$

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 23:00:28
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Please people ... wake up!

From: [e-mail] (Jim Larson)

My concise view of the SWARP 5 situation:

http://www.jvlnet.com/~jwlarson/fishhooks.html

Please read and respond to me via e-mail. I will compile and publish
on a web  page.

Jim Larson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                    20-Sep-99 02:57:05
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 03:38:12
Subj: Re: 2000 - a new IBM release of Warp 5

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <7s44an$qqv$[e-mail]>,
Dave Tholen <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Jason Bowen writes:
>
>> {bandwidth saved}
>
>More like evidence deleted.  More like avoiding some questions that
>I asked.
>
>> Saying that it contradics the statement is only a semantic argument.
>
>Incorrect.  Pointing to evidence is not a semantic argument.  Of course,
>I already explained that in the material you chose to delete.

Blah blah blah, same old tired semantics.


>
>> You can't prove that IBM wants people to use OS/2 because of printed
>> availibility in a catalog.
>
>I wasn't trying to prove that they want people to use it.  I was
>demonstrating that the evidence does not support the conclusion
>that IBM is "very serious about not wanting people to run OS/2 on
>the desktop".  There's a big difference between the two.  I wasn't
>making a claim.  I was countering someone else's claim.  Of course,
>I already explained that in the material you chose to delete.

You only countered their claim semantically.

>
>> It is a logical statement but can't be proven as fact.
>
>I wasn't trying to prove that they want people to use it.  I was
>demonstrating that the evidence does not support the conclusion
>that IBM is "very serious about not wanting people to run OS/2 on
>the desktop".  There's a big difference between the two.  I wasn't
>making a claim.  I was countering someone else's claim.  Of course,
>I already explained that in the material you chose to delete.

What is the point to counter a claim semantically?

>
>> So if all you want to do is semantically argue IBM's actions what
>> is the point?
>
>The key word here is "if".  I'm not doing anything of the sort.  I'm
>simply pointing to evidence that contradicts the claim that IBM is
>"very serious about not wanting people to run OS/2 on the desktop".
>Of course, I also made that clear in the material you chose to delete.

You just want to argue semantics.

>
>> If you can't say that IBM wants people to adopt OS/2 but can only
>> argue semantics what is the point?
>
>The key word here is "if".  I'm not doing anything of the sort.  I'm
>simply pointing to evidence that contradicts the claim that IBM is
>"very serious about not wanting people to run OS/2 on the desktop".
>Of course, I also made that clear in the material you chose to delete.

You are just arguing semantics.

>
>> Saying that OS/2 exceeded expectation without knowing what those
>> expectation and why they were set is pointless.
>
>On the contrary, the point is that it demonstrates that IBM expected
>people to buy OS/2.
>

Semantically

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 20:40:10
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 03:38:12
Subj: Re: Credibility

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Tarquelne wrote:

> Since "Credibility" is the subject:
>
> >> Too bad you missed Warp Expo West, Tim.
> >
> >But I didn't Esther.  In fact, I'm running a variety of gossip
> >items on it at Warp City as we speak.  Warp City is well
> >represented at Warp Expo.  You just may be unaware of it
> >by not having authorized access.
>
> I'm really beginning to find the existence of "Warp City" as a "real"
> OS/2 service hard to swallow.

We are a figment of the Microsoft fanatic's imagination.

> Tim says that possibly "hundreds" of
> Warp City members attend these events,

We have over 6,000 subscribing members who use OS/2.
At least 35-40% are from outside the U.S.  Surely a percentage
of them is bound to appear at these much hyped OS/2 events.
And they aren't shy about reporting to Warp City  about their
adventures and the happenings that go on at such places as
Warp Expo West.  This year several Warp City members have
nearly begged us to buy a booth at Warpstock, even promised
to pay for it and generate a few hundred Warp City logo T-shirts
but we asked them not to.  They are certainly welcome to announce
their affilation with Warp City.  Many people don't because
they've seen what has happened to others who have
publicly stepped forward.  Who needs the harassment?
They know they have access to the best site possible.
All and nothing but OS/2.  Ok.  A little Java thrown in
because OS/2 is the premier Java platform.  (You'd love
our Java Arcade and our online Java screen saver.  You
can even download our Java screen saver for your personal
use!)

> and that Warp City is just
> _bursting_ with news. . .

I wouldn't say bursting but I would say we update nearly
hourly and I will say that much of the real news you
see posted at all of the 'public' OS/2 sites usually
derives from Warp City.  In fact, OS2.ORG is currently
running several items from our gossip column on their
site which were posted late last night or early this morning.
I know because they are vertbatim items, lifited directly
from the column itself.  Those items will filter down now
and appear on Bandiera's site and WarpCast, Focus on
OS/2 (about.com).

> but I've never knowingly met a Warp City
> memeber,

Yes you have, you just don't know it.  I see them in these
newsgroups all the time.

> and, of course, Warp City seems closed to new memebers and
> non-members can't access it.

Not necessarily.  We do run subscription drives and we limit
access to a certain number of members.  This is for their
convenience, not so much ours.  We provide one-on-one
OS/2 assistance -that would be OS/2 Tech Support- and that's
a hard commodity to come by, and we don't like to be rushed.
When you ask us to locate a file we not only locate it but
we tell you all about it, how to install it, how well it works
and all the locations we could find it in.  We're like your
personal OS/2 one-stop shop.  Now you can understand
why members like to stay members.

> Why on earth should we believe Warp
> City exists?

You don't have to believe it at all.  We don't advertise Warp
City.  It is my job to monitor and assist in these newsgroups
and that's the only reason you hear about it. I stick the url
in my tagline so any Warp City member out perusing the
newsgroups for answers or information can quickly jump
to Warp City and see what's news.

I'm just as  prolific at Warp City as I am here in the newsgroups
except Warp City and our members comes first.  But I monitor
everything, every web site, every file and every bit of
gossip that comes down the pike.  We're a 'hands-on' web
site while most other web sites depend on visitors to submit
items, shun those who ask for assistance, update their
sites maybe once in a blue moon.  Everyday when you come
to Warp City there is something new.  Maybe its just a hot
desktop background for your personal desktop but its new!

> Warp City could be all Tim says it is, or Tim could
> just be making it all up.

I make it up.  That's how I get those waiting list of OS/2
users who want in.

> It's getting harder and harder to believe
> the former.

Don't believe it.  It's all a big scam.

> Will some Warp City members _please_ step forward!

We ask all Warp City members to sign agreement.  An agreement
that says they won't reveal their memberships or steal our news or
web pages and report the information elsewhere.  Since our most
current gossip is now sitting -verbatim- at OS2.ORG I can say there
are those members who like to take the risk of losing their access.
All the others like their access and wouldn't risk it for anything.

> >Yes I have.  I am in attendance -one way or another- at
> >all of them.
>
> Astral projection?

You never know.  Remember that long haired lady who said
her name was Esther?  Or that guy who SWORE he was Brad
Wardell and promised you a free copy of FUD?  Next time
look very closely.  It was probably me.  :-)

>
>                                             Tarquelne
>                                        <[e-mail]>
>         I know how God can make a rock so big He can't move it.
>                                   ************************
> Use the address above to reply - not the anti-spam "Reply-to" address
> ___________________________________________________________
> Mike Martone

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                 19-Sep-99 23:45:13
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 03:38:12
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: [e-mail] (Richard Steiner)

Here in comp.os.os2.apps, [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)
spake unto us, saying:

>(I'd do it myself, but I'm a little overwhelmed at the moment, trying
>to find out what actually happened. The apparency is that there was a
>major miscommunication between several parties, all of whom have/had
>the best interests of the OS/2 community in mind. I'm trying to figure
>out where the hairball came from, so it can be hacked up and dealt
>with.)

Hehehe.  Your phrasing is very...ah...creative.  :-)

Whatever is happening is strange, yes.  I suspect many of us are quite
curious what The Real Story might be.

--
   -Rich Steiner  >>>--->  [e-mail]  >>>---> Bloomington, MN
     OS/2 + Linux + BeOS + FreeBSD + Solaris + WinNT4 + Win95 + DOS
      + VMWare + Fusion + vMac + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven! :-)
                     "Need know star RM pic"...??!?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: FIELDATA FORTRAN ENTHUSIASTS CLUB (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                      20-Sep-99 00:03:16
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 03:38:12
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: Jason <[e-mail]>

Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
: Jason wrote:

:> Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
:>
:> : You'll notice Stardock has suddenly gone mum.
:>
:> I'll notice that there has been constant posting by stardock on their
:> news server, including this very day.  And yes, some of it about you Tim.
:>
:> -Jason

: And Warp City has a conference forum too.  I guess we web
: masters just keep it all 'in house' so the public doesn't get wind,
: right?

I don't know who's we Tim, I keep things open to the public.  As for
Stardock, they stated that they were moving all discusions they were in
involving to the Stardock news server.  People are quite free to go read
them at news.stardock.com  in the newsgroup stardock.os2  I know you know
open that newsgroup.  They did this, because they were sick of always
countering what you said and then having their counter arguements called
Spam by you.  It was probably a wise decision, since you are still trying
to get mileage out of miscalling their posts spam.

-Jason

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               19-Sep-99 20:51:04
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 03:38:12
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Jason wrote:

> Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> : You'll notice Stardock has suddenly gone mum.
>
> I'll notice that there has been constant posting by stardock on their
> news server, including this very day.  And yes, some of it about you Tim.
>
> -Jason

And Warp City has a conference forum too.  I guess we web
masters just keep it all 'in house' so the public doesn't get wind,
right?

Tim...


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 01:07:20
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 03:38:12
Subj: Re: OS/2 is ALIVE! [8-)

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:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Right! After all, let's look at the successes that Netscape 4.61,
Open32, NCs,
> >> >> >> and Java all had for OS/2.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> With successes like this, who needs failures?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >What do you know about how any of the above mentioned items run in
OS/2?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >- Marty
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Are you even bothering to read the thread? This person who is 200%
commited to
> >> >> an application seems to feel that the the DOJ/MS trial will have some
positive
> >> >> effect on IBM, and therefore OS/2.
> >> >
> >> >If I wanted to respond to that statement, I'd respond to the original
> >> >poster.
> >>
> >> I am responding to that person. By implication, any response to my
response is
> >> a support or condemnation of that persons statement. That's why we have
> >> threads.
> >
> >My response is a condemnation of your statement.  That's why we have
> >Replies.
>
> Fine. On what grounds? Would you like for me to pull from DejaNews the
various
> statements saying that those various technologies were going to revive OS/2?
>
> It would be embarrassingly easy.

That's not what the products were intended for, therefore they're not
failures as such.  They didn't live up users' (possibly unreasonable)
expectations perhaps, but they operate as intended.

> >> >> If you believe that, you are living in a dream world. All of the
software I
> >> >> mentioned, was supposed to have a similarly benefial, ie, reviving
affect on
> >> >> this very beleagured operating system and all failed.
> >> >
> >> >That's not my argument.
> >>
> >> Fine. That's my argument. If you don't want to discuss that, move on.
> >>
> >> >> As for what I know about how any of those particular items run, what
would you
> >> >> like to know? I know that all run or in the case of NCs, have a
software
> >> >> solution (WSOD) to run.
> >> >
> >> >Your statement says that all of those things you mentioned were
failures.
> >>
> >> Indeed.
> >>
> >> >> What do you want to know?
> >> >
> >> >In what way were they failures?  Did they not do what they were supposed
> >> >to?
> >>
> >> <cut-and-paste>
> >> If you believe that, you are living in a dream world. All of the software
I
> >> mentioned, was supposed to have a similarly benefial, ie, reviving affect
on
> >> this very beleagured operating system and all failed.
> >> </cut-and-paste>
> >
> >Last time I looked, Netscape was supposed to allow me to browse the web,
> >Java was supposed to allow me to run Java apps, ...
>
> Marty, I grow weary of this. I've explain my position, yet you want to argue
> about something else. Fine. Go do so, but it won't be with me.

You grow weary of defending your position, yet you never seem to grow weary
of calling OS/2 products failures.  Why is that?

I'll drop it here.  Both of our points have been expressed to fruition.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         20-Sep-99 04:02:27
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 03:38:12
Subj: Re: 2000 - a new IBM release of Warp 5

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Jason Bowen writes:

>>> {bandwidth saved}

>> More like evidence deleted.  More like avoiding some questions that
>> I asked.

Note:  no response.  I was especially interested in the reasons why
the unspecified product was being advertised, and by whom.

>>> Saying that it contradics the statement is only a semantic argument.

>> Incorrect.  Pointing to evidence is not a semantic argument.  Of course,
>> I already explained that in the material you chose to delete.

> Blah blah blah, same old tired semantics.

What alleged semantics, Jason?

>>> You can't prove that IBM wants people to use OS/2 because of printed
>>> availibility in a catalog.

>> I wasn't trying to prove that they want people to use it.  I was
>> demonstrating that the evidence does not support the conclusion
>> that IBM is "very serious about not wanting people to run OS/2 on
>> the desktop".  There's a big difference between the two.  I wasn't
>> making a claim.  I was countering someone else's claim.  Of course,
>> I already explained that in the material you chose to delete.

> You only countered their claim semantically.

What alleged semantics, Jason?

>>> It is a logical statement but can't be proven as fact.

>> I wasn't trying to prove that they want people to use it.  I was
>> demonstrating that the evidence does not support the conclusion
>> that IBM is "very serious about not wanting people to run OS/2 on
>> the desktop".  There's a big difference between the two.  I wasn't
>> making a claim.  I was countering someone else's claim.  Of course,
>> I already explained that in the material you chose to delete.

> What is the point to counter a claim semantically?

What alleged semantics, Jason?

>>> So if all you want to do is semantically argue IBM's actions what
>>> is the point?

>> The key word here is "if".  I'm not doing anything of the sort.  I'm
>> simply pointing to evidence that contradicts the claim that IBM is
>> "very serious about not wanting people to run OS/2 on the desktop".
>> Of course, I also made that clear in the material you chose to delete.

> You just want to argue semantics.

Incorrect.  What alleged semantics, Jason?

>>> If you can't say that IBM wants people to adopt OS/2 but can only
>>> argue semantics what is the point?

>> The key word here is "if".  I'm not doing anything of the sort.  I'm
>> simply pointing to evidence that contradicts the claim that IBM is
>> "very serious about not wanting people to run OS/2 on the desktop".
>> Of course, I also made that clear in the material you chose to delete.

> You are just arguing semantics.

Incorrect.  What alleged semantics, Jason?

>>> Saying that OS/2 exceeded expectation without knowing what those
>>> expectation and why they were set is pointless.

>> On the contrary, the point is that it demonstrates that IBM expected
>> people to buy OS/2.

> Semantically

Incorrect.  What alleged semantics, Jason?

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

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

From: [e-mail]                     20-Sep-99 05:04:10
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 03:38:12
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: [e-mail] (Byron Desnoyers Winmill)

vid H. McCoy ([e-mail]) wrote:

: I amazed by your choice of OS/2. Either you are stuck with old hardware or
: fighting to get newer hardware to install.  I've never found NT slower than
: OS/2. Again, it is amazing that you, an OS/2 user find constant faults with
: Windows, that most do not.

Older hardware, certainly.  There is no sense getting stuck in the upgrade
cycle when all that it is for is to make money for software developers.

With regards to the faults of Windows NT, I will only list responsiveness
(or the lack thereof).  Otherwise, I have not used it enough to comment.
Well, I shouldn't even say that.  I did have some time to play with one NT
system.  But that was 3 years ago, and on version 3.5 or so (my memory is
failing me).  Outside of speed, I don't recall having any problems with
that machine.  In fact, it was a great deal better than using the plain
DOS box.  (Or had they installed 95 by that point?  I forget.)

Windows 95 is another story altogether.  There my experiences go from so=so
to just plain sour.  It ranges from loosing the system while programming
(due to poor memory protection, and poor bounds checking), to not being able
to do some stuff in CorelDRAW 5 (which could be done under OS/2), to Win95
corrupting its own system files (to the point of disuse), to the modem
dropping to about half of its throughput when the process was stuck into
the background.


: >(Or UNIX, for that matter.  But UNIX has the one quality that you can
: >access a machine from almost anywhere and **somebody else maintains the
Windows 95 is another story altogether.  There my experiences go from so=so
to just plain sour.  It ranges from loosing the system while programming
(due to poor memory protection, and poor bounds checking), to not being able
to do some stuff in CorelDRAW 5 (which could be done under OS/2), to Win95
corrupting its own system files (to the point of disuse), to the modem
dropping to about half of its throughput when the process was stuck into
the background.


: >(Or UNIX, for that matter.  But UNIX has the one quality that you can
: >access a machine from almost anywhere and **somebody else maintains the
: >system**.  Haven't seen much of that with Windows.)

: Unix has many qualities over OS/2, the least of which is reliability.

But it is sure a devil to maintain.  As I said before, I do not have that
much time to devote to one computer.  If you do, have your fun maintaining
your system.  I like having my system available for work when there is
work to do, and available for tinkering when there is time to spare.

As for the reliability of UNIX over OS/2: from my meager accomplishments
with Linux and NetBSD, it seems to me that OS/2 is more reliable from the
users point of view.  For example: running DeScribe simply requires that
the OS and progam are installed properly.  For something like LaTeX you
really need the OS, a text editor, LaTeX, ghostview, (ghostscript?), and
lpd to be installed properly.  Never mind the need of the user to know
how to use all of those programs properly.

Then there are possible productivity gains, some of which are not easy
to measure.  (For example, there is a portrait display hooked up to the
M*c I am typing this message on.  There is little need for me to scroll
back and forth to refer to particular parts of the document, nor to scroll
while reading a document.)

But I have seen OS/2 do better than that two crashes a week which the
editor of the Computer Paper commented was unusually stable for Win9x,
this month.

--
Stopped (SIGTTOU)         byron.
$

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 00:09:19
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 03:38:12
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Bennie Nelson wrote:
>
> I believe I have responded to real issues.

That's all I need to know.  Thanks.

[plonk!]

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                     20-Sep-99 04:16:05
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 03:38:12
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

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

On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 23:50:43 -0400, Brad Barclay wrote:

>Tim Martin wrote:
>
>> I never said they did.  I simply asked the question. Read the
>> above again.  I said it is an IBM pre-requisite for the distribution
>> of any OS/2 client.  Do you realize the amount of money it
>> will take to undertake such a massive translation?
>
>    Yes - very little.  All of the text has already been translated for the
base OS.
>Stardock would only have to translate any new materials that they provided
themselves
>(assuming this was even a requirement), and even then only if the materials
in question
>contained national language strings (there are quite a few OS/2 modules which
contain no text
>whatsoever, and thus don't require translation in the first place).

Um, no.  The server piece is only translated into a subset of the languages
that the client is translated into.  Sure, we should have all the old
translation, but that means 10-20 languages for all new or changed messages
from Warp 4 to WSeb.  First, you co-ordinate the differences.  Then you send
them to translation.  Still a non-negligible cost.
---
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]                                 20-Sep-99 04:30:14
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 03:38:12
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]>, askbill*AT*ibm.net writes:
>Folks,
>
>Note that Dan Casey's explanation (below) is both useful, logical, and
>believable.

snip good stuff >>

>Had OS/2 acheived "critical mass" a few years back, it might have been the
>same by now anyway. If IBM were to find itself in possession of a large
>percentage of the end-user market, they would probably run, not walk, for
>the nearest exit by selling off or spinning off that part of the business.

if wishes were horses, this beggar'd have a farm . . if IBM only *would*
spin off OS/2 to someone who wanted it, instead of this dog-in-the-manger
act. Who is OS/2's worst enemy, class ? IBM !! get a divorce, Lou, then you
can go back to hanging out with Joe Camel in front of the high schools. Let
the people inside IBM who like OS/2 do a 'leveraged executive  buy-out,'
get lean and mean and all that stock broker talk, just get the hell *out* of
a business you don't want and let someone else have a go. Good luck.

> Their core strength lies in the boardroom, and they know it.
>

If their board room had any strength they'd divest themselves of something
they don't understand or want before its value was reduced to nothing.
Unless they need some deductions . . . .


>Just my HK$ 0.155 worth...............
>
>YOMD!
>
>Bill Hacker


----------------------------------------------------------
Härad Ængravvård
Windows NT - the Ornithopter of Operating Systems
-----------------------------------------------------------

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          20-Sep-99 05:40:21
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 03:38:12
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Buddy Donnelly)

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 04:30:28, [e-mail] a ┌crit dans un message:

> In <[e-mail]>, askbill*AT*ibm.net writes:
> >Folks,
> >
> >Note that Dan Casey's explanation (below) is both useful, logical, and
> >believable.
>
> snip good stuff >>
snip all the rest of the good stuff
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> H└rad ╩ngravv┬rd
> Windows NT - the Ornithopter of Operating Systems
> -----------------------------------------------------------

More like, "The Icarus' Wings of Operating Systems"?

(I like ornithopters and the Leo who rode in on them.)

Good luck,

Buddy

Buddy Donnelly
[e-mail]


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 01:16:10
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 03:38:12
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Richard Steiner wrote:
>
> Here in comp.os.os2.apps, [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)
> spake unto us, saying:
>
> >(I'd do it myself, but I'm a little overwhelmed at the moment, trying
> >to find out what actually happened. The apparency is that there was a
> >major miscommunication between several parties, all of whom have/had
> >the best interests of the OS/2 community in mind. I'm trying to figure
> >out where the hairball came from, so it can be hacked up and dealt
> >with.)
>
> Hehehe.  Your phrasing is very...ah...creative.  :-)
>
> Whatever is happening is strange, yes.  I suspect many of us are quite
> curious what The Real Story might be.

Might make a good TV-movie some day (a la Pirates of Silicon Valley).
Perhaps a few unauthorized books...  ;-)

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                              20-Sep-99 00:19:02
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 05:19:28
Subj: Re: OS/2 is ALIVE! [8-)

From: Brad Barclay <[e-mail]>

Gerben Bergman wrote:

> <chuckle> Remember, people, that we're talking about a PC operating system.
> A software product. A collection of ones and zeroes. I suggest that the guy
> who wrote the above paragraph, as well as those that got a "You said it,
> dude!" feeling after reading it, switch off their computers and get out of
> the house for a while. Take a walk. Ride your bikes. Reacquaint yourselves
> with that crazy little thing called life. Trust me, the situation will look
> a lot less grim afterwards. :)

    Why act suprised?  The Bible is nothing but a bunch of pages with ink
stains
on it, and yet some people take it seriously.  Media has long had the power to
bring out some of the strongest of human emotions - should digital media be
any
different?

    Worse yet - many people here make their saleries off OS/2, either directly
or indirectly.  Some people develop OS/2 software for a living.  Others use
OS/2
as an integral part of their business.

    Wether founded or not, the fact that OS/2's future is quite unknown at
this
point in time is cause for concern to many people.  The fact that it's "only a
PC operating system" doesn't diminish that level of concern.

    Other than that, I agree - everyone go for a nice long bike ride, read a
good book, talk to an old friend, clear your senses, and basically re-centrer
you mind to the important things in life.

    Then come back here with a fresh outlook on life, and do something about
your OS/2 concerns (preferably, something constructive :).

Brad BARCLAY


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: via Internet Direct - http://www.mydirect.com/ (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                         20-Sep-99 04:57:27
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 05:19:28
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Marty writes:

> Bennie Nelson wrote:

>> I believe I have responded to real issues.

> That's all I need to know.  Thanks.
>
> [plonk!]

If the Reverend Mother had responded to Maria's quandry the way you do,
Marty, we'd never have the song "Climb Every Mountain".

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

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

From: [e-mail]                              20-Sep-99 01:43:08
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 05:19:28
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: Brad Barclay <[e-mail]>

Darin McBride wrote:

> >    Yes - very little.  All of the text has already been translated for the
base OS.
> >Stardock would only have to translate any new materials that they provided
themselves
> >(assuming this was even a requirement), and even then only if the materials
in question
> >contained national language strings (there are quite a few OS/2 modules
which contain no text
> >whatsoever, and thus don't require translation in the first place).
>
> Um, no.  The server piece is only translated into a subset of the languages
> that the client is translated into.  Sure, we should have all the old
> translation, but that means 10-20 languages for all new or changed messages
> from Warp 4 to WSeb.  First, you co-ordinate the differences.  Then you send
> them to translation.  Still a non-negligible cost.

    Except that in Stardock's scenario, the server-specific components were to
be removed.  The
rest of the NLV strings for the base WPS are available in translated for for
most panels, as they
are identical to those of the existing WARP v4 base.

    About all that would require translation would be any new functionality
that exists over what
already exists in the v4 base, such as help text for JFS, CHKDSK and FORMAT
(for example), and any
associated SYS errors for items left in the stripped down server which weren't
available in the v4
base and haven't already been translated.

    Thus, comparative to the number of translatable strings, the amout of work
Stardock would have
to put into NLV translation would still be very little, unless they suddenly
went ahead and added
a significant amount of new functionality which contained translatable text.

    All of which is moot, now that Stardock has announced that they won't be
producing a WARP v5
client.  Either way, however, I doubt if national-language versions were such
a major decision
factor as Tim makes them out to be, and would be very, *very* suprised if this
was something that
Stardock didn't account for when they negotiated their proposal with IBM (FYI,
Stardock does have
experience with doing NLV versions of some of their products - Brad Wardell
once told me that
there are several NLV versions of Object Desktop available).

Brad BARCLAY


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: via Internet Direct - http://www.mydirect.com/ (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                          20-Sep-99 06:00:07
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 10:50:27
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>>>Gerben Bergman
>>>Why is it that OS/2 users are always this unlucky when trying out Windows?

>>Jeff Glatt
>>I don't think that it's quite as much luck as it is competence. To be
>>frank, based upon what I've seen of OS/2 users in newsgroups such as
>>this, they don't seem to be too savvy in general. Mostly, they just
>>seem to be overly exuberant about a particular niche OS, but
>>otherwise, do not have any particular skills that would prevent them
>>from having difficulty doing something like installing and running
>>Windows

>Marty
>Need I remind you that this group does not represent people who use OS/2 in
>any way, shape, or form?

Of course this group represents people who use OS/2. After all, people
who use OS/2 post here all of the time.

>A lot of Windoze users that formerly used OS/2 had a lot of problems with it

I don't think that a lot of Windows users ever used OS/2.

Of the ones I know who are former OS/2 users, most left OS/2 because
they found that Windows made it easier for them to get more and better
work done. I know that's true in my own case.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                  20-Sep-99 09:01:08
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 10:50:27
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

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

The Swedish OS/2 User Group could very well be a part of such a group.
We would be happy to offer a warp 4.5 client to our members.
And, if members wants to pay for fulltime support, we can set it up.
But we are too small to carry this "world wide".
In a first step SweOS2UG could cooperate with other scandinavian User Groups
but i
think all OS/2 User Groups need a global organization for this.

Lennart Gahm, Swedish OS/2 User Group

On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 22:12:46 GMT, [e-mail] wrote:
>Good idea and there are already such organizations in existence: the several
>non-profit large OS/2 user groups, such as POSSI, SCOUG, etc. Either
individually or
>as a joint venture, such groups could buy special licenses of WSEB 4.5 and
>redistribute a client version to members, only. Apple has somewhat similar
>agreements with user groups to distribute certain older software (at no
charge).
>
>This could be *much* better than the present and historical situation. User
groups
>(UGs) are much better situated to provide support than a megacorp. IBM could
>provide better bug fixes faster and cheaper if reports were funneled through
a
>few UG contacts. Increased revenues from sales and membership fees could
allow
>UGs to fund ISVs. I've long hoped a group of sharp WPS and device driver
>programmers would join together and form team -- called Portsmiths Group, or
such --
>-- to port other-platform applications and devices to OS/2. With salaries or
retainers
>from UGs, good programmers wouldn't have to face shareware starvation to do
>OS/2 work. Such a team could also contract with mainstream vendors to produce

>(good) OS/2 versions, with little risk and overhead. And, so on...
>
>If IBM were to take this route, they could serve their existing customer base
and
>hedge their bets on NT in case the courts have the courage to call naked
naked
>and in some substantive way break up the emperor's monopoly. And, they could
>do so without granting an OS/2 monopoly to any one commercial concern.
>
>Any UGs up to this task?
>
>In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Mooo) writes:
>>How about a Credit Union type of set up?  (I'm brainstorming here),
>>whereby those diehard OS/2 users who really care, and care enough to
>>front money, provide the startup capital for the OS/2 corporation via
>>the purchase of shares?  Those with the most shares have the most
>>votes etc etc.  You don't get access to the 'union' until you buy at
>>least one parcel of shares..this type of thing.  You want access to
>>Warp Client 4.5 as well as a swag of other OS/2 apps?  Fine, buy into
>>OS/2 Corporation, then as a member, you have access to all this fine
>>software at corporate rates.  Big bucks?  You bet, I'd imagine, in all
>>reality, if all you want is Warp Client 4.5 its gonna cost you US$600+
>>(remember we would need to buy the software -and- support the
>>underlying corporate structure...help staff, adminstrators etc).  Per
>>software pricing would get a lot better should you wish to partake in
>>the purchase of several packages.
>>
>>The crunch in all schemes of this type, and I've been watching with
>>interest for over a year, is that someone, and in fact a -lot- of
>>someones, has to make the first move.  A OS/2 corporation such as
>>thing can only be a success if it is large, and I mean that in IBM
>>terms.
>>
>>The underlying theme is that at no time does IBM receive a call from a
>>disgruntled user who cant get his 'dial other internet providers'
>>working.  All this user support is handled by OS/2 Corporation paid
>>support staff.
>>
>>If this sort of money is viewed as unrealistic, then my opinion is
>>that our requests for continued support from IBM is also unrealistic
>>and OS/2 will in fact die...slowly and horribly.
>
>selectric.net? think international business machines, instead.
>



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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 09:51:25
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 10:50:27
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

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

> Brad Barclay <[e-mail]> wrote:
>     One great way to start a revolution is to force the issue.  And nothing
> has ever brought the OS/2 community together so quickly as has Brad
> Wardell's statement.  And bad press has been used to force companies
> to rethink their product stances before.

And <g> it has happened more or less before. Remember the situation
in Germany one (or was it two years ago)? Big customers angrily forcing
IBM to make its position on OS/2 more clear. Wasn't that the row where
Lou Gerstner himself <g> "indicated" that servicing and using OS/2 would
provide for a living for about 10 more years to start with. For you <g> it
does,
I understood, so eight or nine more years to go. Cheers!

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]                               20-Sep-99 09:51:25
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 10:50:27
Subj: Re: Credibility

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

> Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:

[ .. ]

> You don't have to believe it at all.  We don't advertise Warp
> City.  It is my job to monitor and assist in these newsgroups
> and that's the only reason you hear about it.

Hmmm. ... monitoring is of course OK. But to whom can we
complain about the error in judgement introducing into your
job-description you having to "assist in these newsgroups"?


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]                               20-Sep-99 09:51:24
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 10:50:27
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

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


> What is required is a deliberately targeted campaign to convince IBM
> to update the client.  Note I say update.  We don't need a new OS we
> need an enhanced version of what we have now.

You're right short time we need a CDROM-refresh, to get around those
difficult installs, then fixpacking, installing Java, NS etc. etc. Longer term
we may need to put pressure on IBM to get an (affordable way to) upgrade.

Which makes the idea of an united we stand SOHO / Users buying and
pressure group the more interesting way out of this situation.

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]                               20-Sep-99 09:51:23
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 10:50:27
Subj: Re: Judgement Day ... Stardock and OS/2

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

> [e-mail] (Jerry Lapham) wrote:

>> IBM's point of view seems, still, to be "Avoid popular use of OS/2 at
>> all costs.  Stick with high dollar business versions."

> To me, all indications are that IBM wants to get rid of the high dollar
> business versions, too, but some of their big customers won't let them.
> It's quite possible that Aurora was developed only because one or more
> really big customers insisted.

Makes the idea of forming an OS/2 SOHO/Users buying (and thus now
pressure) group all the more interesting. If it works for them, why not for
us?

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]                                     20-Sep-99 06:48:17
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 10:50:27
Subj: Re: Credibility

From: Tarquelne <[e-mail]>

>> but I've never knowingly met a Warp City
>> memeber,
>
>Yes you have, you just don't know it.  I see them in these
>newsgroups all the time.

Tim!  Helllo!  It's statments like the above that make me wonder
about you.

                                            Tarquelne
                                       <[e-mail]>
        I know how God can make a rock so big He can't move it.
                                  ************************
Use the address above to reply - not the anti-spam "Reply-to" address
___________________________________________________________
"I've gone into thousands of [fortune-tellers' parlors] and have been
told thousands of things, but nobody ever told me I was a policewoman getting
ready to arrest her."
--NYC detective





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

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

From: [e-mail]                                      20-Sep-99 11:03:24
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 10:50:27
Subj: Re: No decision regarding OS/2 client was made???

From: [e-mail] ([e-mail])

Jeff Glatt? ([e-mail]?) wrote (Mon, 20 Sep 1999 06:31:41 G
>Kind of ironic being that this guy here has been posting to microsoft

Me?  I like all OSes.  Never used one I didn't like but for Win95.  Is
that what you use?

I think a real interesting question is, why talk about me?  I should
be flattered (but never am), you suppose?

Now, if you want to talk about one or more of my 43 OS/2 apps, then all
right, let's go!  Bring it on!  Or, if you really, really want to talk
about me, and it makes you happy, knock yourself out.  One thing you
won't find me doing, though, is just that; I abhor those that can't
seem to find a-n-y-t-h-i-n-g to talk about but their self.

 '`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'
 Corne1 Huth  -  http://40th.com/
 Bullet database engines/servers 3.1  Win32-WinCE-OS2-Linux+

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                    20-Sep-99 05:34:21
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 10:50:27
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Dan Casey)

In article <[e-mail]>,
Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:

>P.S.  Why are we now hearing the meeting didn't take
>place with Brad specifically said it did?  Whom are we
>to believe here?

The report that "no meeting took place" was posted to the news page at
os2.org, and was attributed to an IBMer speaking at Warp Expo West on
Saturday, the 18th. I've been in contact with someone who attended
this presenataion, and reported what he had heard. I am awaiting
confirmation from the IBMer before I post anything else. While I
believe the information  I have to be correct, I'd prefer to get
confirmation and clarification, rather than risk starting unfounded
rumors.

The information that I posted earlier came directly from Timothy
Sipples, in a personal e-mail, and was quoted verbatim. He also added
that he was "in the dark" as to the rest of the details.

If I get a response to my post for more information, I'll post it
here, and to various other sites such as [e-mail] and
Warpcast.


--
**************************************************************
*  Dan Casey                                                 *
*  President                                                 *
*  V.O.I.C.E. (Virtual OS/2 International Consumer Education *
*  http://www.os2voice.org                                   *
*  Abraxas on IRC                                            *
*  http://members.iquest.net/~dcasey                         *
*  Charter Associate member, Team SETI                       *
*  Warpstock 99 in Atlanta  http://www.warpstock.org         *
**************************************************************
*  E-Mail (subject: Req. PGP Key) for Public Key             *
**************************************************************

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: V.O.I.C.E., Indianapolis, IN (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                    20-Sep-99 05:43:29
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 10:50:27
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: [e-mail] (Dan Casey)

In article <yddF3.4261$RS3.45004@ha1>, [e-mail] wrote:
>
>Any UGs up to this task?
>

VOICE is already in discussions on a similar "proposal". There are
several articles published in the newsletter from Lynn Maxson, under
the title "Warpicity Proposal". We're in the process, now, of ironing
out details and legalese "stuff". We (VOICE) are not getting into this
as strictly a "VOICE Project". We will need (and ask for) the
cooperation of many other OS/2 groups, and the project and funding
will start out as and be separate from VOICE itself.

It is our hope that at least the organizational details can be ironed
out before Warpstock 99. Stay tuned :-)

--
**************************************************************
*  Dan Casey                                                 *
*  President                                                 *
*  V.O.I.C.E. (Virtual OS/2 International Consumer Education *
*  http://www.os2voice.org                                   *
*  Abraxas on IRC                                            *
*  http://members.iquest.net/~dcasey                         *
*  Charter Associate member, Team SETI                       *
*  Warpstock 99 in Atlanta  http://www.warpstock.org         *
**************************************************************
*  E-Mail (subject: Req. PGP Key) for Public Key             *
**************************************************************

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: V.O.I.C.E., Indianapolis, IN (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                  20-Sep-99 07:56:20
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 10:50:27
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

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

Something claiming to be <[e-mail]>
little.man.tholened:

> Jim "little boy" Stuyck writes:
>
> >>> Wonder why Tholen (our very own twice-elected Kook of the Month)
> >>> hasn't commented on this?
>
> >> There is no such person, Stuyck (little boy).

Aw, you don't have to be so modest, "little man" Tholen, YOU have been
elected -- twice! -- Kook of the Month!

> > Why did YOU respond?
>
> For the same reason I respond to other articles that appear here,
> Stuyck (little boy).

And that reason is the open admission that you *know* you have twice been
elected Kook of the Month, "little man" Tholen.



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

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

From: [e-mail]                                  20-Sep-99 07:59:22
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 14:52:05
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

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

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

> > If you don't have any intention of arguing real issues, Bennie, just
> > let me know right now.  It'll make things easier on both of us.
>
> How ironic, coming from someone who admitted to playing "infantile
> games".

How doubly ironic, coming from someone who has been playing "infantile
games" (i.e., semantical) all his uselessnet life.



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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 20-Sep-99 12:24:00
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 14:52:05
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (larger)

From: [e-mail] (Mooo)

"Lennart Gahm" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>The Swedish OS/2 User Group could very well be a part of such a group.
>We would be happy to offer a warp 4.5 client to our members.
>And, if members wants to pay for fulltime support, we can set it up.
>But we are too small to carry this "world wide".
>In a first step SweOS2UG could cooperate with other scandinavian User Groups
>but i
>think all OS/2 User Groups need a global organization for this.

In my humble opinion, the basic problem in getting anything of this
type off the ground is money.  No-one wants to commit any cash until a
certain outcome is provided.

That is why I mentioned in the beginning of this thread that start up
capital would need to be viewed as 'venture capital' - in other words,
money you're willing to lose.

Now the trick is that in a corporate sense, venture capital is risked
by investors against the prospect of higher than average returns.

It is for this reason that although the major initial motivation force
could probably only be provided by one of the largest OS/2 interest
groups, it could not in fact end up being run by one.  Such a scenario
needs to provide something exceptional to the originating investors.
Whether this be permant board membership, financial gain, blah blah,
there needs to be some real and physical reason for initial investors
to plonk down their 'venture cash'.

User groups are traditionally non-profit, and this is as it should be.
Corporations are traditionally profit making and sharing, and this is
also as it should be (in a capitalist world anyway).  What really
needs to happen is for large OS/2 oriented business organisations to
get involved at some point fairly early in the proceedings (by large,
I still mean smaller than those of direct interest to IBM).

A coalition of businesses whose money making ventures rely upon Warp
Server, Warp Client and the spinoff technologies (ie, those with a
vested interest in maintaining OS/2 as a viable marketplace
alternative) would need to appear and 'buy into' the OS/2 Corporation
at an early stage.  End users of course are required also, in fact
10's of thousands of them would be ideal, but I foresee difficulty in
managing to get 10 or 20 thousand home users feeling confident enough
to throw in US$600 each in order to kick off the project.

You see immediately the difficulty with basing such a venture entirely
upon end users.  US$4-5 Million would be a realistic starting figure
to launch an OS/2 corporation, fund its initiation, wages for support
staff and enough capital to outright purchase say 10K licences of Warp
4.5 (client..??) at around say US$150.00 a shot (potentially cheaper?
I'd say so).

As I said initially, you could not wander off to IBM HQ and ask for 10
or 20 licences per month.  The Corp. would need to act as a large
financial institution would, buy the per seat licences in one huge
deal.  At that time negotiations for guarenteed support dates, fixpack
availability and access to Software Choice would also be made.

If this idea is left too late, most/all business currently earning a
living with OS/2 rollouts (or majority rollouts) will have already
moved on to find different ways to support themselves.

Now, whilst I don't necessarily view the statement by Brad Wardell of
Stardock to be the final condemnation of OS/2 Client, it does bode
badly; if for no other reason than to scare the hell out of the
remaining OS/2 ISV's and also those businesses who's livelihood
depends upon OS/2.  All businesses who want to stay in business have
to project (using known information) into the future and try to
compensate to make sure they can maximise gain in their market niche.
What this means is that we cannot afford to wait and see what happens.
By the time we get a 'yay or nay' from IBM, it will be too late - even
if sometime in late 2000 they do cave in and present us all with a new
Client.

This, I think, is where the major user groups will play a huge roll.
We need a road map, or strategy, for the next 6-12 months.  Contact
with ISV's and more importantly OS/2 based or majority based business
needs to be made and asked for a commitment - promisary at first sure,
but some basic working figures need to be thrashed out (if theres no
real interest, this is all a pipe dream).

To gain promisary indications from business, a tangible benefit needs
to be presented, by tangible, I mean other than the simple philosophic
point of view that we all wish to see OS/2 continue with a bright and
long future.  For the most part, at this early stage, I think
promisaries from end users can be ignored.  I feel that a good number,
probably enough, end users would turn up with cash in hand when a
product is actually available for sale.

Remember that a commercial product, by its very nature, needs cashflow
in order to survive.  Cashflow of the order required to fund 'OS/2
Corporation' can realistically only be provided by businesses who keep
rolling the product out into the business marketplace as solutions for
their customers.

We have the means to settle this issue once and for all.  If
sufficient support for an 'OS/2 Corporation' does not exist today, it
never will.  Should the current state of the rumor nation turn out to
be true, and IBM is not willing to retail a new Warp client, the OS/2
community will start shedding users, home users, business users at an
exponential rate starting pretty much from now.  What will be left
will be a clone of the Amiga community, with a handful of diehard
users worldwide with plenty of dreams, but no ability, and no numbers
left to put anything into action.

Craig









--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Nothing I say is my own opinion (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 13:32:29
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 14:52:05
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 04:45:27, [e-mail] (Richard Steiner)
wrote:

| Whatever is happening is strange, yes.  I suspect many of us are quite
| curious what The Real Story might be.

Indeed.

But be aware that, to find out, we'll have to gaze into the gaping maw
of IBM politics. It's entirely possible that we'll _never_ find out
what actually happened.

--Esther


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 13:37:19
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 14:52:05
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 01:15:33, Tarquelne <[e-mail]> wrote:

| I imagine that when turned
| down the Stardock rep said, "Well, are you going to do a client."
| and the IBM rep said "We have no plans at this time." and the
| statement above is simply a report of the above exchange.

I recommend you don't make additional assumptions. The waters are
already muddied... there's no reason to stir them.

Let's find out what _did_ happen, instead of speculating on what
_might_ have happened, okay?

--Esther


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                20-Sep-99 14:02:04
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 14:52:05
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (rj friedman)

On Sat, 18 Sep 1999 19:45:51, [e-mail] wrote:

ε But the IBM message was NOT a Stardock message.  The IBM message was
εthat no one, not Stardock, not IBM, not anybody would be doing an OS/2
client...

Where did you get that information from? I certainly hope it
wasn't based on Brad's statement of events. If there's one
thing I have learned from dealing with Brad in these
newsgroups, it is that he paints an EXTREMELY one sided
picture of the events that take place. A picture designed to
make his `opponents' appear completely in the wrong, and
himself completely in the right.

εI fail to see how this makes either a great villian out of Stardock or a hero
εout of IBM.  Let's face it.  IBM doesn't want a popular client; they want a
ε"tons-of-money" business system.

Said "tons-of-money" business system allowing us to reap the
benefits of updates and fixes and browsers and productivity
suites, drivers, and Java for free - or next to it.

Whoop-de-doo, let's bash IBM for concentrating on the group
of customers that bring in the money that only lets us have
the best desktop OS out there for next to nothing.

Let's all declare OS/2 dead and jump ship because Stardock
couldn't present a business plan that would convince IBM it
was worth the risk to entrust OS/2 in their hands.


________________________________________________________

[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]                                20-Sep-99 14:19:29
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 14:52:05
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (rj friedman)

On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 15:51:15, [e-mail] wrote:

εNote the wording:  "IBM has indicated that they have no plans for an OS/2
based
εclient of their own."

Note the source of that statement - it was not IBM - and
give it the credence it deserves. Hint: the individual
responsible for that statement has a rather strong
proclivity toward presenting his side of the story as the
only side.




________________________________________________________

[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]                                 20-Sep-99 19:06:01
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 20:06:15
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (larger)

From: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Mooo) writes:
>

snipped perceptive analysis >>

>To gain promisary indications from business, a tangible benefit needs
>to be presented, by tangible, I mean other than the simple philosophic
>point of view that we all wish to see OS/2 continue with a bright and
>long future.  For the most part, at this early stage, I think
>promisaries from end users can be ignored.  I feel that a good number,
>probably enough, end users would turn up with cash in hand when a
>product is actually available for sale.
>
>Remember that a commercial product, by its very nature, needs cashflow
>in order to survive.  Cashflow of the order required to fund 'OS/2
>Corporation' can realistically only be provided by businesses who keep
>rolling the product out into the business marketplace as solutions for
>their customers.
>
>We have the means to settle this issue once and for all.  If
>sufficient support for an 'OS/2 Corporation' does not exist today, it
>never will.  Should the current state of the rumor nation turn out to
>be true, and IBM is not willing to retail a new Warp client, the OS/2
>community will start shedding users, home users, business users at an
>exponential rate starting pretty much from now.  What will be left
>will be a clone of the Amiga community, with a handful of diehard
>users worldwide with plenty of dreams, but no ability, and no numbers
>left to put anything into action.
>


there's only one aspect you've not covered here, IMO - OS/2 needs to be
removed from IBM's clutches to survive in any form. No one with a brain,
and *especially* no one with OS/2 experience, business-wise or otherwise,
will ever trust IBM with their future again.  If your new corporation can
OWN OS/2 then we'd be rushing to subscribe - if we'll just be sending more
money down the IBM tubes so they can decide in two years that "customers
should be assisted to migrate to 'Plan D' . . . . ."

**** me once, shame on you
**** me twice, toss-up
**** me three times, shame on me



>Craig
>

skål !

----------------------------------------------------------
Härad Ængravvård
Windows NT - the Ornithopter of Operating Systems
-----------------------------------------------------------

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 15:56:27
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 20:06:16
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

rj friedman wrote:
>
> On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 04:03:44, Brad Barclay
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> ε    One great way to start a revolution is to force the issue.  And nothing
> εhas ever brought the OS/2 community together so quickly as has Brad
> εWardell's statement...
>
> Brad, I appreciate your ideas and respect them, but I flat
> out have to disagree with you on this. Nothing has divided
> the OS/2 community so quickly as Brad Wardell's FALSE
> portrayal of events. Nothing has ever stood to disrupt the
> OS/2 community so completely. Not anything MS ever did to
> it; not anything IBM didn't do for it; not any of the lies
> written about it in the trade rags. If Brad W's intention
> had been to deliberately set out to create havoc, he
> couldn't have succeeded more completely.

Was any of this really Brad (W's) intention?  Yes, he made the
statements in question, but he did not make them publicly originally.
Someone else posted these statements.  I think he would have preferred a
gentler, more "PC" way of making the public statement himself if he had
a choice in the matter.  That's just my gut feeling FWIW.

> εAnd bad press has been used to force companies to
> εrethink their product stances before.
>
> And the deliberate manipulation of innocent people through
> lies to attain dubious ends has been used before, as well.
> It doesn't make it any less immoral or disgusting.

What would be the motivation though?  Most OS/2 users would turn to
Linux or BeOS instead of Windoze if they felt forced to switch, so it
wouldn't benefit the Windoze software end of his business.

> ε    I'm not saying that this is something Brad Wardell is attempting, but
> εone has to admit - it is very quickly helping to mobilize the OS/2
community
> εin an attempt to decide OS/2's future, without IBM if necessary...
>
> I don't believe that for a minute - not only has his
> fabrication divided and disrupted the OS/2 community
> needlessly, but OS/2's future is determined completely by
> the large corporate customers who are footing the bill for
> it. Whatever benefits we, as SOHO type users acquire are
> merely the result of the trickle down effect. Even if you
> and I and everyone else who uses OS/2 for personal, SOHO
> style computing were to drop OS/2 tomorrow (perish the
> thought!!!), it would count zero in determining OS/2's
> future.

Do you honestly believe Brad would have a reason (personal or business)
to lie on this order of magnitude?

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 19:56:13
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 20:06:16
Subj: Re: It doesn't bother people that a new client won't be confirmed?

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

I think Jason was asking how IBM's policies affect the viability for
any ISV who wants to make a living by providing OS/2 applications.

Personally, I can't fathom how you could put a positive spin on that.

--Esther

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 15:47:38, "David T. Johnson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

| Jason Bowen wrote:
| >
| > You didn't answer how this affects ISV's and the overall OS/2 market.  If
| > the market is stagnant and people don't buy new software software isn't
| > developed for OS/2 anymore.  App availibility drives buyers.  You didn't
| > answer how it affects new purchases either.
|
| I thought you were asking about IBM's software update approach.  Your
| questions above relate to what you term a 'stagnant OS/2 market,' to new
| purchases of OS/2, and to developer support for OS/2.  By way of answer,
| software developers are interested in whether the OS/2 platform will run
| their application.  If, a particular requirement exists, such as
| 'fixpack 5 or greater,' they will specify it.  As for new purchasers of
| OS/2, customers of the client don't even care if they get a box.  They
| are buying licenses to use the software.  They will install these
| licenses with the service level and features they require.  Hope this is
| helpful.
|


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

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

From: [e-mail]                         20-Sep-99 15:29:09
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 20:06:16
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: juvenaly <[e-mail]>


rj friedman wrote:

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

Good point. Consider this too, which can be said in Big Blue' defense:
For years we've heard criticism of certain companies (guess which ones?)
for "vaporware" -- talking, for strategic reasons, about software they
had not yet released, and sometimes had no intention to release. IBM, in
refusing to divulge its plans, avoids this questionable practice. Which
makes sense, too -- because plans can always change.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 20-Sep-99 20:05:05
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 20:06:16
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]>, juvenaly <[e-mail]>
writes:
>
>
>rj friedman wrote:
>
>> It would be funny, if it weren't so ludicrous, the way so
>> many are fuming and venting, rushing to blame IBM for the
>> Stardock/Warp5 fiasco. Has it not occurred to anyone that
>> the reason Stardock was turned down was because they were
>> not able to come up with a sufficiently convincing business
>> plan that would persuade IBM it was worth their while to
>> entrust OS/2 to Stardock?
>> ________________________________________________________
>
>Good point. Consider this too, which can be said in Big Blue' defense:
>For years we've heard criticism of certain companies (guess which ones?)
>for "vaporware" -- talking, for strategic reasons, about software they
>had not yet released, and sometimes had no intention to release. IBM, in
>refusing to divulge its plans, avoids this questionable practice. Which
>makes sense, too -- because plans can always change.
>

let's not make a virtue out of this : when AJ Watson was head of IBM they
*invented* the practice of 'vaporware', to the extent that the Department
of Justice had to take them to court, do the old smoke-filled room trick.
For many years IBM *couldn't* engage in the odious practice they'd invented
entirely because of consent decrees and injunctions - not 'cuz they're lovely
folks. Seems funny that they'd get hoist on their own petard, actually . . .

honest communication seems to be beyond the abilities of *any* of
these people.


----------------------------------------------------------
Härad Ængravvård
-----------------------------------------------------------

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                20-Sep-99 16:59:09
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 20:06:16
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: Ron Vopicka <[e-mail]>

Jason Bowen wrote:
>
> Yeah you are free to belive whatever you want to make yourself feel
> better.  OS/2 out of the box right now can't install on most modern
> hardware and yet you find this ok,

Yes, you do need to install the readily available IBM1s506 update.
Pretty complex operation though, exploding a file and copying to
diskettes!

> the fixpack method is just fine with you.

A lot finer than:

a. denying there is a problem
b. finally silently fixing it
c. having the gall to sell it

> Not providing an updated client that can install out of the box on
> a machine with say a 10 gig hard drive seems to be a barrier to adoption
> to me.  You can actually order machines pre-loaded with Linux now that MS
> is under the gun but IBM isn't interested in pushing OS/2 as a pre-load
> but this is ok with you.

Who is going to preload a system that is not currently for sale.  It has
been some time since IBM removed 4.0 (client) from its salesmanual.  The
real trick seems to be just finding a box with Warp 4 in it, let alone
installed on some piece of (current) hardware.  Maybe they should
preload Warp 4.5 server for those who would like to use it... that would
only add $1400 to the cost of a system, I'm sure there is a large market
for that preload.

If IBM were to "push" an updated preload, ala MSoft, they would have to
be willing to spend many hundreds of millions of (US) $$ on installation
aids, testing (on some representative set of current (and non-current)
hardware to verify proper operation and compatibility).  How many
"onesy" customers do you suppose you would have to sell to to break even
on $2-500,000,000.?  And the large corporate customers wouldn't care.
Their systems are either doing what they were intended to (if OS/2).

How about spending another $500Mil on a good Win32 interface... that
should get microsoft to rapidly move to windows-64!

I would say someone would have to make a hellacious good business case
to make ANYONE want to bring out (and support) a new OS/2.  The customer
(quantity) is simply not there.

> IBM won't makes vague ambigous statements about OS/2 but this is ok with
you.

Better than vague, ambiguous statements about Windows that only turn out
to be vague and ambiguous when you try to install and run it.

Who knows, with a little effort MS may come up with an update that won't
even let you shutdown... that should really boost productivity.  Oops,
they've been there and done that... so much for selling tested code.

Ron

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             20-Sep-99 15:15:10
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 20:06:16
Subj: Re: Perhaps Stardock is wrong?

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>

Kendall Bennett wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
> > In a few days we'll see what Stardock and Wardell have
> > wrought with their very public announcements:  PCWeek,
> > TechWeek, ZDNet, and all the familiar commercial news
> > sites will be running full blown stories on how IBM has
> > literally killed OS/2.  The proof?  Why Brad Wardell, speaking
> > for IBM, says so.  And what will the big quote be?  Brad Wardell's
> > public statement that appears to speak for IBM when it says,
> > "IBM has indicated that they have no plans for an OS/2 based
> > client of their own."
> >
> > Brad Wardell has no authority to speak for IBM.  None.
>
> I don't usually get involved in advocacy battles, but I was quite
> surprised by Brad Wardell's announcement about the demise of an OS/2 Warp
> 5 client. Surprised because of the above quote indicating that IBM has no
> plans for a Warp 5 client.
>
> Why does this surprise me? Because it goes against the information I have
> received from people I work with closely at IBM (on developing our
> SciTech Display Doctor for OS/2 product). I have asked a couple of times
> during meetings, what the status of a Warp 5 client for OS/2 would be.
> The answer has always been something along the lines of "No Comment", or
> "We'll see". The announcement also goes against my own personal feelings
> about IBM's commitment to OS/2 (which is based on an announcement we will
> be making soon).
>
> OS/2 *has* been doing well for IBM recently, they *have* released Warp
> Server for e-Business and Workspace On Demand is doing well. It would
> seem to me that perhaps IBM is not ready for a Warp 5 client just yet.
> Their focus is after all on the business end of the OS/2 spectrum, but to
> me an updated Warp 5 client *does* make a lot of sense for IBM, but
> perhaps they are just not ready for it yet. IBM has made absolutely no
> public statements about this, and when IBM does a press release stating
> that there will never be a Warp 5 client, then I will believe it. Until
> then I personally believe IBM is biding their time until it makes sense
> to release a Warp 5 client.

Very insightful comments and I completely agree with you.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                20-Sep-99 18:01:20
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Judgement Day ... Stardock and OS/2

From: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Mooo) said:

>I dont know about this.  I keep hearing a lot of noise in general
>about how hard OS/2 is to install on 'new' hardware but as a system
integrator
>and assembler, I just don't see it.

Remember, not everyone can nor should have a long history of doing the
process.
The very fact that you do it all the time means you aren't an average user.

Jim L
Remove XX from address to Email
More gun laws will cure the nations ills - just like drug laws do.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 15:52:26
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:

> Personally I think that Brad Wardell ( trying to keep the Brads straight )
> has done a wonderful job of getting all the vocal os/2 supporters incensed
> about this supposed statement/decision by IBM.

Wardell has done that and much more.  He has single handedly
chased hundreds if not thousands of OS/2 users away from OS/2.
You consider that a wonderful job?  You are saying you think
it is great that Brad has released a "supposed statement/decision
by IBM" that has angered the most vocal OS/2 users and literally
pushed many OS/2 users away to Microsoft and other operating
systems.  I find that amazing coming from an OS/2 user.

> Prehaps it will galvanize some of the more ardent supporters of OS/2 Warp
> (in all its flavours) into banding together and putting out some public
> statements about the superiority of Warp and maybe do something to get IBM
> to make an announcement on this issue.

OS/2's most vocal supporters have always been ardent.  IBM
has always and will continue to support OS/2.  It is THEIR
operating system - not ours to tell them what to do with it.

> I've also noticed that BW has been very quiet about this thread since he
> first spawned it.

What's to say?  How does he defend himself?  He knows
if he does speak publicly he is going to be targeted for
speaking on behalf of IBM.  He threatens here to sue his
detractors if they speak ill of Stardock or Stardock's
dubious actions yet takes it upon himself to speak for
IBM - effectively declare OS/2 dead and sending IBM's
OS/2 customers (users) to other operating systems.
How much money has Brad Wardell cost IBM?  Do you
wonder at all now why IBM said no to Brad?

> Maybe both BW and IBM are trying to test the waters to see if there is any
> ardent support - thus a market base - for a new client based on WSeB.

OS/2 and related products and services will generate
millions of dollars for IBM this year alone.  They are
fully aware of the support for OS/2.  Maybe BW is angry
that IBM turned him down and is now striking out to
hurt IBM and OS/2 (and the OS/2 community as a whole).

> Afterall - if you don't succeed at first - change your marketing strategy.
>

Quite a risky marketing strategy:  declare the product dead
and chase away the most ardent supporters and advocates.

> -----------------------------------------------------------
> Kenn Sunley
> MR/2 ICE ver 1.60 reg'd
> Date: 1999.09.20
> Time: 13:10:22 - -0600
>
> Warp 4
> 233Mhz PII
> ATI Xpert@work
> Gradd Rocks - thank you IBM
> -----------------------------------------------------------




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

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

From: [e-mail]                    20-Sep-99 17:41:15
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: IBM's new gospel: OS equality

From: Jason <[e-mail]>

From ZDNet

http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2337434,00.html
===
IBM, which took the pulpit to sell itself as an OS-agnostic company when
it endorsed Java, is now going one giant step further.

With its soon-to-be-announced "client-stack" embedded OS strategy and
developerWorks portal, it will attempt to win support for its "all
operating systems are equal" religion.
===
Now, the company is giving as much development, marketing and support
time to NT, Linux, Solaris and third-party real-time operating systems as
it dedicates to OS/390 and OS/400.
===
'The phenomenon of the Internet has made the world safe for multiple
OSes.'
-- IBM Software Group GM Steve Mills
===
Mills doesn't believe CIOs want to support "an infinite number of
operating systems." But there are no OS consolidation plans in IBM's
future, he says.
===

I'm interested about comments of this article as in regards to OS/2.

-Jason

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                   20-Sep-99 21:46:19
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Judgement Day ... Stardock and OS/2

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

The dollars came from Microsoft in the form of lower Windows preloads fees.
IBM admitted in the trial that they abandoned further OS/2 clients for the
sake of better licensing fees for Windows preloads.
They didn't renounce the deal, they just admitted it.

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 17:43:22 GMT, Mooo wrote:

|[e-mail] wrote:
|
|>>>Just because IBM doesn't want to lose control of OS/2 does not mean that
OS/2
|>>>is dead.  You people read FAR too much into this.
|>>We haven't seen a lot from IBM to support this conclusion.
|>
|>And...  No one in all these threads seems to be looking at the BIG
|>PICTURE. -- A new OS2 client at this point would offer considerable proof
|>to the Gates/MS claim that there is competition, and that they do not have
|>a monopoly because OS2 is alive and well.
|
|Yes, there is a lot to be said for this idea.
|
|However, IBM generally is not talking, and when by some odd chance
|they do say something, or something leaks out, its universally
|negative.
|
|This causes and has caused a great deal of FUD (yeah, the real thing
|Fear Uncertainty and Doubt) amoungst a userbase which for several
|years has felt very alone and unloved.
|
|The idea you present is a possible reason, but I feel not really
|plausible.  Huge damages might be won, but even these would pale
|compared to the revenue lost due to stiffing so many of your loyal
|clients over the years and into the future.
|
|It would almost smack of 'cutting off your nose to spite your face' in
|fact.
|
|Anyway, this might all turn out for the best in the end.  If this type
|of fear does not bring the OS/2 community together, and have everyone
|with an interest reaching into their wallets to see what can be done
|then nothing will ever move them.
|
|If this was going to happen (apathy) then its better to kill the
|patient in a relatively quick way and not let it die slowly and
|horribly over the next few years taking far too many small/medium
|businesses with it.
|
|Its not so much Judgement Day I guess, more of a Watershed Day.  All
|those who want to be counted, stand up, and let the counting begin.
|
|Should a united financial face appear to umbrella the unwanted
|end-users of OS/2 then I suspect OS/2 will in fact have a very bright
|future indeed.  Imagine being a shareholder of one of the largest OS/2
|directorates?  The users need a driver?  Right, lets get the team onto
|the job.  Someone call IBM and let them know we need a new kernal for
|Warp 6...heh
|
|These days the world is small, globalization is in, companies are
|bigger then national governments, and the only thing guarenteed to
|make the Captains of these corporate ships sit down and take notice of
|you is to front them with a fist full of dollars :-)
|
|Craig
|
|
|
|



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

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

From: [e-mail]                    20-Sep-99 17:47:22
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: Jason <[e-mail]>

Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:

: Sadly few people participate in the Stardock news server
: (other than yourself and the regular group of Microsoft
: flakeys who live in this public newsgroup).

More constant lies from Tim Martin.  As most people already know, you
just can't be trusted.  Why don't you try telling the truth sometime, or
are you affraid people will no longer go over to warpcity to find the
scaps of news it has.

-Jason

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             20-Sep-99 15:23:06
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: IBM's new gospel: OS equality

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>

Jason wrote:
>
> From ZDNet
>
> http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2337434,00.html
> ===
> IBM, which took the pulpit to sell itself as an OS-agnostic company when
> it endorsed Java, is now going one giant step further.
>
> With its soon-to-be-announced "client-stack" embedded OS strategy and
> developerWorks portal, it will attempt to win support for its "all
> operating systems are equal" religion.
> ===
> Now, the company is giving as much development, marketing and support
> time to NT, Linux, Solaris and third-party real-time operating systems as
> it dedicates to OS/390 and OS/400.

IBM continues to be out in front on these issues.  Excellent strategy.
No operating system is suitable for every application and purpose.  Only
a company that derives most of its revenue from the sale of Windows
licenses would claim otherwise.  IBM is enabling sites to build and
operate systems that are optimized for their specific requirements.




> ===
> 'The phenomenon of the Internet has made the world safe for multiple
> OSes.'
> -- IBM Software Group GM Steve Mills
> ===
> Mills doesn't believe CIOs want to support "an infinite number of
> operating systems." But there are no OS consolidation plans in IBM's
> future, he says.
> ===
>
> I'm interested about comments of this article as in regards to OS/2.
>

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 22:34:25
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: It doesn't bother people that a new client won't be confirmed?

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 17:15:24, "David T. Johnson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

| I think Jason was asking about the impact on ISVs of IBM's OS/2 software
| updating vs releasing either a new "v5" client or a v4 client "updated"
| with the latest fixpack.  I don't see an impact on ISVs one way or the
| other.  If an ISV wants a particular version or service level for his
| app, it will be specified.  ISVs, in my opinion, are mostly interested
| in how many and what types of users/licenses there are for a particular
| platform.

ISVs are interested in selling products.

If there's a new client, there's new energy. Existing users will buy
more apps. OS/2 might get a significant number of new users, some of
whom may buy their apps.

With the status quo... well, the apps ain't selling, David.

--Esther

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

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

From: [e-mail]                    20-Sep-99 23:04:10
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <[e-mail]>,
Tim Martin  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>OS/2's most vocal supporters have always been ardent.  IBM
>has always and will continue to support OS/2.  It is THEIR
>operating system - not ours to tell them what to do with it.

... and you will always lick-up what they tell you too.  I don't notice
IBM saying anything bad about what Brad said, do you?  I don't see press
releases denouncing what he said.  It is IBM'm operating system after all.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                    20-Sep-99 23:06:19
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <[e-mail]>,
Esther Schindler <[e-mail]> wrote:
>On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 17:33:03, "David T. Johnson"
><[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>| Well???  Aren't you going to TELL us these reasons?  We're all waiting!
>| Stand and deliver, woman!
>
>In no particular order, and off the top of my head:
>
>* A new client (whether from IBM or a third party) will get press. It
>would raise the visibility of the operating system again, in the midst
>of a time when computer users are once again considering alternatives.

You mean not commiting to a new client isn't positive press?  You've got
to be kidding me.

>
>* A new client will help ISVs sell new and upgraded applications,
>because it would be a clear statement that OS/2 has a viable
>*commercial* future. (EVERY OS/2 software developer is suffering,
>right now. While there are plenty of people who love OS/2 and the
>applications they own, many wonder, "How much of a financial
>investment do I want to make in new apps for this platform?")

You're crazy, wanting to send a message like that.

>
>* A new client would presumably make the OS easier to install, without
>Fixpack City.

I already have posters in c.o.o.a that say otherwise.

>
>* A new client would sell more copies of Warp Server; client and
>server sales go hand in hand.

Well it's IBM's operating system.

>
>* A new client might include new features. You might think, "What new
>features? I have everything I need now!" but innovators don't rely on
>what people _say_ they want. Nobody shouted, "I must have a handheld
>computer or I shall surely die!" yet millions of people snarfed up
>PalmPilots because they solved a need _they didn't know they had_.

I like what I have just fine.

>
>..and that's without any deep thought. I'm sure that other people
>here, much wiser than I, could add to this list.
>
>--Esther


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                          21-Sep-99 08:22:01
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

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

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 13:10:22 -0600, [e-mail] wrote:

:>I've also noticed that BW has been very quiet about this thread since he
:>first spawned it.

Brad no longer subscribes to any of the OS/2 newsgroups.
You have to go to the Stardock server to continue discussion
on the fate of OS/2.

Cheers

Wayne

******************************************************
Wayne Bickell
Tokyo, Japan
[e-mail]
******************************************************
           Posted with PMINews 2 for OS/2
******************************************************



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: AT&T Internet Service (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                             20-Sep-99 16:15:16
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: IBM's new gospel: OS equality

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>

Jason Bowen wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>,
> David T. Johnson <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >Jason wrote:
> >>
> >> From ZDNet
> >>
> >> http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2337434,00.html
> >> ===
> >> IBM, which took the pulpit to sell itself as an OS-agnostic company when
> >> it endorsed Java, is now going one giant step further.
> >>
> >> With its soon-to-be-announced "client-stack" embedded OS strategy and
> >> developerWorks portal, it will attempt to win support for its "all
> >> operating systems are equal" religion.
> >> ===
> >> Now, the company is giving as much development, marketing and support
> >> time to NT, Linux, Solaris and third-party real-time operating systems as
> >> it dedicates to OS/390 and OS/400.
> >
> >IBM continues to be out in front on these issues.  Excellent strategy.
> >No operating system is suitable for every application and purpose.  Only
> >a company that derives most of its revenue from the sale of Windows
> >licenses would claim otherwise.  IBM is enabling sites to build and
> >operate systems that are optimized for their specific requirements.
> >
>
> Wasn't WORA the gospel not to long ago?  Java was gonna equalize and make
> all platforms suitable for everything as I recall, or read in this
> newsgroup.
>
It is Java and WORA that is a key part of the IBM strategy described.
Read here:

http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayStory.pl?990920.ecibmtools.htm

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 22:32:13
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 17:33:03, "David T. Johnson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

| Well???  Aren't you going to TELL us these reasons?  We're all waiting!
| Stand and deliver, woman!

In no particular order, and off the top of my head:

* A new client (whether from IBM or a third party) will get press. It
would raise the visibility of the operating system again, in the midst
of a time when computer users are once again considering alternatives.

* A new client will help ISVs sell new and upgraded applications,
because it would be a clear statement that OS/2 has a viable
*commercial* future. (EVERY OS/2 software developer is suffering,
right now. While there are plenty of people who love OS/2 and the
applications they own, many wonder, "How much of a financial
investment do I want to make in new apps for this platform?")

* A new client would presumably make the OS easier to install, without
Fixpack City.

* A new client would sell more copies of Warp Server; client and
server sales go hand in hand.

* A new client might include new features. You might think, "What new
features? I have everything I need now!" but innovators don't rely on
what people _say_ they want. Nobody shouted, "I must have a handheld
computer or I shall surely die!" yet millions of people snarfed up
PalmPilots because they solved a need _they didn't know they had_.

..and that's without any deep thought. I'm sure that other people
here, much wiser than I, could add to this list.

--Esther

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 23:16:29
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Judgement Day ... Stardock and OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Frank)

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 22:07:55, [e-mail] wrote:

> More gun laws will cure the nations ills - just like drug laws do.

No gun laws will cure any overpopulation, just like drugs do.

Frank

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


Reply per Email to [e-mail]

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 23:12:03
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Frank)

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 20:59:19, Ron Vopicka <[e-mail]> wrote:

> If IBM were to "push" an updated preload, ala MSoft, they would have to
> be willing to spend many hundreds of millions of (US) $$ on installation
> aids, testing (on some representative set of current (and non-current)
> hardware to verify proper operation and compatibility).  How many
> "onesy" customers do you suppose you would have to sell to to break even
> on $2-500,000,000.?  And the large corporate customers wouldn't care.
> Their systems are either doing what they were intended to (if OS/2).
>
> Ron

If they had been doing this from the beginning, the costs wouldn't be
so high !!
IBM has a lot to catch up with if the go pushing os/2 in the market as
a consumer
product against the redmond gadget.


Frank

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


Reply per Email to [e-mail]

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                20-Sep-99 18:17:26
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail]

Craig Benbow <[e-mail]> said:

>Of course you can install OS/2 on a drive bigge than 8.4 megs.  All thats
>needed is updated install disks!

Precisely.  That and how many other things have to be fritzed around with to
make it somewhere near up to date and functional?  Which is why guru, nerd,
computer genius, hackers love OS/2 and ordinary users tolerate it.

Jim L
Remove XX from address to Email
More gun laws will cure the nations ills - just like drug laws do.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                20-Sep-99 17:51:04
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Judgement Day ... Stardock and OS/2

From: [e-mail]

[e-mail] said:

>If I was sitting in IBM would I want to give the farm away now -- When
>somewhere down the line there could be a ruling against MS

Somewhere down the line?  When MS loses?  Is that what is holding OS/2 back?
This is supposed to convince me that IBM is wringing their hands, just dying
to
release a Warp 5 client?  Or - by then - WARP 2010?

If I had any money I'd bet it all that IBM won't make OS/2 what it COULD be
even
if MS does lose.  Mean while the OS/2 community goes begging for an
installable
version of it.  Of course we all must remember that the suits at IBM cry
themselves to sleep over it - each and every night.

Jim L
Remove XX from address to Email
More gun laws will cure the nations ills - just like drug laws do.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 22:42:17
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: A public thank-you to the Warp Expo West organizers

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

The "client issue" is throwing everybody off, I think, but let's get a
little closer to earth.

What we _do_ know, right now, is that a few hundred OS/2 users had the
opportunity to gather together in Southern California last weekend.
They were able to attend presentations by technical experts, they
could see OS/2 applications demonstrated, and they could, by golly,
have a chance to *talk* with each other, and know that they're not
alone.

I'd like to publicly thank the volunteers and members of the Southern
California OS/2 User Group, who put together Warp Expo West. By any
measure you could use, the event was an outstanding success. They did
_everything_ right, from the big things (like finding a gorgeous
venue, and lining up a speaker roster that had people cussing "But I
want to go to *BOTH* of those!") to the little details that make
people feel special (like chocolate chip cookies in the exhibit hall).
I spent the day talking with OS/2 users, and  I came home emotionally
invigorated and physically exhausted.

I want to express my personal appreciation for all the work SCOUG did.
They're a class act.

--Esther

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            20-Sep-99 19:49:13
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (David H. McCoy)

In article <7s5gr6$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
>Yeah you are free to belive whatever you want to make yourself feel
>better.  OS/2 out of the box right now can't install on most modern
>hardware and yet you find this ok, the fixpack method is just fine with
>you.  Not providing an updated client that can install out of the box on
>a machine with say a 10 gig hard drive seems to be a barrier to adoption
>to me.  You can actually order machines pre-loaded with Linux now that MS
>is under the gun but IBM isn't interested in pushing OS/2 as a pre-load
>but this is ok with you.  IBM won't makes vague ambigous statements about
>OS/2 but this is ok with you.
>
>In article <[e-mail]>,
>rj friedman <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>It would be funny, if it weren't so ludicrous, the way so
>>many are fuming and venting, rushing to blame IBM for the
>>Stardock/Warp5 fiasco. Has it not occurred to anyone that
>>the reason Stardock was turned down was because they were
>>not able to come up with a sufficiently convincing business
>>plan that would persuade IBM it was worth their while to
>>entrust OS/2 to Stardock?
>>
>>________________________________________________________
>>
>>[RJ]                 OS/2 - Live it, or live with it.
>>rj friedman          Team ABW
>>Taipei, Taiwan       [e-mail]
>>
>>To send email - remove the `yyy'
>>________________________________________________________
>>
>
>
>

Welcome to the world of OS/2 advocacy.

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                20-Sep-99 18:23:22
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail]

"Barry Bryan" <[e-mail]> said:

>:>OS/2 can't install on a hard drive greater than 8.4 megs.

>It was just as well that I didn't know that when I installed on a 20GB drive.
>   Of course I did have to turn LBA on in the BIOS.

Straight out of the box.  Right?  If IBM had a completely up to date CD and
someone else didn't, people would say IBM was "with it" and that other someone
was in the dark ages.  As it is, IBM is the one who is behind.  You can make a
call with a dial telephone.  But how would it go over if all phones were dial
phones that came with instructions for changing them to push button?

Jim L
Remove XX from address to Email
More gun laws will cure the nations ills - just like drug laws do.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                    20-Sep-99 18:42:19
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Dan Casey)

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Esther Schindler) wrote:
>On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 01:15:33, Tarquelne <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>| I imagine that when turned
>| down the Stardock rep said, "Well, are you going to do a client."
>| and the IBM rep said "We have no plans at this time." and the
>| statement above is simply a report of the above exchange.
>
>I recommend you don't make additional assumptions. The waters are
>already muddied... there's no reason to stir them.
>
>Let's find out what _did_ happen, instead of speculating on what
>_might_ have happened, okay?
>
>--Esther

I agree 110% with Esther on this. There is already  too much
speculation, and too many conflicting reports on this subject as it
is.

I have several e-mail  messages awaiting replies from "those who
should know", and I'll post something when I get straight and factual
answers. Until then, I'll keep my opinions and info to myself. As soon
as I know,  you  all will  know.



--
**************************************************************
*  Dan Casey                                                 *
*  President                                                 *
*  V.O.I.C.E. (Virtual OS/2 International Consumer Education *
*  http://www.os2voice.org                                   *
*  Abraxas on IRC                                            *
*  http://members.iquest.net/~dcasey                         *
*  Charter Associate member, Team SETI                       *
*  Warpstock 99 in Atlanta  http://www.warpstock.org         *
**************************************************************
*  E-Mail (subject: Req. PGP Key) for Public Key             *
**************************************************************

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: V.O.I.C.E., Indianapolis, IN (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                20-Sep-99 13:27:07
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Judgement Day ... Stardock and OS/2

From: [e-mail] (rj friedman)

On Sat, 18 Sep 1999 00:19:20, Britton Robbins
<[e-mail]> wrote:

εSo what!
»
εI personally am glad that IBM did not license out OS/2.
εIt's fine if people like the Stardock products but I, for one, prefer the
simplicity
εof the standard Workplace Shell on Warp4...

εJust because IBM doesn't want to lose control of OS/2 does not mean that OS/2
is
εdead.  You people read FAR too much into this.


I guess I am going to be guilty of a ME TOO post, but here
goes anyway. I agree with you 100%.


εI just read an article from the same ZDNet that some other person was quoting
ε"OS/2's dead" articles dating back to 1997.   The article I read was dated
September
ε2, 1999 by Esther Schindler titled "Shhh!, OS/2 is selling better than
expected"


εDan Casey wrote:
»
ε> Well, like it or not, here's the scoop from Brad:

Well, judging from past behavior, the `scoop' from Brad is
bound to be an extremely one sided portrayal of whatever did
or did not take place. Whatever IBM's reasons were for not
wanting to deal with Brad and Stardock, you can be sure that
you won't learn them from Brad's `scoop'.



________________________________________________________

[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]                    20-Sep-99 14:38:27
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Judgement Day ... Stardock and OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <[e-mail]>,
rj friedman <[e-mail]> wrote:
>On Sat, 18 Sep 1999 03:20:23, [e-mail]
>(John Hong) wrote:
>
>»... If anything, I think a few people are reading
>»too much into OS/2's success...
>
>I don't know about that. OS/2's success in the enterprise
>means that I will continue to get the fixpacks/updates that
>have been coming at me - for free, I might add - as a result
>of the trickle down. Plus all the business productivity
>software that I need to earn my living - for free, or next
>to it.

Makes it a pain to install on new hardware heh?  Why doesn't IBM care
about that?

>
>
>» I mean, OS/2 makes money for IBM and IBM
>»only...
>
>I don't know about that, either. As a small business user,
>OS/2 makes money for ME - and quite nicely, thank you.
>
>
>»I don't know about you, but I'm not seeing Corel porting their
>»WordPerfect suite over to OS/2....
>
>We've already got two suites - one of which is absolutely
>free - that are just as functional as anything else out
>there. We don't NEED Corel to port their WordPerfect suite
>over to OS/2 in order to be productive.
>
>
>»I don't see RealPlayer for OS/2.  I
>»don't see Civilization being ported over to OS/2...
>
>As a business user, I don't care about RealPlayer for OS/2,
>much less about Civilization (or any other games). If those
>things are important to you, then OS/2 (alone) is not the OS
>for you. As such, you can either dual boot (if there are
>still some aspects of OS/2 you would rather not give up), or
>switch to something else altogether. Either way - because
>OS/2 is successful in the enterprise - it will make no
>difference to the continued viability of OS/2.
>
>
>»In fact, if anything
>»we're losing ISV's.  Innoval and TrueSpectra are the two latest
>»casualties...
>
>In both cases, there is no way that either one could compete
>with the free products that are filling their niches. Two
>fully featured Java base mailers were recently released -
>both of them for free, for example. It's too bad - I feel
>that Innoval's and Dan Porter's contributions were top
>notch. But they are (IMO ) the first in a series of victims
>to the new paradigm in software that will take place across
>all the platforms.
>
>»As long
>»as OS/2 remains a minor niche role for IBM, I fear we will lose more and
>»more OS/2 ISV's...
>
>I don't think this is a phenomenon strictly limited to OS/2.
>There is a paradigm shift going on in the way software is
>conceived of and delivered - i.e., free (mostly), over the
>internet. Because OS/2 is on the edge, it feels the pinch
>first. But make no mistake, this will happen to all of the
>platforms over the next 5 years.
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________
>
>[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: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                20-Sep-99 09:58:23
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Esther Schindler) said:

>It's entirely possible that we'll _never_ find out
>what actually happened.

And it's entirely possible we'll never see another OS/2 client without
shelling
out $1000 each.

Jim L
Remove XX from address to Email
More gun laws will cure the nations ills - just like drug laws do.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                20-Sep-99 09:54:18
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: [e-mail]

"Lennart Gahm" <[e-mail]> said:

>In a first step SweOS2UG could cooperate with other scandinavian User Groups
>but i think all OS/2 User Groups need a global organization for this.

Well, go ahead and name one.  We desperately need more inane bashing threads.

Jim L
Remove XX from address to Email
More gun laws will cure the nations ills - just like drug laws do.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 13:49:02
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Credibility

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 03:40:21, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:

| This year several Warp City members have
| nearly begged us to buy a booth at Warpstock, even promised
| to pay for it and generate a few hundred Warp City logo T-shirts
| but we asked them not to.  They are certainly welcome to announce
| their affilation with Warp City.  Many people don't because
| they've seen what has happened to others who have
| publicly stepped forward.  Who needs the harassment?

Ah, I see, you admit it. You don't have the courage to face those who
disagree with you.

While two of the Ziff Davis writers you decry (and a third editor,
who's the author of one of the WSfeB reviews) had no problem with
appearing on a panel in front of those same users.

--Esther

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 20-Sep-99 09:51:06
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Marty wrote:
>
> Bennie Nelson wrote:
> >
> > I believe I have responded to real issues.
>
> That's all I need to know.  Thanks.
>
> [plonk!]
>
> - Marty

I wonder what he thought I meant?

Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                    20-Sep-99 14:42:11
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Judgement Day ... Stardock and OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <[e-mail]>,
rj friedman <[e-mail]> wrote:
>On Sat, 18 Sep 1999 00:19:20, Britton Robbins
><[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>»So what!
>»
>»I personally am glad that IBM did not license out OS/2.
>»It's fine if people like the Stardock products but I, for one, prefer the
simplicity
>»of the standard Workplace Shell on Warp4...
>
>»Just because IBM doesn't want to lose control of OS/2 does not mean that
OS/2 is
>»dead.  You people read FAR too much into this.

Grab a nice new machine with a 13 gig hard drive and other assorted new
hardware and install that copy of V4 without having to jump through hoops.
Why would someobody put their head in the sand and not believe that
something is up if IBM doesn't care about installing out of the box on new
hardware?

>
>
>I guess I am going to be guilty of a ME TOO post, but here
>goes anyway. I agree with you 100%.
>
>
>»I just read an article from the same ZDNet that some other person was
quoting
>»"OS/2's dead" articles dating back to 1997.   The article I read was dated
September
>»2, 1999 by Esther Schindler titled "Shhh!, OS/2 is selling better than
expected"
>
>
>»Dan Casey wrote:
>»
>»> Well, like it or not, here's the scoop from Brad:
>
>Well, judging from past behavior, the `scoop' from Brad is
>bound to be an extremely one sided portrayal of whatever did
>or did not take place. Whatever IBM's reasons were for not
>wanting to deal with Brad and Stardock, you can be sure that
>you won't learn them from Brad's `scoop'.

Yeah because Brad wants OS/2 to die right?  He is trying to get IBM to put
a modern client out and they don't want to and you people find this good.
Did you all suffer abuse as a child?

>
>
>
>________________________________________________________
>
>[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: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                 20-Sep-99 09:48:20
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Jeff Glatt wrote:
>
> >Bennie Nelson
> >Your corollary does not allow for those who won't bet because they oppose
> >betting on moral grounds.
>
> Steven's stock market speculation in this newsgroup is "immoral
> gambling"???

Jeff,
While I did not say that, nor do I believe that, some people do
believe that.  There are people who believe that playing card
games is sin.  There are some people, the Amish, who do not
use electricity for the same reason.

While I do not subscribe to any of these beliefs, there people
who sincerely hold such beliefs and act accordingly.  The point
I was trying to make about Den Beste's quotation of a certain
aphorism that referenced using wagers as a means of determining
expertise is that it is flawed because it is exclusionary.

>
> Ok, are there *any* OS/2 users in this newsgroup who aren't part of
> some weird religious-political cult of kooks?

Name any who are, Jeff.  Also, name the specific cult(s) and
give years of membership in the same.

Regards,
Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 07:53:00
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Jason wrote:

> Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
> : Jason wrote:
>
> :> Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
> :>
> :> : You'll notice Stardock has suddenly gone mum.
> :>
> :> I'll notice that there has been constant posting by stardock on their
> :> news server, including this very day.  And yes, some of it about you Tim.
> :>
> :> -Jason
>
> : And Warp City has a conference forum too.  I guess we web
> : masters just keep it all 'in house' so the public doesn't get wind,
> : right?
>
> I don't know who's we Tim, I keep things open to the public.  As for
> Stardock, they stated that they were moving all discusions they were in
> involving to the Stardock news server.  People are quite free to go read
> them at news.stardock.com  in the newsgroup stardock.os2  I know you know
> open that newsgroup.  They did this, because they were sick of always
> countering what you said and then having their counter arguements called
> Spam by you.  It was probably a wise decision, since you are still trying
> to get mileage out of miscalling their posts spam.
>
> -Jason

No, they did it because Brad is such a poor public poster.
His worthless threats, his derogatory comments, his constant
never ending spam was (and continues) to cause too much
harm to their bottom line.  The negative publicity against
Stardock generated by Brad alone has forced them to
their own news server where they could better control the
content and keep Brad's faux pas out of the limelight.

Sadly few people participate in the Stardock news server
(other than yourself and the regular group of Microsoft
flakeys who live in this public newsgroup).

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                20-Sep-99 10:03:07
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail]

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

>Longer term we may need to put pressure on IBM to get an
>(affordable way to) upgrade.

Affordable is precisely where IBM will never go.

Jim L
Remove XX from address to Email
More gun laws will cure the nations ills - just like drug laws do.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 08:09:09
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Dan Casey wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]>,
> Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> >P.S.  Why are we now hearing the meeting didn't take
> >place with Brad specifically said it did?  Whom are we
> >to believe here?
>
> The report that "no meeting took place" was posted to the news page at
> os2.org, and was attributed to an IBMer speaking at Warp Expo West on
> Saturday, the 18th.

That report was published *verbatim* from Warp City without
our approval or authorization.

> I've been in contact with someone who attended
> this presenataion, and reported what he had heard.

And our reporter talked directly to the IBMer who made
the statement which is why we reported the news to Warp
City members.

> I am awaiting
> confirmation from the IBMer before I post anything else. While I
> believe the information  I have to be correct, I'd prefer to get
> confirmation and clarification, rather than risk starting unfounded
> rumors.

That same IBMer said much more on the subject but we haven't
reported it publicly because it is news we want to hold to our
vest for the time being.

> The information that I posted earlier came directly from Timothy
> Sipples, in a personal e-mail, and was quoted verbatim. He also added
> that he was "in the dark" as to the rest of the details.
>

And our German counterpart also spoke with Timothy Sipples
in a private email.

> If I get a response to my post for more information, I'll post it
> here, and to various other sites such as [e-mail] and
> Warpcast.

Thank you.

>
> --
> **************************************************************
> *  Dan Casey                                                 *
> *  President                                                 *
> *  V.O.I.C.E. (Virtual OS/2 International Consumer Education *
> *  http://www.os2voice.org                                   *
> *  Abraxas on IRC                                            *
> *  http://members.iquest.net/~dcasey                         *
> *  Charter Associate member, Team SETI                       *
> *  Warpstock 99 in Atlanta  http://www.warpstock.org         *
> **************************************************************
> *  E-Mail (subject: Req. PGP Key) for Public Key             *
> **************************************************************




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

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

From: [e-mail]                                20-Sep-99 14:12:18
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (rj friedman)

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

________________________________________________________

[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]                                20-Sep-99 15:08:08
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Perhaps Stardock is wrong?

From: [e-mail] (rj friedman)

On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 18:28:49, [e-mail]
(Kendall Bennett) wrote:


εI don't usually get involved in advocacy battles, but I was quite
εsurprised by Brad Wardell's announcement about the demise of an OS/2 Warp
ε5 client. Surprised because of the above quote indicating that IBM has no
εplans for a Warp 5 client.
»
εWhy does this surprise me? Because it goes against the information I have
εreceived from people I work with closely at IBM

From my own dealings with Brad Wardell in cooa, I have found
him to be of a vindictive nature; an individual who will
tell the tale in such a way as to embellish his side of the
story and stab the poison dart into the back of those he
considers his `enemies'. I can only surmise that when IBM
turned him down, this was his way of getting even.




________________________________________________________

[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]                    20-Sep-99 15:10:20
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <[e-mail]>,
rj friedman <[e-mail]> wrote:
>On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 04:03:44, Brad Barclay
><[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>»    One great way to start a revolution is to force the issue.  And nothing
>»has ever brought the OS/2 community together so quickly as has Brad
>»Wardell's statement...
>
>Brad, I appreciate your ideas and respect them, but I flat
>out have to disagree with you on this. Nothing has divided
>the OS/2 community so quickly as Brad Wardell's FALSE
>portrayal of events. Nothing has ever stood to disrupt the
>OS/2 community so completely. Not anything MS ever did to
>it; not anything IBM didn't do for it; not any of the lies
>written about it in the trade rags. If Brad W's intention
>had been to deliberately set out to create havoc, he
>couldn't have succeeded more completely.

IBM won't put out a new client that will easily install on modern
hardware, is that a false portrayal?  You really don't care that IBM
doesn't care do you?  After all all you need are fixpacks that work for
the currently installed user base.  That doesn't grow a userbase or ensure
future support.

>
>
>»And bad press has been used to force companies to
>»rethink their product stances before.
>
>And the deliberate manipulation of innocent people through
>lies to attain dubious ends has been used before, as well.
>It doesn't make it any less immoral or disgusting.
>
>
>»    I'm not saying that this is something Brad Wardell is attempting, but
>»one has to admit - it is very quickly helping to mobilize the OS/2 community
>»in an attempt to decide OS/2's future, without IBM if necessary...
>
>I don't believe that for a minute - not only has his
>fabrication divided and disrupted the OS/2 community
>needlessly, but OS/2's future is determined completely by
>the large corporate customers who are footing the bill for
>it. Whatever benefits we, as SOHO type users acquire are
>merely the result of the trickle down effect. Even if you
>and I and everyone else who uses OS/2 for personal, SOHO
>style computing were to drop OS/2 tomorrow (perish the
>thought!!!), it would count zero in determining OS/2's
>future.
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________
>
>[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: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                    20-Sep-99 14:37:13
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

Yeah you are free to belive whatever you want to make yourself feel
better.  OS/2 out of the box right now can't install on most modern
hardware and yet you find this ok, the fixpack method is just fine with
you.  Not providing an updated client that can install out of the box on
a machine with say a 10 gig hard drive seems to be a barrier to adoption
to me.  You can actually order machines pre-loaded with Linux now that MS
is under the gun but IBM isn't interested in pushing OS/2 as a pre-load
but this is ok with you.  IBM won't makes vague ambigous statements about
OS/2 but this is ok with you.

In article <[e-mail]>,
rj friedman <[e-mail]> wrote:
>It would be funny, if it weren't so ludicrous, the way so
>many are fuming and venting, rushing to blame IBM for the
>Stardock/Warp5 fiasco. Has it not occurred to anyone that
>the reason Stardock was turned down was because they were
>not able to come up with a sufficiently convincing business
>plan that would persuade IBM it was worth their while to
>entrust OS/2 to Stardock?
>
>________________________________________________________
>
>[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: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                20-Sep-99 14:55:05
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: OS/2 Death Knell!

From: [e-mail] (rj friedman)

On Fri, 17 Sep 1999 22:10:30, "Robert Gehrig"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

εIBM gets a lot of money up front, and a steady income stream from Stardock.
εSomeelse is doing the work.
ε
εWhat other compelling reasons do they need.

OTOH, they would be entrusting their valuable product to
Stardock and its President, Brad Wardell. Obviously, Brad
and company were unable to present a sufficiently compelling
business plan to convince IBM to go through with such an
entrustment. Considering the way Brad behaves here in cooa,
it might not be surprising that IBM would have reservations




________________________________________________________

[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]                               20-Sep-99 07:56:20
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Credibility

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Tarquelne wrote:

> >> but I've never knowingly met a Warp City
> >> memeber,
> >
> >Yes you have, you just don't know it.  I see them in these
> >newsgroups all the time.
>
> Tim!  Helllo!  It's statments like the above that make me wonder
> about you.

Wonder is a *GOOD* thing.  Keep doing it.

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                 20-Sep-99 11:35:28
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> In article <7s1590$mhm$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
> >
> >Sure. Will new device drivers be produced?
> >Absolutely.
>
> But in numbers needed to keep up with new hardware?
> No.

If you are saying all new PC hardware devices, then you are correct.  You are
quite wrong in saying that not enough new hardware will be supported.  I just
built a brand new system using a just-released motherboard and an AMD K6-III
400.  The printer is the recently released Lexmark Z51.  Matrox and 3dfx video
cards, and a Turtle Beach sound card round out the system.  Of course, the
3dfx card is for Windows games and not OS/2.  Not a problem.  Given the
notoriously bad stability of Win32-based games, I'm just as glad that OS/2
doesn't have to clean up each time a game crashes the system.

>
> >Will new applications be developed? Yes.
>
> But in numbers needed to attract or even retain users?
> No.

Enough to retain this user.

Regards,
Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 08:03:15
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Brad Barclay wrote:

> Tim Martin wrote:
>
> > The question arises: why was such a statement made?
> > Was it merely a miswording?  A mistake borne of the
> > writer?  Or puposely worded to cause the current reaction
> > we are all seeing - the anger at IBM, the flood of posts
> > declaring the flee to Linux or other operating systems,
> > the businessmen posting their new decisions to drop
> > OS/2 Warp Server, etc.  Was it purposely worded to force
> > IBM to rescind their unfavorable decision and give
> > Stardock what Brad wants?
>
>     Tim, you could never be the leader of a revolution.  Che would be very
> disappointed :).
>
>     One great way to start a revolution is to force the issue.  And nothing
> has ever brought the OS/2 community together so quickly as has Brad
> Wardell's statement.  And bad press has been used to force companies to
> rethink their product stances before.

You miss the other side of the coin.  Nothing has ever brought so
many in the OS/2 community to run away from OS/2 either.  Brad
may have single handedly whittled OS/2 users down by half and
for his own (Company's) benefit.  OS/2 users should run away
from Brad Wardell and Stardock as quickly as possible.  This is
not a good leader to follow it is a greedy self-serving child.

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                20-Sep-99 14:36:14
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (rj friedman)

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 04:03:44, Brad Barclay
<[e-mail]> wrote:

ε    One great way to start a revolution is to force the issue.  And nothing
εhas ever brought the OS/2 community together so quickly as has Brad
εWardell's statement...

Brad, I appreciate your ideas and respect them, but I flat
out have to disagree with you on this. Nothing has divided
the OS/2 community so quickly as Brad Wardell's FALSE
portrayal of events. Nothing has ever stood to disrupt the
OS/2 community so completely. Not anything MS ever did to
it; not anything IBM didn't do for it; not any of the lies
written about it in the trade rags. If Brad W's intention
had been to deliberately set out to create havoc, he
couldn't have succeeded more completely.


εAnd bad press has been used to force companies to
εrethink their product stances before.

And the deliberate manipulation of innocent people through
lies to attain dubious ends has been used before, as well.
It doesn't make it any less immoral or disgusting.


ε    I'm not saying that this is something Brad Wardell is attempting, but
εone has to admit - it is very quickly helping to mobilize the OS/2 community
εin an attempt to decide OS/2's future, without IBM if necessary...

I don't believe that for a minute - not only has his
fabrication divided and disrupted the OS/2 community
needlessly, but OS/2's future is determined completely by
the large corporate customers who are footing the bill for
it. Whatever benefits we, as SOHO type users acquire are
merely the result of the trickle down effect. Even if you
and I and everyone else who uses OS/2 for personal, SOHO
style computing were to drop OS/2 tomorrow (perish the
thought!!!), it would count zero in determining OS/2's
future.





________________________________________________________

[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]                                     20-Sep-99 15:02:07
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Mirosoft paid for "independent" ads

From: Mirage Media <[e-mail]>

http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-202-121243.html

Ya gotta love'm.......

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: Mirage Media (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                 20-Sep-99 10:57:12
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Esther Schindler wrote:
>
> On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 06:28:29, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> | It was reported today at Warp Expo West that IBM will make
> | $100,000 million from ALL OS/2 this year.  It was also reported
> | that IBM is spending some $12million on drivers and other
> | OS/2 enhancements.  IBM has committed to support OS/2 until
> | the year 2009.
>
> None of which translates into "a new Warp client."
>
Esther,

"New Warp client" is used quite frequently by many in the newsgroups
and other places.  It seems that the main reasons for desiring a new
client are:

1) consolidating the various updates to the OS, Java, Communicator, and
the latest device drivers;

2) incorporating Warp Server functionality, such as, SMP, JFS, and
HPFS386;

3) improving the OS or some of its main components (examples, the
multimedia subsystem and the browser); and

4) providing support for WIN32-based games.

Item one is mainly for the sake of convenience.  I have built and/or
upgraded a number of OS/2 systems over the past year, and the process
of installing a fresh copy of the OS is somewhat lengthened and
complicated by the need to install a fixpak after the install is
done.  Also, having to download the latest Netscape browser is also
time consuming.  However, as a pioneer <g>, I really do not mind the
bit of extra effort it takes, because I know the rewards are worth
that effort.  Parenthetically, I have also had to deal with quite a
number of Windows systems in the past year, and so I am constantly
reminded of how poorly designed that family of OSes really is.

Item two is a bit tougher, because those features are available, but
for a rather high price.  If I want them and have the money, I can
purchase Warp Server.

Item three is the toughest.  IBM is improving the OS and various
components, most notably, Communicator, but fixing the multimedia
subsystem is not a high priority.  There are also key browser
plugins that could be added (Real Player, for example).  This
would seem to be the area where enterprising and industrious
members of the OS/2 programming community could be of service
to the OS/2 SOHO install base.  I have seen some efforts in this
area, but there seems to be quite a void that has yet to be filled.

Item four can be addressed by simply using boot manager and
a copy of Windows.  While this may be heretical, it is quite
effective.  It also keeps the games and their inherent instability
from crashing OS/2.  One caveat, if this solution is adopted, do
not succumb to the temptation of accessing the Web from Windows.
Just don't do it, man!  It's a gnarly 'Net for the Windows user <g>.

Thanks for reading,
Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                20-Sep-99 07:19:18
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: While you're at it...

From: [e-mail] (Jerry McBride)

While everyone is busy jumping around about OS/2 and Stardocks big lie...

I just managed to get caught up on some reading on a the Linux Weekly News and
here's an interesting article a lot of us (you) probably missed...

http://lwn.net/daily/esr-cracked.html

Basically, it explains what happend with that MicroSoft "You can't touch 'dis"
challange it made with W2k and why it even happend.

Yeah... W2k... just what the industry needs... the support industry, that
is...

--

*******************************************************************************

*            Sometimes, the BEST things in life really ARE free...
*
*       Get a FREE copy of NetRexx 1.150 for your next java project at:
*
*                     http://www2.hursley.ibm.com/netrexx
*
*******************************************************************************


/----------------------------------------\
| From the desktop of: Jerome D. McBride |
|         [e-mail]             |
\----------------------------------------/

--

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                19-Sep-99 22:55:18
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: OS/2 Death Knell!

From: [e-mail] (Jerry McBride)

In article <[e-mail]>,
Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:

--- one big snip ---

>IBM did the right thing.  They saved OS/2 from Stardock.
>That's compelling enough.
>
>Tim Martin
>The OS/2 Guy
>Warp City
>http://warpcity.com
>"E-ride the wild surf to Warp City!"
>

I agree with Tim on this one. It could have been one huge foul-up in the
making. I'm not knocking Stardock, but I'd rather leave things as they lay
than to take a chance on a small ISV to sell OS/2 to the general public...

Besides, if Stardock got it, then there really would be no chance for an open
source license for OS/2. Stardock would HAVE to sell copies to pay for their
IBM bills...



--

*******************************************************************************

*            Sometimes, the BEST things in life really ARE free...
*
*       Get a FREE copy of NetRexx 1.150 for your next java project at:
*
*                     http://www2.hursley.ibm.com/netrexx
*
*******************************************************************************


/----------------------------------------\
| From the desktop of: Jerome D. McBride |
|         [e-mail]             |
\----------------------------------------/

--

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

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

From: [e-mail]                    20-Sep-99 15:11:20
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <[e-mail]>,
Tim Martin  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Brad Barclay wrote:
>
>> Tim Martin wrote:
>>
>> > The question arises: why was such a statement made?
>> > Was it merely a miswording?  A mistake borne of the
>> > writer?  Or puposely worded to cause the current reaction
>> > we are all seeing - the anger at IBM, the flood of posts
>> > declaring the flee to Linux or other operating systems,
>> > the businessmen posting their new decisions to drop
>> > OS/2 Warp Server, etc.  Was it purposely worded to force
>> > IBM to rescind their unfavorable decision and give
>> > Stardock what Brad wants?
>>
>>     Tim, you could never be the leader of a revolution.  Che would be very
>> disappointed :).
>>
>>     One great way to start a revolution is to force the issue.  And nothing
>> has ever brought the OS/2 community together so quickly as has Brad
>> Wardell's statement.  And bad press has been used to force companies to
>> rethink their product stances before.
>
>You miss the other side of the coin.  Nothing has ever brought so
>many in the OS/2 community to run away from OS/2 either.  Brad
>may have single handedly whittled OS/2 users down by half and
>for his own (Company's) benefit.  OS/2 users should run away
>from Brad Wardell and Stardock as quickly as possible.  This is
>not a good leader to follow it is a greedy self-serving child.

... and yet IBM lets it languish and won't provide an updated client for
sale.

>
>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: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                20-Sep-99 15:14:16
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: [e-mail] (rj friedman)

On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 17:48:14, Brad Barclay
<[e-mail]> wrote:

ε    In short, the figure is very misleading.  Besides which, the point is not
that
εIBM is or isn't making a profit from OS/2 - it's wether or not there is going
to be
εa new fat client version...

For me, that isn't the point at all - the point for me is
whether or not OS/2 will continue to be viable as a means
for me to earn my living - and it will - fat client or no
fat client.


  And right now, based on all publicly available info, as
εthe magic 8 ball says "all indications point to no".

Frankly, as long as the fixpacks/updates keep coming; as
long as the java keeps coming; as long as the drivers keep
coming; as long as the Star Offices/SmartSuites keep coming;
I could care less.


________________________________________________________

[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]                               20-Sep-99 07:55:19
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Credibility

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

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

> > Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> [ .. ]
>
> > You don't have to believe it at all.  We don't advertise Warp
> > City.  It is my job to monitor and assist in these newsgroups
> > and that's the only reason you hear about it.
>
> Hmmm. ... monitoring is of course OK. But to whom can we
> complain about the error in judgement introducing into your
> job-description you having to "assist in these newsgroups"?
>
> Regards from Leeuwarden
> Peter van Dobben de Bruijn
> ---
> usethenet.at.the-net-4u.com (at becomes @)
> ----

Call your momma.

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 13:00:27
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Jeff Glatt wrote:
>
> >>>Gerben Bergman
> >>>Why is it that OS/2 users are always this unlucky when trying out
Windows?
>
> >>Jeff Glatt
> >>I don't think that it's quite as much luck as it is competence. To be
> >>frank, based upon what I've seen of OS/2 users in newsgroups such as
> >>this, they don't seem to be too savvy in general. Mostly, they just
> >>seem to be overly exuberant about a particular niche OS, but
> >>otherwise, do not have any particular skills that would prevent them
> >>from having difficulty doing something like installing and running
> >>Windows
>
> >Marty
> >Need I remind you that this group does not represent people who use OS/2 in
> >any way, shape, or form?
>
> Of course this group represents people who use OS/2. After all, people
> who use OS/2 post here all of the time.

Does it also represent windoze users since they post here too?

> >A lot of Windoze users that formerly used OS/2 had a lot of problems with
it
>
> I don't think that a lot of Windows users ever used OS/2.
>
> Of the ones I know who are former OS/2 users, most left OS/2 because
> they found that Windows made it easier for them to get more and better
> work done. I know that's true in my own case.

Of the ones that have used OS/2 and have posted here, many have claimed
they had stability problems with OS/2.  This, of course, is just going
by what is posted in this group.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                20-Sep-99 12:39:16
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (rj friedman) said:

>»Note the wording:  "IBM has indicated that they have no plans for an OS/2
>based  »client of their own."

>Note the source of that statement - it was not IBM - and

The guy I was replying to said he had read Brad's statement and there was no
such thing in it.  You and he both consider Brad to be unreliable.  I didn't
resppond to that point and will not.

Jim L
Remove XX from address to Email
More gun laws will cure the nations ills - just like drug laws do.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 20-Sep-99 13:08:22
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Jeff Glatt wrote:
>
> >>>Bennie Nelson
> >>>Your corollary does not allow for those who won't bet because they oppose
> >>>betting on moral grounds.
>
> >>jglatt
> >>Steven's stock market speculation in this newsgroup is "immoral
> >>gambling"???
>
> >While I did not say that
>
> Yes, you proposed that this is indeed what some people think.
>
> Indeed, you seem to be a spokesman for kooks lately -- voicing the
> opinions of all manner of cultish religious-political beliefs. What's
> the matter -- don't you think that the fringe groups are getting
> enough good press lately, so in addition to being an unpaid salesman
> for an oddball, niche IBM product, you're now moonlighting free as a
> mouthpiece for esoteric religious-political affiliations?

That's an interesting way of describing being tolerant of other
people and their right to have and express their own beliefs which
do not harm or infringe upon the rights and beliefs of others.

>
> >There are people who believe that playing card
> >games is sin.
>
> So, what other kooks have you been hanging out with lately, and feel
> the need to trumpet? Surely, there are people who believe that it is
> "wrong" and "bad" to shave poodles? Somewhere, there must be someone
> who believes that flouride in drinking water is actually a
> mind-altering chemical that government is using to lull the populace
> into complacency? No doubt, there are people who believe that the
> unisex look was a good thing and should be enforced? Somewhere,
> someone probably believes that Warp City actually has more than a
> couple "members".
>
> Why haven't you spoken up, and ensured that the views of these kooks
> are well-represented at every opportunity? I realize that it's hard
> work trumpeted the dogma of every cult out there, but you shouldn't
> play favorites with kooks. They don't like that.
>
> >There are some people, the Amish, who do not
> >use electricity for the same reason.
>
> Those poor Amish! It's so wonderful that you're here to make sure that
> all of these people who are using computers to access a
> telecommunications network are well-aware of how evil electricity is!
>
> Hahahahaha!!!!
>
> (OS/2 kooks are sooooooooooooo entertaining).
>
> >While I do not subscribe to any of these beliefs, there people
> >who sincerely hold such beliefs and act accordingly. The point
> >I was trying to make about Den Beste's quotation of a certain
> >aphorism that referenced using wagers as a means of determining
> >expertise is that it is flawed because it is exclusionary.
>
> And there are people who believe OS/2 is dead. Maybe you should make
> sure that their message is also not lost among the multitude of other,
> prevailing views in OS/2 newsgroups? I mean, you don't have to
> subscribe to the belief in order to followup messages by people who
> are saying that OS/2 isn't dead, and remind them that there are people
> who believe otherwise, so they shouldn't express such "exclusionary"
> views?

Those who hold and express the view that "OS/2 is dead" do not need
my assistance.  They've been saying that for years, so I guess it
must be true.

>
> Oh wait, I forgot, you're a fan of Tholen's Kook of Month policy
> toward "being unbiased". You don't "have time" to dole out the same
> criticism toward those whose oddball, kooky views jive with your own.

I certainly have need expressed that view.  I have posted what I
believe to be polite corrections for errors Tim Martin has made in
some of his posts.  Not to single out Tim Martin, but I believe he
is the current lightning rod in cooa.

> Or, is the latest flimsy excuse that your news server mysteriously
> doesn't receive any messages except those of people whom you
> criticize? I forget which pathetic excuse you kooks are clinging to
> this week.

Actually, both news servers I use have had trouble in the last week due
hurricane Floyd.  One server was simply powered off.  I'm not sure why
the other went dormant for a time.  I've been trying to get caught up
on the messages in this newsgroup for several days, now.

>
> >>Ok, are there *any* OS/2 users in this newsgroup who aren't part of
> >>some weird religious-political cult of kooks?
>
> >Name any who are, Jeff.  Also, name the specific cult(s) and
> >give years of membership in the same.
>
> I don't know -- how long have you been using OS/2? You seem plenty odd
> to me. Are you social misfit, Bennie? Do you find that you just don't
> seem to fit in nor identify with any even-remotely-mainstream group?

Hmm.  Let's see, I use Os/2 v4, Windows NT v4 (both Workstation
and server editions), Windows 95, Linux, Solaris 7, and OS/390.

> Do you find association only with ones comprised of people who espouse
> oddball, esoteric, religious-political ideals? (I've already noted in
> previous posts when you've expressed notably negative views of
> humanity and society in general.

This is quite amusing, Jeff.  You have been mocking the morals of
many people, the OS choice of many people, the political views of
many people, etc.  I have a made a few general comments about human
nature as seen in the various posts in USENET.  I will leave it to
others to decide which of us has "expressed notably negative views."

> Offhand, I'd say that you are likely
> a person who has been an outcast for a good portion of his life, if
> not for your entire life, and therefore tends to view society as
> something that you're not really a part of -- a large, amorphous group
> of humans that are "bad" and "evil" because you couldn't find a way to
> fit in nor identify with them. This is a very common trait among
> people who tend to support, endorse, defend, etc, cultish views from
> oddballs. I think that you've already well-established your tendency
> to do that).

Jeff, you've overdone it.  To state that the views exist and the people
who hold them have the right to hold and express their views is not the
same as endorsing those views.  I defend their rights, because the
Constitution of the United States established a nation for that very
purpose.  Are you opposed to the liberties Americans enjoy as expressed
in the Bill of Rights?  If so, then you are opposed to your own right
to express your ideas in this newsgroup.

>
> So I ask again -- where are the normal OS/2 users? Have they all gone
> to Stardock's newsgroup?

Regards,
Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 20-Sep-99 17:49:20
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Mooo)

[e-mail] (Jason Bowen) wrote:

>Yeah you are free to belive whatever you want to make yourself feel
>better.  OS/2 out of the box right now can't install on most modern
>hardware and yet you find this ok

What?  Oh god!  I must be out of business then.

What pray tell stops you installing OS/2 on a modern well equiped
quality x86 PC?


>, the fixpack method is just fine with
>you.

You don't fix any other OS?


>  Not providing an updated client that can install out of the box on
>a machine with say a 10 gig hard drive seems to be a barrier to adoption
>to me.

You've done this with NT I gather?  I mean, NT with no fixes applied?


>  You can actually order machines pre-loaded with Linux now that MS
>is under the gun but IBM isn't interested in pushing OS/2 as a pre-load
>but this is ok with you.  IBM won't makes vague ambigous statements about
>OS/2 but this is ok with you.

Bleah, IBM.  They are really a manufacturer masquerading as a high end
reseller.  If you're parents are idiots does that mean you're a dunce?
Not necessarily, and certainly not so of OS/2.


Craig

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Nothing I say is my own opinion (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                20-Sep-99 16:56:29
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

From: [e-mail] (rj friedman)

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 15:39:13, [e-mail] (Esther
Schindler) wrote:

εRJ, I respect your position on this, and I understand it. As long as
εthe fixpacks keep coming, OS/2 users are in an "if it ain't broke
εdon't fix it" situation... that is, as regards the operating system
εitself.

That's not my position. My position is that OS/2 gets a
continuous stream of upgrades, the cumulative effect of
which is the equvalent of an upgrade (or upgrades). If it
were MS doing this, they would bring these fixpack/upgrades
out as a new client every year and charge for it. Well, we,
in fact, get the equivalent of a new client - only it isn't
marketed that way - big deal - the effect is the same.


εHowever, not everyone in the OS/2 community feels this way, and not
εjust "to make their insides feel good." Do you understand their
εreasons for wanting a new client, even if you don't agree with those
εreasons?

Well, to return to a metaphore that you used at one time, I
hear their desire - but IMO they are demanding the sizzle
without realizing that they are getting the steak. They are
(IMO) whining about not getting the sizzle instead of
rejoicing in the fact that they are getting the steak for
free.

IMO, they are being unreasonable for not understanding that
IBM is not in business to give them the sizzle. Period. If
anyone thinks that IBM is here to give them the sizzle, they
are deluding themselves. If anyone feels that the sizzle is
more important than the steak, realistically they should be
looking elsewhere - no blame - good bye, good luck. But,
please, let them stop with all the OS/2 is dead because IBM
doesn't love us, rhetoric.



________________________________________________________

[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]                               20-Sep-99 17:22:22
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

I take your response to mean that you don't really understand the
position of the people who feel otherwise.

While, as I said, I do understand your viewpoint, I also understand
the perspective of those who want a new client. There are plenty of
reasons why one might do so -- and not all of them are related to
technical enhancements of the OS.

--Esther

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 16:56:58, [e-mail] (rj friedman) wrote:

| On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 15:39:13, [e-mail] (Esther
| Schindler) wrote:
|
| εRJ, I respect your position on this, and I understand it. As long as
| εthe fixpacks keep coming, OS/2 users are in an "if it ain't broke
| εdon't fix it" situation... that is, as regards the operating system
| εitself.
|
| That's not my position. My position is that OS/2 gets a
| continuous stream of upgrades, the cumulative effect of
| which is the equvalent of an upgrade (or upgrades). If it
| were MS doing this, they would bring these fixpack/upgrades
| out as a new client every year and charge for it. Well, we,
| in fact, get the equivalent of a new client - only it isn't
| marketed that way - big deal - the effect is the same.
|
|
| εHowever, not everyone in the OS/2 community feels this way, and not
| εjust "to make their insides feel good." Do you understand their
| εreasons for wanting a new client, even if you don't agree with those
| εreasons?
|
| Well, to return to a metaphore that you used at one time, I
| hear their desire - but IMO they are demanding the sizzle
| without realizing that they are getting the steak. They are
| (IMO) whining about not getting the sizzle instead of
| rejoicing in the fact that they are getting the steak for
| free.
|
| IMO, they are being unreasonable for not understanding that
| IBM is not in business to give them the sizzle. Period. If
| anyone thinks that IBM is here to give them the sizzle, they
| are deluding themselves. If anyone feels that the sizzle is
| more important than the steak, realistically they should be
| looking elsewhere - no blame - good bye, good luck. But,
| please, let them stop with all the OS/2 is dead because IBM
| doesn't love us, rhetoric.
|
|
|
| ________________________________________________________
|
| [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: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                20-Sep-99 13:10:04
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (rj friedman) said:

>Has it not occurred to anyone that
>the reason Stardock was turned down was because they were
>not able to come up with a sufficiently convincing business
>plan that would persuade IBM it was worth their while to
>entrust OS/2 to Stardock?

So is that why IBM has no interest in small users?  Gimme a break.

Jim L
Remove XX from address to Email
More gun laws will cure the nations ills - just like drug laws do.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                         20-Sep-99 17:14:02
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Re: Credibility

From: [e-mail] (Richard R. Klemmer)

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 03:40:21, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:

Could you please explain the discrepancy here.

First you said:

> but we asked them not to.  They are certainly welcome to announce
> their affilation with Warp City.  Many people don't because

But then later you state:

> We ask all Warp City members to sign agreement.  An agreement
> that says they won't reveal their memberships or steal our news or
> web pages and report the information elsewhere.  Since our most

Which is it?  Are they or are they not allowed to reveal that they are
members?  I'll be attending Warpstock this year and I would be
interested in meeting members of Warp City to hear what they have to
say about it's services.

-----------------------------
Richard R. Klemmer
[e-mail]
http://www.webtrek.com
-----------------------------

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 20-Sep-99 17:43:11
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:22
Subj: Re: Judgement Day ... Stardock and OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Mooo)

[e-mail] wrote:

>>>Just because IBM doesn't want to lose control of OS/2 does not mean that
OS/2
>>>is dead.  You people read FAR too much into this.
>>We haven't seen a lot from IBM to support this conclusion.
>
>And...  No one in all these threads seems to be looking at the BIG
>PICTURE. -- A new OS2 client at this point would offer considerable proof
>to the Gates/MS claim that there is competition, and that they do not have
>a monopoly because OS2 is alive and well.

Yes, there is a lot to be said for this idea.

However, IBM generally is not talking, and when by some odd chance
they do say something, or something leaks out, its universally
negative.

This causes and has caused a great deal of FUD (yeah, the real thing
Fear Uncertainty and Doubt) amoungst a userbase which for several
years has felt very alone and unloved.

The idea you present is a possible reason, but I feel not really
plausible.  Huge damages might be won, but even these would pale
compared to the revenue lost due to stiffing so many of your loyal
clients over the years and into the future.

It would almost smack of 'cutting off your nose to spite your face' in
fact.

Anyway, this might all turn out for the best in the end.  If this type
of fear does not bring the OS/2 community together, and have everyone
with an interest reaching into their wallets to see what can be done
then nothing will ever move them.

If this was going to happen (apathy) then its better to kill the
patient in a relatively quick way and not let it die slowly and
horribly over the next few years taking far too many small/medium
businesses with it.

Its not so much Judgement Day I guess, more of a Watershed Day.  All
those who want to be counted, stand up, and let the counting begin.

Should a united financial face appear to umbrella the unwanted
end-users of OS/2 then I suspect OS/2 will in fact have a very bright
future indeed.  Imagine being a shareholder of one of the largest OS/2
directorates?  The users need a driver?  Right, lets get the team onto
the job.  Someone call IBM and let them know we need a new kernal for
Warp 6...heh

These days the world is small, globalization is in, companies are
bigger then national governments, and the only thing guarenteed to
make the Captains of these corporate ships sit down and take notice of
you is to front them with a fist full of dollars :-)

Craig




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Nothing I say is my own opinion (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                          20-Sep-99 16:22:18
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:22
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>>>Bennie Nelson
>>>Your corollary does not allow for those who won't bet because they oppose
>>>betting on moral grounds.

>>jglatt
>>Steven's stock market speculation in this newsgroup is "immoral
>>gambling"???

>While I did not say that

Yes, you proposed that this is indeed what some people think.

Indeed, you seem to be a spokesman for kooks lately -- voicing the
opinions of all manner of cultish religious-political beliefs. What's
the matter -- don't you think that the fringe groups are getting
enough good press lately, so in addition to being an unpaid salesman
for an oddball, niche IBM product, you're now moonlighting free as a
mouthpiece for esoteric religious-political affiliations?

>There are people who believe that playing card
>games is sin.

So, what other kooks have you been hanging out with lately, and feel
the need to trumpet? Surely, there are people who believe that it is
"wrong" and "bad" to shave poodles? Somewhere, there must be someone
who believes that flouride in drinking water is actually a
mind-altering chemical that government is using to lull the populace
into complacency? No doubt, there are people who believe that the
unisex look was a good thing and should be enforced? Somewhere,
someone probably believes that Warp City actually has more than a
couple "members".

Why haven't you spoken up, and ensured that the views of these kooks
are well-represented at every opportunity? I realize that it's hard
work trumpeted the dogma of every cult out there, but you shouldn't
play favorites with kooks. They don't like that.

>There are some people, the Amish, who do not
>use electricity for the same reason.

Those poor Amish! It's so wonderful that you're here to make sure that
all of these people who are using computers to access a
telecommunications network are well-aware of how evil electricity is!

Hahahahaha!!!!

(OS/2 kooks are sooooooooooooo entertaining).

>While I do not subscribe to any of these beliefs, there people
>who sincerely hold such beliefs and act accordingly. The point
>I was trying to make about Den Beste's quotation of a certain
>aphorism that referenced using wagers as a means of determining
>expertise is that it is flawed because it is exclusionary.

And there are people who believe OS/2 is dead. Maybe you should make
sure that their message is also not lost among the multitude of other,
prevailing views in OS/2 newsgroups? I mean, you don't have to
subscribe to the belief in order to followup messages by people who
are saying that OS/2 isn't dead, and remind them that there are people
who believe otherwise, so they shouldn't express such "exclusionary"
views?

Oh wait, I forgot, you're a fan of Tholen's Kook of Month policy
toward "being unbiased". You don't "have time" to dole out the same
criticism toward those whose oddball, kooky views jive with your own.
Or, is the latest flimsy excuse that your news server mysteriously
doesn't receive any messages except those of people whom you
criticize? I forget which pathetic excuse you kooks are clinging to
this week.

>>Ok, are there *any* OS/2 users in this newsgroup who aren't part of
>>some weird religious-political cult of kooks?

>Name any who are, Jeff.  Also, name the specific cult(s) and
>give years of membership in the same.

I don't know -- how long have you been using OS/2? You seem plenty odd
to me. Are you social misfit, Bennie? Do you find that you just don't
seem to fit in nor identify with any even-remotely-mainstream group?
Do you find association only with ones comprised of people who espouse
oddball, esoteric, religious-political ideals? (I've already noted in
previous posts when you've expressed notably negative views of
humanity and society in general. Offhand, I'd say that you are likely
a person who has been an outcast for a good portion of his life, if
not for your entire life, and therefore tends to view society as
something that you're not really a part of -- a large, amorphous group
of humans that are "bad" and "evil" because you couldn't find a way to
fit in nor identify with them. This is a very common trait among
people who tend to support, endorse, defend, etc, cultish views from
oddballs. I think that you've already well-established your tendency
to do that).

So I ask again -- where are the normal OS/2 users? Have they all gone
to Stardock's newsgroup?

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             20-Sep-99 10:27:15
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:22
Subj: Re: It doesn't bother people that a new client won't be confirmed?

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>

Jason Bowen wrote:
>
> Warp 4 out of the box has to be patched to be installed on new hardware.
> Do you think this helps acceptance?  Do you think this would stall sales
> of software if the current userbase is perfectly happy to keep using the
> software they have as new users avoid adopting it due to IBM's
> unwillingness to provide a new client?  How does this affect ISV's writing
> OS/2 software? Do you think this is an acceptable scenario for OS/2's
> continued existance?  Is the fixpack way really good?  It seems a lot of
> users in this group do find this acceptable.

Not an issue.  OS/2 v4 fixpacks are released at regular intervals of
about 3 months.  Even if the OS/2 GA package were revised to include the
"latest" fixpack, it would be out-of-date in 3 months.  You are thinking
about software the way that Microsoft does...as a 'package' that you
install and use for some period of time without any further support,
other than to get it installed and working.  This is fine for consumer
software and is also very lucrative for Microsoft.  In contrast, IBM
sells to business customers and looks at software as a 'service' and a
'process' where the software enables system functionality.  IBM plans
and expects to provide regular updates as a part of their software
support process.  Their software products, including OS/2, are designed
to be updated periodically, both to correct bugs (APARs in IBM lingo)
and to provide support for new technology and hardware and software
changes.  Microsoft looks at their service packs as patches to correct
flaws...not as a means of supporting their customers.  When updating is
required, Microsoft instead provides a new product.  As far as I know,
Microsoft has never gone back and added new features or support to an
existing product.  Well, actually, I can think of one case.  When Office
97 was released, Microsoft released a converter for Office 95 users to
allow them to read and write the new Office 97 "Word" format.  But I
think this was done in response to loud yells from Office 95 sites.

In the IBM view, customers will use a software product throughout the
entire support period of 5 or more years.  In the Microsoft view,
customers will use a software product only until a new and "better"
replacement product is released.  At that time, Microsoft expects that
users will install the newer replacement product and all support for the
earlier product effectively ends.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         20-Sep-99 17:24:28
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:22
Subj: Re: No decision regarding OS/2 client was made???

From: [e-mail] (Richard R. Klemmer)

On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 13:32:45, "Kim Cheung"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> According to words around the WarpExpo West, the IBM meeting did not take
> place due to storm concern.  No decision was made regarding the OEM version
> of OS/2.
>

It appears that there was a previous meeting where the Stardock
proposal was rejected and it was decided it wasn't necessary for the
other meeting to take place.

So that no one gets upset, I'll state that the source of my
information is a post from someone who was relaying information from
someone from IBM.  Yes, that comes under the heading of hearsay, at
the very least. :-)

I wouldn't doubt that it's true, though.

-----------------------------
Richard R. Klemmer
[e-mail]
http://www.webtrek.com
-----------------------------

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 20-Sep-99 17:26:22
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:22
Subj: Re: Judgement Day ... Stardock and OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Mooo)

[e-mail] (Jason Bowen) wrote:

>Makes it a pain to install on new hardware heh?  Why doesn't IBM care
>about that?

I dont know about this.  I keep hearing a lot of noise in general
about how hard OS/2 is to install on 'new' hardware but as a system
integrator and assembler, I just don't see it.

In fact, I'd go the other way and say that its never been easier to
install OS/2.  You should have seen me frothing at the mouth with
frustration back in '95 trying to get Warp 3 Red Spine to install!

A lot depends on hardware choice.  If you choose carefully, and buy
quality kit, it nearly always works.

I don't consider patching the boot diskettes much of a hassle as far
as installation goes.


>>» I mean, OS/2 makes money for IBM and IBM
>>»only...
>>
>>I don't know about that, either. As a small business user,
>>OS/2 makes money for ME - and quite nicely, thank you.

Yes, I'd agree with this.


>>»I don't know about you, but I'm not seeing Corel porting their
>>»WordPerfect suite over to OS/2....

Have you seen Wordperfect 8 for Linux?  You're not missing much.
SO5.1 is a much better product.


>>We've already got two suites - one of which is absolutely
>>free - that are just as functional as anything else out
>>there. We don't NEED Corel to port their WordPerfect suite
>>over to OS/2 in order to be productive.

After the looong wait I was very very dissapointed with Smartsuite/2
If this is what you get when you cough up AU$400.00 I'll just stick
with cheap/free ware thanks (Staroffice)...incidently, anyone used the
Win32 version of SS?  Its crap too.  I can't believe Lotus isn't broke
if this is the best they can do.


>>»I don't see RealPlayer for OS/2.  I
>>»don't see Civilization being ported over to OS/2...
>>
>>As a business user, I don't care about RealPlayer for OS/2,
>>much less about Civilization (or any other games). If those
>>things are important to you, then OS/2 (alone) is not the OS
>>for you.

Yep.  Windows95 (not 98 or NT) is the primary gaming/novelty/passtime
OS by far.  Market share in this arena must be close to 100%

Nothing anyone does will change this juggernaught now thats its
steaming ahead.  Business is another matter entirely though.


Craig

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Nothing I say is my own opinion (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                 20-Sep-99 13:19:26
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:22
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Marty wrote:
>
> Jeff Glatt wrote:
> >
> > >Bennie Nelson
> > >Your corollary does not allow for those who won't bet because they oppose
> > >betting on moral grounds.
> >
> > Steven's stock market speculation in this newsgroup is "immoral
> > gambling"???
> >
> > Ok, are there *any* OS/2 users in this newsgroup who aren't part of
> > some weird religious-political cult of kooks?
>
> Glad I'm not the only one finding that a bit strange.  Yes.  There are
> some OS/2 users that are not religious zealots here.  I'd like to think
> I'm in that group.
>
> - Marty

Marty,
Are you opposed to people having the right hold those views?  There is no
coincidence that OS choice is equated to religious choice.  The right
to choose either is threatened by denial of either.  Look at Communist
China: access to religious facilities and access to the Internet are
restricted by the Chinese government.  Surely, you do not approve of
that situation.  I am not saying you do.  I am saying that liberty
is precious and should be defended, whether it be for choice of an
OS or for some other belief or view.  Note, that I am not saying all
beliefs or views.  The obvious restriction is those that infringe upon
another's rights.

If the above reflects kookiness,then the U.S Constitution is also kooky.

Regards,
Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 20-Sep-99 13:44:07
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:22
Subj: Re: Perhaps Stardock is wrong?

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Mr. Bennett,

Thanks for your post.  One business factor that must be weighed
is the effect of Y2K upon businesses around the world.  This is
not the best time to release an OS/2 client, because businesses are
investing a tremendous amount of resources in Y2K related activities.
Those are IT resources.  Money and personnel that are not available
for investing in an upgrade to an OS.  Make no mistake about it:
applying an OS/2 fixpak to gain Y2K compliance is much easier than
installing a whole new version of the OS.

Regards,
Bennie Nelson

Kendall Bennett wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
> > In a few days we'll see what Stardock and Wardell have
> > wrought with their very public announcements:  PCWeek,
> > TechWeek, ZDNet, and all the familiar commercial news
> > sites will be running full blown stories on how IBM has
> > literally killed OS/2.  The proof?  Why Brad Wardell, speaking
> > for IBM, says so.  And what will the big quote be?  Brad Wardell's
> > public statement that appears to speak for IBM when it says,
> > "IBM has indicated that they have no plans for an OS/2 based
> > client of their own."
> >
> > Brad Wardell has no authority to speak for IBM.  None.
>
> I don't usually get involved in advocacy battles, but I was quite
> surprised by Brad Wardell's announcement about the demise of an OS/2 Warp
> 5 client. Surprised because of the above quote indicating that IBM has no
> plans for a Warp 5 client.
>
> Why does this surprise me? Because it goes against the information I have
> received from people I work with closely at IBM (on developing our
> SciTech Display Doctor for OS/2 product). I have asked a couple of times
> during meetings, what the status of a Warp 5 client for OS/2 would be.
> The answer has always been something along the lines of "No Comment", or
> "We'll see". The announcement also goes against my own personal feelings
> about IBM's commitment to OS/2 (which is based on an announcement we will
> be making soon).
>
> OS/2 *has* been doing well for IBM recently, they *have* released Warp
> Server for e-Business and Workspace On Demand is doing well. It would
> seem to me that perhaps IBM is not ready for a Warp 5 client just yet.
> Their focus is after all on the business end of the OS/2 spectrum, but to
> me an updated Warp 5 client *does* make a lot of sense for IBM, but
> perhaps they are just not ready for it yet. IBM has made absolutely no
> public statements about this, and when IBM does a press release stating
> that there will never be a Warp 5 client, then I will believe it. Until
> then I personally believe IBM is biding their time until it makes sense
> to release a Warp 5 client.
>
> > There is absolutely no reason to be mad at IBM.  They've
> > been telling us all year long they have no intention of
> > offering a Warp 5 client this year (in 1999).
>
> This is something I personally believe. It does not make a lot of
> business sense for IBM to try and release a new Warp 5 client late in
> 1999. The Y2K issue is a big one, and any OS/2 shop worth their salt is
> *not* going to do a major upgrade of *any* Warp 5 clients before the
> Millenium, whether it comes from IBM or Stardock. A major OS/2 Warp 5
> client upgrade will require significant amounts of time for the OS/2
> customer to develop proper test and deployment plans for their company.
> At a time when most places are going nuts trying to solve all their Y2K
> related issues, do you think they will even consider the option of
> upgrading their client machine OS'es?? Upgrading a server is one thing,
> but upgrading all clients is something completely different.
>
> Just my $0.02 worth...
>
> --
>
> +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
> |      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: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, USA (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                    20-Sep-99 17:44:25
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:22
Subj: Re: It doesn't bother people that a new client won't be confirmed?

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

You didn't answer how this affects ISV's and the overall OS/2 market.  If
the market is stagnant and people don't buy new software software isn't
developed for OS/2 anymore.  App availibility drives buyers.  You didn't
answer how it affects new purchases either.

 In article
<[e-mail]>,
David T. Johnson <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Jason Bowen wrote:
>>
>> Warp 4 out of the box has to be patched to be installed on new hardware.
>> Do you think this helps acceptance?  Do you think this would stall sales
>> of software if the current userbase is perfectly happy to keep using the
>> software they have as new users avoid adopting it due to IBM's
>> unwillingness to provide a new client?  How does this affect ISV's writing
>> OS/2 software? Do you think this is an acceptable scenario for OS/2's
>> continued existance?  Is the fixpack way really good?  It seems a lot of
>> users in this group do find this acceptable.
>
>Not an issue.  OS/2 v4 fixpacks are released at regular intervals of
>about 3 months.  Even if the OS/2 GA package were revised to include the
>"latest" fixpack, it would be out-of-date in 3 months.  You are thinking
>about software the way that Microsoft does...as a 'package' that you
>install and use for some period of time without any further support,
>other than to get it installed and working.  This is fine for consumer
>software and is also very lucrative for Microsoft.  In contrast, IBM
>sells to business customers and looks at software as a 'service' and a
>'process' where the software enables system functionality.  IBM plans
>and expects to provide regular updates as a part of their software
>support process.  Their software products, including OS/2, are designed
>to be updated periodically, both to correct bugs (APARs in IBM lingo)
>and to provide support for new technology and hardware and software
>changes.  Microsoft looks at their service packs as patches to correct
>flaws...not as a means of supporting their customers.  When updating is
>required, Microsoft instead provides a new product.  As far as I know,
>Microsoft has never gone back and added new features or support to an
>existing product.  Well, actually, I can think of one case.  When Office
>97 was released, Microsoft released a converter for Office 95 users to
>allow them to read and write the new Office 97 "Word" format.  But I
>think this was done in response to loud yells from Office 95 sites.
>
>In the IBM view, customers will use a software product throughout the
>entire support period of 5 or more years.  In the Microsoft view,
>customers will use a software product only until a new and "better"
>replacement product is released.  At that time, Microsoft expects that
>users will install the newer replacement product and all support for the
>earlier product effectively ends.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]               20-Sep-99 12:00:11
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:22
Subj: Re: Perhaps Stardock is wrong?

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

On 20 Sep 1999 15:08:16 GMT, rj friedman wrote:

>I can only surmise that when IBM
>turned him down, this was his way of getting even.
>

That's in-correct.   This is a business dealing - a very serious one at that.
  There is nothing to "get even" about.



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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 20-Sep-99 14:01:13
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:22
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Jason Bowen wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>,
> Bennie Nelson  <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >Jason Bowen wrote:
> >>
> >> Yeah you are free to belive whatever you want to make yourself feel
> >> better.  OS/2 out of the box right now can't install on most modern
> >> hardware and yet you find this ok, the fixpack method is just fine with
> >> you.  Not providing an updated client that can install out of the box on
> >> a machine with say a 10 gig hard drive seems to be a barrier to adoption
> >> to me.  You can actually order machines pre-loaded with Linux now that MS
> >> is under the gun but IBM isn't interested in pushing OS/2 as a pre-load
> >> but this is ok with you.  IBM won't makes vague ambigous statements about
> >> OS/2 but this is ok with you.
> >
> >Windows 9x couldn't and can't install on many systems without tweaking
> >the install diskette.  Why?  CDROM not supported.
>
> We are talking about OS/2 and current hardware.  Win98 and NT seem to be
> getting preloaded. I have never had a probelm with Windows anything not
> supporting hardware.  NT booted from my cdrom drive just fine same with
> 98.  The EIDE standard hasn't changed much in the last several years.

OS/2 works with hardware that is current.  I have built brand new systems
with recently released off-the-shelf components, this year.  No problems.

Windows 95, on the other hand, did not fare so well.

>
> >
> >Windows NT v4 won't install completely on my Dell Pentium Pro desktop
> >system.  Why?  Some of the hardware is not supported.
>
> Can you buy NT pre-installed?  How does the support compare to current
> hardware and what does this say about IBM's view of OS/2?

I am responsible for a number of NT systems (all on Dell PCs) that came
with NT partially installed.  That is the way they were configured by
Dell.  The subsequent completion of the installs met with mixed success.

That's one thing I've noticed about Windows: if at first you don't
succeed, try the install again.  Without making any changes.  And
sometimes that works.  Problem is: one definition of insanity is
doing the same thing again and expecting different results.

>
> >
> >Is this a flaw?  I really don't think so.  There are so many choices
> >that the install routines become too cumbersome and complex.  When MS
> >released Win 95B, they did not provide shrink wrapped copies for sale.
> >Why?  Because MS did not want to handle the support calls for the
> >users trying to install it on their home systems.
>
> OS/2 can't install on a hard drive greater than 8.4 megs.  It doesn't have
> basic support for current hardware but I do see Windows getting pre-loaded
> on all kinds of new hardware, how about you?  How do you know the reason
> for not releasing Win95B?  Do you have a reference?

This was reported back when the version was released.  That version was
only available with a purchase of a motherboard, hard drive, or pre-installed.
I don't have time to look up any references, but I had to purchase several
copies from authorized MS resellers and all of them told me the same story.

I couldn't get Windows 95 or OS/2 to use an 8.4 gb (I'm sure you meant that
instead of "megs").  I decided the motherboard was the problem (recent mb
from ASUS using an Intel chipset) and bought a brand new board.  Both OSes
could then use the whole drive.  So, the problem isn't always the OS.

Besides, the OS/2 install diskette can easily modified to provide support
for hard drives larger than 8.4 gb.

>
> >
> >>
> >> In article <[e-mail]>,
> >> rj friedman <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >> >It would be funny, if it weren't so ludicrous, the way so
> >> >many are fuming and venting, rushing to blame IBM for the
> >> >Stardock/Warp5 fiasco. Has it not occurred to anyone that
> >> >the reason Stardock was turned down was because they were
> >> >not able to come up with a sufficiently convincing business
> >> >plan that would persuade IBM it was worth their while to
> >> >entrust OS/2 to Stardock?
> >> >
> >> >________________________________________________________
> >> >
> >> >[RJ]                 OS/2 - Live it, or live with it.
> >> >rj friedman          Team ABW
> >> >Taipei, Taiwan       [e-mail]
> >> >
> >> >To send email - remove the `yyy'
> >> >________________________________________________________
> >> >
> >

Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             20-Sep-99 11:11:19
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:22
Subj: Judgment Day surprise!

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>

Well, it's been three days and OS/2 looks it will survive another
death.  These periodic deaths are very entertaining.

It looks as if there is some question that the infamous Judgment Day
meeting at IBM even happened.  Hopefully, this will be cleared up in a
day or so,  But...IF the famous meeting DID happen, it was very
surprising that so many people thought IBM's emphatic NO to Stardock was
BAD news for the OS/2 client.  This actually looks like GOOD news
because IBM would NEVER license a technology to a 3rd party that they,
themselves, had plans for.  If IBM had said 'Yes' to a company like
Stardock, I would have tended to see this as bad news for the future of
the entire OS/2 platform.

The entire IT industry is EXTREMELY volatile right now and I don't think
that IBM, or anyone else, knows what software technologies will prevail
and what form they will take.  In IBM's view, they do not see a reason,
AT THE PRESENT TIME, to release a new OS/2 client.  But I would strongly
doubt anyone who says:  'IBM says no more new OS/2 clients'  because IBM
just does not KNOW this.  The only thing that is certain is that BIG
changes are coming in the way we use computers and in the software we
use with them.  And I would much rather be IBM right now than
Microsoft.  IBM's strategy with Websphere and DB2 looks fabulous.  The
Microsoft OS-centric strategy, in contrast, puts all of the marbles on a
big hairy-chested Windows 2000 and a lot of proprietary standards.
Windows 2000 is supposed to do absolutely everything and more.  With the
load it is carrying at Microsoft, it would have to transmute lead into
gold to even have a chance of success.  I am sure that Windows 2000 will
eventually be released and will sell a lot of copies.  But Microsoft has
badly overreached into way too many areas and markets and is in serious
trouble.  I just hope that if their earnings tumble and their stock
collapses, it won't take a major portion of the stock market down with
it.  Just my opinion.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             20-Sep-99 13:15:12
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:22
Subj: Re: It doesn't bother people that a new client won't be confirmed?

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>

Esther Schindler wrote:
>
> I think Jason was asking how IBM's policies affect the viability for
> any ISV who wants to make a living by providing OS/2 applications.
>
> Personally, I can't fathom how you could put a positive spin on that.

I think Jason was asking about the impact on ISVs of IBM's OS/2 software
updating vs releasing either a new "v5" client or a v4 client "updated"
with the latest fixpack.  I don't see an impact on ISVs one way or the
other.  If an ISV wants a particular version or service level for his
app, it will be specified.  ISVs, in my opinion, are mostly interested
in how many and what types of users/licenses there are for a particular
platform.

>
> --Esther
>
> On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 15:47:38, "David T. Johnson"
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> | Jason Bowen wrote:
> | >
> | > You didn't answer how this affects ISV's and the overall OS/2 market.
If
> | > the market is stagnant and people don't buy new software software isn't
> | > developed for OS/2 anymore.  App availibility drives buyers.  You didn't
> | > answer how it affects new purchases either.
> |
> | I thought you were asking about IBM's software update approach.  Your
> | questions above relate to what you term a 'stagnant OS/2 market,' to new
> | purchases of OS/2, and to developer support for OS/2.  By way of answer,
> | software developers are interested in whether the OS/2 platform will run
> | their application.  If, a particular requirement exists, such as
> | 'fixpack 5 or greater,' they will specify it.  As for new purchasers of
> | OS/2, customers of the client don't even care if they get a box.  They
> | are buying licenses to use the software.  They will install these
> | licenses with the service level and features they require.  Hope this is
> | helpful.
> |

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             20-Sep-99 16:58:19
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>

Esther Schindler wrote:
>
> On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 17:33:03, "David T. Johnson"
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> | Well???  Aren't you going to TELL us these reasons?  We're all waiting!
> | Stand and deliver, woman!
>
> In no particular order, and off the top of my head:
>
> * A new client (whether from IBM or a third party) will get press. It
> would raise the visibility of the operating system again, in the midst
> of a time when computer users are once again considering alternatives.

Okay I agree with you here but I would frankly expect most of the press
to be bad (present company excepted, of course) based on past history.

>
> * A new client will help ISVs sell new and upgraded applications,
> because it would be a clear statement that OS/2 has a viable
> *commercial* future. (EVERY OS/2 software developer is suffering,
> right now. While there are plenty of people who love OS/2 and the
> applications they own, many wonder, "How much of a financial
> investment do I want to make in new apps for this platform?")

Again I agree but I think is the same thing as the "warm inside" feeling
that rj was taling about.  But if I were a developer, I would not do any
platform-specific development for OS/2 regardless, unless technical
considerations demanded it.  And I would say this even if OS/2 owned 50%
of the desktop share.  There are too many cross-platform options
available.  I think it's nuts for a developer to marry a platform, ANY
platform, with the development technology available today.  This idea
was started by Microsoft with Windows 3.0 and it's time for it to end.
The OS should be focused on extracting maximum performance out of the
hardware and OS/2 does that very well with the x86 hardware.  The
developer should be focused on what the apps are supposed to accomplish
and not on what OS they are running on.
>
> * A new client would presumably make the OS easier to install, without
> Fixpack City.

Well, yes, but only until the first fixpack was released.  And then Java
2.2...  And TCP/IP v6.2.  And so on...

>
> * A new client would sell more copies of Warp Server; client and
> server sales go hand in hand.

Yes, this is probably true...but this is not IBM's vision.   From IBM's
point of view, they will sell you the 'server' and they will toss in a
few handful of 'clients' for free.

>
> * A new client might include new features. You might think, "What new
> features? I have everything I need now!" but innovators don't rely on
> what people _say_ they want. Nobody shouted, "I must have a handheld
> computer or I shall surely die!" yet millions of people snarfed up
> PalmPilots because they solved a need _they didn't know they had_.

What new features?  (Okay, I had to ask.)  This sort of stuff changes so
fast that I just can't see upgrading the client to keep up.  A
modular/plug-in approach to adding functionality to the client would be
better.  We already do that with 'drivers' that are added to the client
to give it more capabilities with new hardware.  I would much rather see
driver development than new client development.  I think the client life
will become longer and longer to the point where it will last the life
of the hardware or maybe even cross to the next hardware upgrade.

>
> ..and that's without any deep thought. I'm sure that other people
> here, much wiser than I, could add to this list.

Thanks for your reply.  It is a pleasure to read your comments and I
hope they will prompt some of those wiser than both of us to post.
Computing is nothing but ideas...

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 22:54:05
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 22:52:53, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:

| He has single handedly
| chased hundreds if not thousands of OS/2 users away from OS/2.

According to...?


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

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

From: [e-mail]                             20-Sep-99 16:21:19
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: It doesn't bother people that a new client won't be confirmed?

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>

Esther Schindler wrote:
>
> On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 17:15:24, "David T. Johnson"
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> | I think Jason was asking about the impact on ISVs of IBM's OS/2 software
> | updating vs releasing either a new "v5" client or a v4 client "updated"
> | with the latest fixpack.  I don't see an impact on ISVs one way or the
> | other.  If an ISV wants a particular version or service level for his
> | app, it will be specified.  ISVs, in my opinion, are mostly interested
> | in how many and what types of users/licenses there are for a particular
> | platform.
>
> ISVs are interested in selling products.
>
> If there's a new client, there's new energy. Existing users will buy
> more apps. OS/2 might get a significant number of new users, some of
> whom may buy their apps.
>
> With the status quo... well, the apps ain't selling, David.
>
I think things in consumer app sales are tough everywhere.  How can you
sell a $500 office productivity suite when Sun is giving away a very
good product for FREE?  The days of $x00 shrink-wrapped consumer apps
are numbered.  From where I sit, it looks like hardware sales are
carrying most computer retailers.  Software is plummeting in price and
exploding in availability thanks to internet distribution.  For
specialized applications, enterprise sites are moving to Java in a major
way.  These are interesting times.

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

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

From: [e-mail]               20-Sep-99 16:04:21
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: A public thank-you to the Warp Expo West organizers

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

On 20 Sep 1999 22:42:34 GMT, Esther Schindler wrote:

>(like chocolate chip cookies in the exhibit hall).

How can you not mention those apples and bananas?


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 00:12:01
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: It doesn't bother people that a new client won't be confirmed?

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 20:21:39, "David T. Johnson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

| > With the status quo... well, the apps ain't selling, David.

| I think things in consumer app sales are tough everywhere.  How can you
| sell a $500 office productivity suite when Sun is giving away a very
| good product for FREE?  The days of $x00 shrink-wrapped consumer apps
| are numbered.  From where I sit, it looks like hardware sales are
| carrying most computer retailers.  Software is plummeting in price and
| exploding in availability thanks to internet distribution.  For
| specialized applications, enterprise sites are moving to Java in a major
| way.  These are interesting times.

These are indeed interesting times, David, but when you say, "I think
things in consumer app sales are tough everywhere" you tread right on
what I do for a living.

Yes, consumer apps have it a bit tougher these days... if you judge
their success only by what you see in the average CompUSA. When the
functionality is built into the OS or the ordinary user's office suite
-- or it's really gratuitous in the first place -- you'll have a
harder time moving the boxes. However, there are plenty of desktop
apps that sell quite well, and make their companies enough money to
keep the staff well fed. (I'm thinking of the resume-makers and the
home cooking apps, not even straying into games, about which I know
nothing.)

The retail stores, in general, are in a world of hurt because hardware
margins are thinner than grandma's strudel, and that entire segment of
the business has become a commodity. BUT THAT ISN'T WHERE THE MONEY IS
and it never really has been. Most of the computer industry operates
on business-to-business, even when the participants are very small:
the consultant working out of her spare bedroom, serving a small
business that needs a computer setup. The money is, and always has
been, in providing services and expertise, whether that's configuring
a network or designing a Web site or explaining where the Any key is
on the user's keyboard.

Most of my job, David, is to review software (and occasionally
hardware). I rarely look at a package that's priced for end-users, but
I always look at products that are part of a solution that a reseller
(ISP, VAR, System Integrator, pick your label) can sell. I just
compared 3 intranet applications that start at about $2500. I reviewed
a developer's tool that has a list price of $799. And so on. The
developers writing those b-to-b applications are, in general, *NOT*
hurting in the least.

Nor do I mean to imply that it's only the consumer-app OS/2 ISVs who
are feeling the crunch. There are quite a few vertical developers who
sell turnkey solutions that just-so-happen to build the program on top
of OS/2, and they've spent the last few years having to say, "No, OS/2
*isn't* dead, and you don't _have_ to get a Windows solution" instead
of spending their time selling their own product's benefits.

--Esther

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 23:12:05
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Frank)

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 19:29:19, juvenaly <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Good point. Consider this too, which can be said in Big Blue' defense:
> For years we've heard criticism of certain companies (guess which ones?)
> for "vaporware" -- talking, for strategic reasons, about software they
> had not yet released, and sometimes had no intention to release. IBM, in
> refusing to divulge its plans, avoids this questionable practice. Which
> makes sense, too -- because plans can always change.
>

Or in other words : the plan was to trow in the towel and stop
developing.
(not even "vaporware")

Frank

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


Reply per Email to [e-mail]

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

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            20-Sep-99 22:15:01
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: New OS/2 client not to be

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 08:21:22, [e-mail] (M.P. van Dobben de
Bruijn) wrote:

>
> >> He, is this the optimistic and fighting Karel we have encountered
> >> before? Can't be. Of course IBM judged it otherwise than you did.
> >> IBM is not going to spend money on a FAT client. They are going
> >> to transfer their business users with terminals to THIN clients and
> >> those who want the inherent trouble of FAT clients can get some-
> >> thing with another companies or organisations name on it.
>
> > The drugs have worn off. <G>
>
> Please do take some more. I liked the other mood better <VBG>.
>
Heh. They were supposed to be delivered in my new Warp 5 box <EVBG>.

> > Basically I'm not interested in any thin clients. I don't work in a
> > cubicle in some mammoth-sized multi-interstellar company, and I'm
> > surely not interested in renting my software off the internet, so I want
> > my OS fat and juicy, thank you very much. And I *was* interested
> > in a fat client with someone else's name on it (Stardock, remember?),
> > but obviously IBM doesn't want that to happen either.
>
> At this time IBM does not see what is called a business-case.
>
> The essential part on that in Brad's statement is, I think:
>
> Though IBM indicated Stardock had the strongest proposal, they
> have decided that it is currently not in IBM's or their customer's inter-
> ests to license any current OS/2 technology on an OEM-basis.
>
> The real meaningfull words being "CURRENTLY not in IBM's OR
> THEIR CUSTOMERS INTEREST'S ..." The real current IBM modus
> operandi shines through: "we do what our customers need to continue
> to run their profitable business now and in the future". We all know that
> SOHO is not IBM's intended customerbase, however they have this year
> expanded this to the not-so-big eBusinesses. We may get access to tools
> made for those customers over time. Besides this is "CURRENTLY" but with
> the rapid change in this field we expecience now that may change overnight.
>
The problem to me is: when I bought my first copy of Warp (red three),
I - the SOHO - *was* IBM's intended customer base. They said flat-out
that they wanted everybody to run Warp.

Now IBM is back playing with the big boys. I still use Warp, 'cuz it's
a heck of an OS. But my feelings of loyalty towards IBM are down the
drain heading for turd heaven. I've started to play with Linux again,
because if tomorrow there's something I need to do that I cannot do
with Warp, I'm gone.

In another thread someone proposed we (the users) all shell out USD
400 to form a company to make IBM continue to support and develop
Warp. I find that plain silly: I'm not going to pay money to make IBM
do the right thing. If they're not interested in me as a customer any
more, I'll be doing my work in Applix... and I'll buy some beer for my
USD 400... probably to drown my blues for having had to leave Warp.

> >> Now this does not mean there will not be OS/2 based desktop
> >> solutions for a long time to come. But they may have decided it
> >> is not necessary (and in these confusing Y2K periods perhaps
> >> not desirable also) yet to dive into your wallet for another few
> >> hundred dollars to give you just another desktop with a new
> >> driver-model, a new look, a mandatory change to new versions
> >> of your existing applications, the need to buy new hardware etc.
>
> > I would have been very happy with a trimmed-down, up to speed new Warp
> > client from Stardock. OS/2 upgrades have rarely made hardware upgrades
> > mandatory. IIRC, Warp 3 required even *less* memory than v 2.11.
>
> I was comparing IBM's position on pulling money from your wallet
> (none at this time as it works) to the ways of a Redmond based corp.
> They seem to feel that there is no compelling reason (for you) to spend
> money on a new version, not from Stardock nor from themselves or others.
>
You're sort of right there: even without any fixpacks, Warp 4 is still
waayyyy ahead of the competition (not counting the ability to run some
inane game or run the latest, dumbest music composing software). The
problems start if you're going to use stae-of-the-art hardware: it
would really have been neat to get an updated client, slimmed down a
little and ready to run a whole new millenium.

> >> You get the picture. What is wrong with IBM letting you keep
> >> your current (according to your own words; fine WPS) solutions
> >> without wanting them to have more money for the same product?
>
> > There is nothing wrong with Warp, the WPS and the apps I run now. I
> > will keep on running them for as long as they serve me. But it has now
> > become painfully obvious that OS/2 is by its maker no longer
> > considered to be a viable option for SOHO users. This is a lot worse
> > than previous rumours about the demise of OS/2: this is IBM
> > practically saying: "Piss off, you lame SOHO'ers, you!"
>
> Maybe. I think that there was a simple reason: a failing business case
> and that IBM did not take this decision specifically to get us out of the
> door. After all, that would be stupid allienating those faithfull users
invited
> in by big TV-campaigns etc. some years ago. It may work out that way, but
> that is because there is an industry-shift to thin clients (even M$ is going
the
> way of putting the building blocks and the office-suite on the server).
Wasn't
> Linux born from the same uneasiness of putting far to much into the
OS-kernel?
>
To me, thin clients are taking away choice: a fat client can always
emulate a thin one (that's the good part of a computer; it's
essentially a machine that can become any other machine), but it
doesn't work the other way around. Remember: PS's were born because
users were fed up with those pesky terminals.

True, Linux takes a lot out of the kernel (sometimes so much it
becomes confusing), but it's still there on *your* machine if you want
to. You don't need to log into some internet server to recompile your
kernel, which - I just found out - is actually quite a trivial thing,
comparable to changing your config.sys file (needless to say I was
pleasantly surprised).

> We can feel pissed off, we can try to fight the industries intended
direction but
> both will not help us (me at least) to keep (or get) a grip on day-to-day
business.
> One can call that playing oystrich, I believe salmon's only fight the uphill
(eh up-
> stream) battle if there is <VBG> something really desirable to do there. I
am opti-
> mistically waiting for that season to arrive, then I will decide (<g>
environmental
> circumstances may have changed by then) which upstream I am going to fight.
>
Sofar, it seems that the Linux way of looking at computers is the way
I like it. We'll see. After all, Warp is far from being deleted from
my computer.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net
=======================================================
If we could have our cake _and_ eat it,
people would start whining about seconds.
=======================================================

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

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            20-Sep-99 22:15:02
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 23:57:55, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Karel Jansens wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 18:52:18, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > > Brad Barclay wrote:
> > >
> > > > Tim Martin wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > >     Maybe the facts as you assume you know them.  Darin and myself
both work
> > > > > > inside the big blue wall however, and have a whole lot more
information to go
> > > > > > on than you do.  And it's not good.
> > > > >
> > > > > Then you'd better check with you own co-workers - especially
> > > > > those attending Warpstock today.  They are telling a much
> > > > > different story.  In fact - the whole reporting by Brad Wardell
> > > > > of such a meeting even taking place is now in question.  They
> > > > > say no such meeting took place.
> > > >
> > > >     I have sufficient proof to say otherwise.
> > >
> > > Yet if you check with WarpExpo attendees you'll find the
> > > IBM official actually made a rather lengthy statement on
> > > the subject and (let me add) - indicated a second company
> > > is also in negotiations to release a Warp 5 client.  Will Stardock
> > > provide a Warp 5 client in all 35-40 languages which is an IBM
> > > requirement or are they trying to limit 'their' Stardock Warp 5
> > > client to just English-only?  Can IBM afford to do that to their
> > > world-wide customers?  Germany, the largest user of OS/2,
> > > would most likely be outraged.
> > >
> > Tim,
> >
> > I would *really* love to believe you.
>
> Please don't.  You've worked incessantly against me and
> Warp City for quite sometime based upon the crackpot
> statements of my detractors.  Warp City members know
> different.
>
Weeellll, you shouldn't tell fibs then, Mr Martin.

> > However, your credibility record being as it is on coo*, I will need a
> > *lot* more than those statements.
>
> Ahhh... the crackpot detractors.
>
Not entirely. Even a clueless newbie as myself can see the many
inconsistencies in your posts. You should keep better notes of what
you send out.

But I'm not saying that I'll never believe you again. Only, if you
want to report on what is essentially a *big* issue for the OS/2
world, *and* if you intend to make such strong statements regarding
that issue, you'd better be prepared to cough up some proof. Otherwise
you're only making a fool of yourself.

And we wouldn't want that, would we now?

> > What "IBM official" was it you are quoting?
>
> Can't say.  He's given us no authorization to publicly
> announce his name.  Kim Cheung knows and he's
> a participant at the Warp Expo West.  Maybe he'll
> be brave and tell you.
>
That's the easy way out. If there is no corroborration (is that too
many 'r's?), you're essentially bringing out gossip with zero value.

> > What second company is negotiating the release of a Warp client?
>
> We're holding that close to our vest.  Now THAT's hot
> information.
>
Same as above. "I know it, but I ain't gonna tell ya" doesn't count as
confirmation, Tim.

> > Stardock (or you) never made a secret of their negotiations.
>
> They could have and should have but they had little
> to sway IBM with.  You've seen Wardell's public outbursts,
> tirades and actions.  If you were IBM would you trust such
> an individual with your guaranteed $100,000 million a year
> golden egg?  Stardock needed all the publicity and support
> they could garner.  And they got it and it still hasn't helped.
>
I have to admit that I haven't seen Brad do any of the above (bursting
out, tirading or actioning) with relation to the Stardock Warp client.
He did give you the occasional ding round the ear, though.

Incidentally, where does that figure "100,000 million" come from? I
can see no way Warp could ever make 100 billion a year.

> > When did Stardock state they would limit their client to just an
> > English version?
>
> I never said they did.  I simply asked the question. Read the
> above again.  I said it is an IBM pre-requisite for the distribution
> of any OS/2 client.  Do you realize the amount of money it
> will take to undertake such a massive translation?
>
It was one of your arguments why you thought Stardock wasn't given the
license to produce the new client. The fact that you put a question
mark at the end of that sentence doens't change that.

And no, I don't know the amount of money that would take. How much is
it?

> > If you can answer those questions, we're a step closer to home.
>
> No, YOU are a step closer to getting the information you
> believe will quell your fears of Stardock's claim that OS/2
> is dead.  Time will take you home.
>
Essentially, I couldn't care less if OS/2 is "dead" or not. The only
thing that still interests me is whether I can get my work done. Sofar
Warp fulfills that condition nicely. But IBM's announcement has made
me a bit weary about long-term plans involving OS/2 and my business,
hence the fresh Linux partition on my disk.

> > > You'll notice Stardock has suddenly gone mum.  Was this
> > > public message from Wardell a strategic move to force IBM
> > > to go his way?  Scare the hell out of the OS/2 community,
> > > tell them there will never be a Warp 5 client (in essence,
> > > declaring the death of OS/2) and anger the OS/2 masses
> > > against IBM?  Risky move.  Maybe not.  If IBM were to cave
> > > in to his proposal (English only) the good news of a Stardock
> > > Warp 5 client release would overwhelm any "gosh we're sorry,
> > > we were wrong" statement out of Stardock.
> > >
> > Admitted, it is interesting how we haven't heard anything from
> > Stardock's people after the "leaked" message,
>
> There was no 'leaked' message at all.  Brad Wardell issued
> and signed the message himself.  He knew it would be published
> at every public OS/2 news site.  In it, he appears to speak for
> IBM when he says "...IBM has indicated that they have no plans
> for an OS/2 based client of their own."  Yet this statement has
> never been officially issued by IBM.  It is either worded poorly
> or on purpose or is insufficent but it leaves the impression of
> an announcement of the death of OS/2.  What else would the
> average reader deduce from such a statement.  Had he added
> ".. IBM has indicated that they have no plans for an OS/2 based
> client of their own THIS YEAR" then we would all understand
> that IBM has simply decided against allowing Stardock to
> release a Stardock version of a Warp 5 client.
>
I think we now have had enough people confirming that statement from
IBM that we can safely assume Brad has at least given a reasonably
accurate version of it.

> > but it could also be
> > that the matter hasn't been resolved yet.
>
> Gosh, I don't know what you are reading or where you have
> been reading but every OS/2 public web site I've been to
> says there will be no new OS/2 upgrade.  About.com has
> literally written OS/2's obit.  WarpCast's 'Judgement Day'
> scenario offers only Wardell's public statement which
> leads anyone who reads it to believe OS/2 is dead.
>
So those web sites did a stupid thing. We're all used to that. Heck,
*you* should know.

> Now it appears you want the world to believe "the matter
> hasn't been resolved yet."  Gee, why doesn't Stardock
> release such a statement?
>
I dunno. Haven't heard from Stardock yet. My gut feeling tells me
there's politics going on.

> > You really shouldn't try to
> > "put strategies into their mouths".
>
> I've put no strategies into their mouths, I'm basing my
> opinion on their actions to date.  You just stratigized for
> us all that perhaps "the matter hasn't been resolved yet"
> and yet, Brad's public statement, in every sense of the
> word, certainly makes it clear to the reader that there will
> be no new Warp 5 client from Stardock or IBM - ever.
>
Politics again? They're fiendish little devils, those politics; get
into anything, they will. And they're a bugger to get out again.

> > And again you mention the unproven
> > English-only Warp (not that I'd care, mind you; I'm running English
> > now, because no more Dutch version apparently).
>
> I bring it up because the IBM official at WarpExpo brought
> up the fact that IBM has a pre-requirement for any Warp 5
> 'deal' and that policy requires the release of any OS/2 client
> be made in some 35-40 different languages.  IBM sells OS/2
> worldwide and it makes perfect sense for them to want their
> entire clientle to have a working version in their own language.
> I ask the question: could this be the reason why IBM has
> elected to turn down Stardock's initial proposal?  Could
> Stardock possibly afford to come up with the money to
> offer some 35-40 different language versions of a Warp 5
> product?  You tell me.
>
IBM itself saw no problem in dropping a whole bunch of national
versions going from 3 to 4.
And what kind of money are we talking about here?

> > > Our (Warp City) German members are pretty angry right now.
> > > They say Stardock's message is crushing OS/2 users in their
> > > neck of the woods (Stardock's statement is doing more and
> > > more damage here every second).
> > >
> > In all fairness, the way you've been reacting does help to keep up
> > those emotions.
>
> Hello?  I've done everything possible to quell their fears
> caused from Wardell's public statement are unfounded.
> To tell them Brad Wardell DOES NOT speak for IBM when
> he announces there will be no Warp 5 client.  They turn
> to me because they know I'm devoted to OS/2 and will
> work with and for them to get them the information they
> need to make an informed decision.
>
Tim, the problem is that nobody - and I do mean nobody - sees you
"working with and for" anybody. All we see here is idle gossip and
"told you so!" messages. How can you expect people to take you
seriously on that basis?

There are people here in the group coming up with constructive
proposals vs the future of OS/2. OK, so I may not like all of their
ideas, but at least they're doing something! You just seem to rant
away and subsequently get angry when people don't want to see you as a
leader in the community.

> > > I wouldn't be surprised if IBM were to release some kind of
> > > public or official statement.  Stardock's message is the most
> > > negative and damaging to OS/2 than anything this year.
> > >
> > > > > You'd also better check with those same IBM officials.  They
> > > > > say OS/2 will generate more than 100 million for IBM this year
> > > > > and that IBM is spending some 12 million on drivers and
> > > > > additional maintenance releases.  That's pretty damn good
> > > > > for a so-called dead operating system.
> > > >
> > > >     And it probably will.  What you're missing is that this figure has
very little
> > > > to do with the OS/2 client, and instead represents sales of OS/2 WARP
Server,
> > > > WorkSpace on Demand, DB2 (which IIRC pulls in the bulk of that
figure), the
> > > > VisualAge family, and everything else that runs under OS/2 that IBM
sells.
> > > >
> > > >     In short, the figure is very misleading.  Besides which, the point
is not that
> > > > IBM is or isn't making a profit from OS/2 - it's wether or not there
is going to be
> > > > a new fat client version.  And right now, based on all publicly
available info, as
> > > > the magic 8 ball says "all indications point to no".
> > >
> > > But IBM has said categorically there will be no new 'fat' client this
> > > year.  They have NEVER said they will not eventually release
> > > a Warp 5 client.  Wardell is saying just that.  Someone has to either
> > > confirm or deny it because Wardell's statement is just too
> > > damaging and evidenced by the headlines appearing at the
> > > public OS/2 web sites.
> > >
> > Did IBM ever emphasise "this year"? I'd say that simply the fact that
> > they haven't reacted to this issue (Stardock nono new fat client)
> > could be considered the writing on the wall. Oh well, I guess I can
> > wait until the end of next week...
>
> Has IBM ever said officially they will never offer another
> release of OS/2 Warp?  No.  What IBM has said is that they
> will continue to support OS/2 for the next ten years.  They
> can do that by continuing to offer fixpaks, new drivers and
> applications but it is obvious they will eventually be forced
> (even economically) to put together one full upgrade package
> and offer it for online installation or for sale on CD to current
> registered users.
>
That's a novel use of the word "obvious" if I ever saw one. If such
were the case, why haven't they brought out such a packet already?
With the burning y2k issue alone I'd say there's more than enough
economical drive for it.

> But please pay no attention to what I say.
>
Why not? Don't you believe yourself?

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net
=======================================================
If we could have our cake _and_ eat it,
people would start whining about seconds.
=======================================================

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                  20-Sep-99 23:19:06
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: "Jaime A. Cruz, Jr." <[e-mail]>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Sometimes I sit here and find myself wondering exactly what color the sky is
on Tim's planet...  Other times, I figure it isn't even worth bothering.  If
I see a post from Tim, and spot the words "Brad" or "Stardock" anywhere in
the text, I dismiss it as more irrational prattling and ignore it.  If the
words "Brad" or "Stardock" are not anywhere in the text, it is often
something useful.  It's almost as though those words triggered some kind of
Tourette's Syndrome in him...

On 20 Sep 1999 22:54:11 GMT, Esther Schindler wrote:

>On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 22:52:53, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>| He has single handedly
>| chased hundreds if not thousands of OS/2 users away from OS/2.
>
>According to...?
>
>

Jaime A. Cruz, Jr.

o&o_o&o_o&o_o&o_o&o_o&o_o&o_o&o_o&o_o&o_o&o_o&o_o&o
o                                                 o
o  Visit the Nassau Wings Motorcycle Club at:     o
o  http://www.nassauwings.org/                    o
o  A Charter Member of the Motorcycle Web Ring!   o
o                                                 o
o&o_o&o_o&o_o&o_o&o_o&o_o&o_o&o_o&o_o&o_o&o_o&o_o&o



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 5.0 OS/2 for non-commercial use
Comment: PGP 5.0 for OS/2
Charset: cp850

wj8DBQE35rLegvzYfxgMc34RAmNpAJ9U2VzgB6C10s3asU1MW87Jsbby4QCfc8hD
385THXwzYV17ij+/oAkAHhg=
=RK4A
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Nassau Wings Motorcycle Club (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                         20-Sep-99 23:47:15
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Marty writes [to RJ Friedman]:

> Do you honestly believe Brad would have a reason (personal or
> business) to lie on this order of magnitude?

I've seen Brad lie on the same order of magnitude about other things.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            20-Sep-99 20:21:18
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: [e-mail] (David H. McCoy)

In article <7s4f8l$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
>vid H. McCoy ([e-mail]) wrote:
>
>: I amazed by your choice of OS/2. Either you are stuck with old hardware or
>: fighting to get newer hardware to install.  I've never found NT slower than
>: OS/2. Again, it is amazing that you, an OS/2 user find constant faults with
>: Windows, that most do not.
>
>Older hardware, certainly.  There is no sense getting stuck in the upgrade
>cycle when all that it is for is to make money for software developers.


Sure. With you guys is always an upgrade cycle. You ever stop to consider that

people buy what they think they need? It seems to me that the only people who
shout "upgrade cycle" are those without software.

>With regards to the faults of Windows NT, I will only list responsiveness
>(or the lack thereof).  Otherwise, I have not used it enough to comment.
>Well, I shouldn't even say that.  I did have some time to play with one NT
>system.  But that was 3 years ago, and on version 3.5 or so (my memory is
>failing me).  Outside of speed, I don't recall having any problems with
>that machine.  In fact, it was a great deal better than using the plain
>DOS box.  (Or had they installed 95 by that point?  I forget.)

Don't you think that a couple of uses 3 years ago is a bit much on which to
draw such a conclusion. You are woefully out of date. I used OS/2 from 2.1 to
Warp 4, and I once had the same opinion as you. Three years ago. IMO, when I
tried NT 4 on my OS/2 box, a P166 with 64 megs of ram, they are at similar
speeds in terms of program launching, downloading, and multitasking. The
reason
I eventually switched to NT was because it proved for me, more stable, more
robust, and far better supported. The first thing I noticed, for example is
that my hardware worked better. For example, my then SB16 PnP under OS/2,
could
not be shared between Win-OS/2 sessions and OS/2. In fact, if one Win-OS/2
session grabbed the soundcard, nothing else could use it.  Nothing. Now, under

NT(and now Win2k), play MP3s using RealJukebox, listen to SpinnerPlus, and
still get system alerts. Also, things like my Ziptools existed for NT, but not

for OS/2. I could format my PP zipdisks as NTFS. That hardware support
continues under Win2k where now, when I installed it, it recoginized things
like my generic PCI soundcard and my Diamond TNT2 Ultra videocard. And unlike
OS/2 it seems, it can recognized drives greater than 8 gig.

>Windows 95 is another story altogether.  There my experiences go from so=so
>to just plain sour.  It ranges from loosing the system while programming
>(due to poor memory protection, and poor bounds checking), to not being able
>to do some stuff in CorelDRAW 5 (which could be done under OS/2), to Win95
>corrupting its own system files (to the point of disuse), to the modem
>dropping to about half of its throughput when the process was stuck into
>the background.

Why is it that most people don't have such problems. When I worked at AT&T,
hundreds of people used Win95. Dozens were around me and none, to my
knowledge,
complained of such widespread problems. Heck, my mother-in-law is almost
totally computer illiterate and has called me about problems like my mouse
doesn't work. A problem caused by the fact that it was 4 years old, BTW.


>
>: >(Or UNIX, for that matter.  But UNIX has the one quality that you can
>: >access a machine from almost anywhere and **somebody else maintains the
>: >system**.  Haven't seen much of that with Windows.)
>
>: Unix has many qualities over OS/2, the least of which is reliability.
>
>But it is sure a devil to maintain.  As I said before, I do not have that
>much time to devote to one computer.  If you do, have your fun maintaining
>your system.  I like having my system available for work when there is
>work to do, and available for tinkering when there is time to spare.

I don't agree. Every company I've ever worked at has some kind of Unix box and

for the most part, you left them alone. You cannot find a more reliable
system.
For the most part, you just leave them alone.

>As for the reliability of UNIX over OS/2: from my meager accomplishments
>with Linux and NetBSD, it seems to me that OS/2 is more reliable from the
>users point of view.  For example: running DeScribe simply requires that
>the OS and progam are installed properly.  For something like LaTeX you
>really need the OS, a text editor, LaTeX, ghostview, (ghostscript?), and
>lpd to be installed properly.  Never mind the need of the user to know
>how to use all of those programs properly.

Please. No offense, but you don't know what you are talking about. You keep
making claims of reliability and response for systems on which you obviously
have little experience. Unix boxes can run hundreds of concurrent users. OS/2
cannot come close to touching it.

It sound like you are talking about ease of use, and Windows has it over OS/2
there. Better hardware support, no-brainer software purchases, and
installshield make for the best user experience.



>--
>Stopped (SIGTTOU)         byron.
>$
>

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            20-Sep-99 20:25:09
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: [e-mail] (David H. McCoy)

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>Jeff Glatt wrote:
>>
>> >>>Gerben Bergman
>> >>>Why is it that OS/2 users are always this unlucky when trying out
Windows?
>>
>> >>Jeff Glatt
>> >>I don't think that it's quite as much luck as it is competence. To be
>> >>frank, based upon what I've seen of OS/2 users in newsgroups such as
>> >>this, they don't seem to be too savvy in general. Mostly, they just
>> >>seem to be overly exuberant about a particular niche OS, but
>> >>otherwise, do not have any particular skills that would prevent them
>> >>from having difficulty doing something like installing and running
>> >>Windows
>>
>> >Marty
>> >Need I remind you that this group does not represent people who use OS/2
in
>> >any way, shape, or form?
>>
>> Of course this group represents people who use OS/2. After all, people
>> who use OS/2 post here all of the time.
>
>Does it also represent windoze users since they post here too?
>
>> >A lot of Windoze users that formerly used OS/2 had a lot of problems with
it
>>
>> I don't think that a lot of Windows users ever used OS/2.
>>
>> Of the ones I know who are former OS/2 users, most left OS/2 because
>> they found that Windows made it easier for them to get more and better
>> work done. I know that's true in my own case.
>
>Of the ones that have used OS/2 and have posted here, many have claimed
>they had stability problems with OS/2.  This, of course, is just going
>by what is posted in this group.
>
>- Marty
>

I had both. The SIQ was a problem. A big one, no, but it isn't a problem at
all
for me with Win2k(or NT). Also, I grew weary of fighting hardware and
software.
I prefer seeing my OS of choice on the box. Also, for me, the WPS would lock
up
about every 4 days. NT on the same hardware did not.

I tried NT convinced me that it was better, for me anyway, than OS/2 by sheer
competence. It proved more reliable. More robust. And offered far better
support.

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                    21-Sep-99 00:42:02
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Tell us about your sofware Dave

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

How are sales doing?  Can you give us a 5 year graph of sales and revenue?
Do it in volume and not percentages.  Where do you stand among OS/2 isv's?
What percentage of the OS/2 software pie do you have?  Could you
support yourself off of the sales of your software?  Do you represent the
average software vendor?  We are in an OS/2 advocacy group and what better
place to answer these questions posed to you.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                    21-Sep-99 00:44:04
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <7s6ifq$lg4$[e-mail]>,
Dave Tholen <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Jason Bowen writes:
>
>> I have never had a probelm with Windows anything not supporting hardware.
>
>I've read about people complaining about how Microsoft refused to help
>out with an NT problem because the hardware they were using wasn't on
>the HCL.
>

I've heard that OS/2 users have to patch their install disks to install
Warp on new hardware.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                    21-Sep-99 00:47:17
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <7s6id2$lg4$[e-mail]>,
Dave Tholen <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Jason Bowen writes:
>
>> OS/2 out of the box right now can't install on most modern hardware
>
>What do you consider "modern hardware", Jason?  I installed OS/2 out
>of the box on a Pentium II 400 MHz machine, 256 MB of memory, and a
>monitor running at 1600x1200x24bits.  It has ultra-wide SCSI drives,
>a CD rewriteable, audio, ethernet card...
>

What do you think the chances are of walking into a random computer store,
grabbing a random piece of hardware, and having support for it under
Linux, Windows 9x/NT or OS/2?  OS/2 out of the box can't install on
EIDE hard drive over 8.4 gigs unless it is patched.  How many DVD
drive/decoder combinations have support under OS/2?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                         20-Sep-99 23:51:13
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Bennie Nelson writes [to Tim Martin]:

> I doubt seriously that you can find and produce any evidence to
> show that Brad W. has chased away a dozen people from using OS/2.

I guess it depends on how you choose to place the blame.  Several
other people have posted their own interpretations of Brad's latest
message regarding no client from Stardock, and I've seen several
people comment on how they're going to start looking at Linux as a
result.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         21-Sep-99 00:03:07
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Esther Schindler writes:

> (EVERY OS/2 software developer is suffering, right now.

How can you say that, Esther?  I'm an OS/2 software developer, and you
certainly have no information from me that allows you to make such a
statement.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            20-Sep-99 20:27:10
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: OS/2 is ALIVE! [8-)

From: [e-mail] (David H. McCoy)

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:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Right! After all, let's look at the successes that Netscape 4.61,
Open32, NCs,
>> >> >> >> and Java all had for OS/2.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> With successes like this, who needs failures?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >What do you know about how any of the above mentioned items run in
OS/2?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >- Marty
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Are you even bothering to read the thread? This person who is 200%
commited to
>> >> >> an application seems to feel that the the DOJ/MS trial will have some
positive
>> >> >> effect on IBM, and therefore OS/2.
>> >> >
>> >> >If I wanted to respond to that statement, I'd respond to the original
>> >> >poster.
>> >>
>> >> I am responding to that person. By implication, any response to my
response is
>> >> a support or condemnation of that persons statement. That's why we have
>> >> threads.
>> >
>> >My response is a condemnation of your statement.  That's why we have
>> >Replies.
>>
>> Fine. On what grounds? Would you like for me to pull from DejaNews the
various
>> statements saying that those various technologies were going to revive
OS/2?
>>
>> It would be embarrassingly easy.
>
>That's not what the products were intended for, therefore they're not
>failures as such.  They didn't live up users' (possibly unreasonable)
>expectations perhaps, but they operate as intended.

That may be true, but the context I'm speaking of is user expectations. If you

don't want to discuss that, move on.

>> >> >> If you believe that, you are living in a dream world. All of the
software I
>> >> >> mentioned, was supposed to have a similarly benefial, ie, reviving
affect on
>> >> >> this very beleagured operating system and all failed.
>> >> >
>> >> >That's not my argument.
>> >>
>> >> Fine. That's my argument. If you don't want to discuss that, move on.
>> >>
>> >> >> As for what I know about how any of those particular items run, what
would you
>> >> >> like to know? I know that all run or in the case of NCs, have a
software
>> >> >> solution (WSOD) to run.
>> >> >
>> >> >Your statement says that all of those things you mentioned were
failures.
>> >>
>> >> Indeed.
>> >>
>> >> >> What do you want to know?
>> >> >
>> >> >In what way were they failures?  Did they not do what they were
supposed
>> >> >to?
>> >>
>> >> <cut-and-paste>
>> >> If you believe that, you are living in a dream world. All of the
software I
>> >> mentioned, was supposed to have a similarly benefial, ie, reviving
affect on
>> >> this very beleagured operating system and all failed.
>> >> </cut-and-paste>
>> >
>> >Last time I looked, Netscape was supposed to allow me to browse the web,
>> >Java was supposed to allow me to run Java apps, ...
>>
>> Marty, I grow weary of this. I've explain my position, yet you want to
argue
>> about something else. Fine. Go do so, but it won't be with me.
>
>You grow weary of defending your position, yet you never seem to grow weary
>of calling OS/2 products failures.  Why is that?

No. I grow weary of people like you. You come into a thread and only want to
speak of something outside the scope of the thread.





>- Marty
>

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                20-Sep-99 19:38:22
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: Ron Vopicka <[e-mail]>

Frank,

I think you missed my not-to-clearly-made point.

If ANYONE is going to bring out a new release of an operating system,
they go thru alpha and beta tests, concurrently every piece of code is
regression tested.  If there are 150k different configuration
possibilities with varying pieces of hardware, you have to assembly a
(large) statistical representation of those systems to do ALL of your
testing on.  You have lots of people involved in test, you have customer
engineers involved for maintainability, you have more and more people
involved that you can not even imagine.  You house the people and
equipment and it all comes to big cubic bucks!

And they did do it from the beginning... with every release.  People
lose sight of the fact that when software goes into maintenance mode you
don't get the same level of testing you do with a new full-blown version
(Microsoft being a relatively obvious exception to that rule).

And you are right, that all comes to a lot of catch-up IF you thought
you were going to make a profit with that OS in competition with MS (or
others).

But they aren't going to make and REAL money on it.  They don't have the
applications.  MS corralled those very adeptly.

Ron

Frank wrote:
>
> On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 20:59:19, Ron Vopicka <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> > If IBM were to "push" an updated preload, ala MSoft, they would have to
> > be willing to spend many hundreds of millions of (US) $$ on installation
> > aids, testing (on some representative set of current (and non-current)
> > hardware to verify proper operation and compatibility).  How many
> > "onesy" customers do you suppose you would have to sell to to break even
> > on $2-500,000,000.?  And the large corporate customers wouldn't care.
> > Their systems are either doing what they were intended to (if OS/2).
> >
> > Ron
>
> If they had been doing this from the beginning, the costs wouldn't be
> so high !!
> IBM has a lot to catch up with if the go pushing os/2 in the market as
> a consumer
> product against the redmond gadget.
>
> Frank
>
> The box said:"Requires Windows 95/98, NT or better" .......... So I
> too installed OS/2.
>

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 00:12:17
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: A public thank-you to the Warp Expo West organizers

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

"Kim Cheung" wrote:

| >(like chocolate chip cookies in the exhibit hall).

| How can you not mention those apples and bananas?

You expect me to mention fruit when there's chocolate around?!

--Esther

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 17:26:23
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Credibility

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

"Richard R. Klemmer" wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 03:40:21, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Could you please explain the discrepancy here.
>
> First you said:
>
> > but we asked them not to.  They are certainly welcome to announce
> > their affilation with Warp City.  Many people don't because
>
> But then later you state:
>
> > We ask all Warp City members to sign agreement.  An agreement
> > that says they won't reveal their memberships or steal our news or
> > web pages and report the information elsewhere.  Since our most
>
> Which is it?

Both.  We can't stop a member from announcing their
affiliation but we do ask them to agree not to.  We do
that for their own protection.  Warp City members are
often targeted by (Microsoft) fanatics.

> Are they or are they not allowed to reveal that they are
> members?

See above.

> I'll be attending Warpstock this year and I would be
> interested in meeting members of Warp City to hear what they have to
> say about it's services.

Many Warp City members have revealed their
memberships right here in these newsgroups.  A
bit of detective work through Deja News would
tell you who they are.

Here is a recent sample.  It was originally posted on 06/09/1999
in this newsgroup and written to Brad Wardell who claimed
all members of Warp City were ficticious.  This particular
individual is an important and well-respected member of the
OS/2 community:

"I am a Warpcity member and have been for two plus years,
I don't believe I am Ficticious.

During that time frame I have asked for and received help
from Tim at least three times. He has provided a solution
to my problem in every case, and on two of the problems,
I had a response within 30 minutes."

> -----------------------------
> Richard R. Klemmer
> [e-mail]
> http://www.webtrek.com
> -----------------------------

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 17:43:19
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: New!  Comm/2 v4.61, 56BIT & 128BIT, Plug-in Pack & C/2 Spellcheck

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

The IBM Netscape team has released an updated
Communicator v4.61.  It is now an official program
found in the IBM Software Catalog.  The Url:

http://service.boulder.ibm.com/asd-bin/doc/en_us/catalog.htm
Netscape Communicator 4.61 for OS/2(R) Warp

Netscape Communicator 4.61 for OS/2 Warp combines Web browsing,
e-mail, Web page creation, and newsgroups into a single solution
enabling
you to find and share information easily.
Updated 09/20/99
Netscape Communicator 4.61 for OS/2(R) Warp with strong
encryption

Netscape Communicator 4.61 for OS/2 Warp with strong encryption
combines Web browsing, e-mail, Web page creation, and newsgroups into
a single solution enabling you to find and share information easily. The

level of encryption available in this version allows you to access your
accounts at financial institutions that require strong (128-bit)
encryption.
FOR USE IN THE U.S. AND CANADA ONLY.
Updated 09/20/99

OS/2(R) Plug-in Pack v. 3.0
The OS/2 Plug-in Pack v. 3.0 enhances Netscape Communicator 4.61 for
OS/2 Warp by enabling it to play many video and audio files. It also
enables Netscape Communicator to use Microsoft(R) Windows(R) 3.1
plug-ins.
Updated 09/20/99

IBM(R) Spellchecker Dictionaries for Netscape
Communicator 4.61 for OS/2(R) Warp
Provides additional spelling dictionaries for Netscape Communicator 4.61

for OS/2 Warp.
Updated 09/20/99

Tim Martin
The OS/2 Guy
Warp City
http://warpcity.com
"E-ride the wild surf to Warp City!"

P.S.  Thanks IBM's Netscape Team for all the hard work!


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                   21-Sep-99 01:41:29
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Mike Trettel)

On 21 Sep 1999 00:44:08 GMT, Jason Bowen <[e-mail]>
wrote:
>In article <7s6ifq$lg4$[e-mail]>,
>Dave Tholen <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>Jason Bowen writes:
>>
>>> I have never had a probelm with Windows anything not supporting hardware.
>>
>>I've read about people complaining about how Microsoft refused to help
>>out with an NT problem because the hardware they were using wasn't on
>>the HCL.
>>
>
>I've heard that OS/2 users have to patch their install disks to install
>Warp on new hardware.
>

On EIDE disks that have more than 1024 cylinders (or is it 2048-never
could keep that EIDE crap straight) it's needed to apply the newer eide
disk driver to the install disks.  That's only needed if the MB
bios won't retranslate the drive geometry via LBA to less than
1024 cylinders.  Those of us who use SCSI have never had this problem
(and never will, either).  This is an annoyance, to be sure, but it
really isn't that big a deal.  It's right up there with installing NT
on an unsupported SCSI adapter and swapping in the correct driver
during the install-something that has to be dealt with once and only
during the install.

--
===========
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]                               20-Sep-99 20:59:05
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Karel Jansens wrote:
>
> > Linux and Window get much more support than OS/2 and who can blame people
> > when IBM won't commit on OS/2's future
> >
> The overwhelming Linux support comes from the fact that it's open
> source and windows, wweelll... it probably needs it.

I gotta disagree with you on the Linux support issue.  If there were any
reason not to have hardware support in Linux, it would be because it is
open source.  No one wants their proprietary information distributed in
source form to the masses.  That's part of the reason why it has been so
historically slow to get video cards supported by XFree86.  Anyone remember
waiting for the SVGA server to start supporting Matrox cards?

The only reason things are changing now is because more companies are
finding Linux a viable platform.  Also, the "invention" of compiled modules
a while back has helped the situation a bit, where drivers can be
distributed <without> source.  Open source is definitely not something that
encourages hardware support for sure.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 18:00:17
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Bennie Nelson wrote:

> Tim Martin wrote:
> >
> > [e-mail] wrote:
> >
> > > Personally I think that Brad Wardell ( trying to keep the Brads straight
)
> > > has done a wonderful job of getting all the vocal os/2 supporters
incensed
> > > about this supposed statement/decision by IBM.
> >
> > Wardell has done that and much more.  He has single handedly
> > chased hundreds if not thousands of OS/2 users away from OS/2.
>
> Tim,
> It seems to me that you've overplayed your hand, again.  You do have
> a habit of that.  I doubt seriously that you can find and produce
> any evidence to show that Brad W. has chased away a dozen people
> from using OS/2.
>
> I much prefer the helpful Tim Martin who posts in the other
> newsgroups.  I believe you have been shabbily treated by some
> in this newsgroup, but you don't have to respond in the way you
> do.  That only tends to stir other people up who don't know the
> whole story.  Besides, as is so often the case, it's the guy who
> swings second who draws the penalty flag.
>
> Please give it some thought.
>
> Regards,
> Bennie Nelson

Sorry Bennie but you have to sit in my seat.  I oversee
the largest OS/2-only private subscription web site on
the 'Net which services thousands of OS/2 users.  I have
to deal with the reality of members writing to say, "Now
that IBM has killed OS/2 will you help us move over to
Linux and other supported operating systems?"

Many see Brad to be a leader (self-proclaimed) within the
OS/2  community.  That self-proclaimed leader has stepped
forward and literally declared the end of any OS/2 future.

Look around you now.  The Register, one of the most
well respected News Media Sources on the 'Net, is now
running the "poor Brad" story and citing the death of
OS/2 once again.  By the end of this week you'll see
other commercial tech news sites reporting the final
death of OS/2.  Folks like "Wired" "InfoWorld"  "CNET"
"Mercury News"  "ZDNews" and so on.

If you think many OS/2 users won't believe these
constant flood of false stories and leave OS/2 then
there's a golden bridge in San Francisco I'd love to
sell you.

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 01:56:19
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

Tim,

YOU are the one claiming that OS/2 users are being chased away from
OS/2. Not me. I haven't seen a single OS/2 user walk away from the
platform.

*YOU* are the one spouting doom and gloom for the OS/2 community, Tim,
and doing your best to keep this contraversy alive. I'm the one
posting thank-you messages to the people who put on a successful OS/2
event, and editing an article about choosing Web servers for OS/2.
Which of us is doing a better job supporting the people who use the
operating system?

And, for the record, we have no plans to write about this incident at
S@R. Had the news been positive, I would have been delighted to report
it, and I'm quite sure that ZDNN would have picked it up. Because I
knew about the planned meeting, I had sent Mary Jo a "heads-up" for a
hot news story (should the news be positive) and the article would
have been posted at 9am Friday.

Mary Jo and I did discuss the matter. We agreed that "no new client"
wasn't news, because that's been the status quo. This is a "dog bites
man" story. OS/2 is no more dead-or-alive than it was a week ago; my
system is running just fine, my applications continue to work. IBM has
made no statements... but then they almost _never_ make statements,
and rarely about OS/2.

So that settles the matter of how this is handled by the computer
press, or at least the corner of it for which I can adequately speak.
Let's get back to the matter at hand, where you claim that Brad has
single-handedly chased away hundreds if not thousands of OS/2 users.

According to *whom*...?

You chastised _me_ for reporting information without adequate
attribution. Why should you be held to a different standard,
especially when you're attacking an individual?

--Esther

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 01:28:15, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:

| Esther Schindler wrote:
|
| > On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 22:52:53, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
| >
| > | He has single handedly
| > | chased hundreds if not thousands of OS/2 users away from OS/2.
| >
| > According to...?
|
| What's the upcoming title of your next ZD hit piece
| Esther?  "IBM Shafts The King Of OS/2?", subtitled:
| "Bottom Nails To OS/2 Coffin Pounded In  By Lou!"
|
| I see Mary Jo Folly now dancin' with madness,
| rubbing her palms deliriously together, cigarette
| dangling from her lips as she dictates into her
| Microsoft Dragon voice dictation software.  "It's
| dead I tell you - God Damn it IS DEAD this time!
| It HAS TO BE!"
|
| :-)
|
|


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                   21-Sep-99 01:50:12
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Mike Trettel)

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 15:29:19 -0400, juvenaly <[e-mail]>
wrote:
>
>
>rj friedman wrote:
>
>> It would be funny, if it weren't so ludicrous, the way so
>> many are fuming and venting, rushing to blame IBM for the
>> Stardock/Warp5 fiasco. Has it not occurred to anyone that
>> the reason Stardock was turned down was because they were
>> not able to come up with a sufficiently convincing business
>> plan that would persuade IBM it was worth their while to
>> entrust OS/2 to Stardock?
>> ________________________________________________________
>
>Good point. Consider this too, which can be said in Big Blue' defense:
>For years we've heard criticism of certain companies (guess which ones?)
>for "vaporware" -- talking, for strategic reasons, about software they
>had not yet released, and sometimes had no intention to release. IBM, in
>refusing to divulge its plans, avoids this questionable practice. Which
>makes sense, too -- because plans can always change.
>

While this is pure speculation on my part, it could be that IBM is
waiting for some indication from Judge Jackson as to how he is going to
rule.  IBM has been on a tear lately giving away all sorts of neat
software-DB2, VA for Java, etc., and it would be really interesting if
they added a operating system to the pile of freebies.  If one of the
remedies was to free OS/2 from the MS tax, IBM would have far more
flexibility to do interesting things with it.

One can hope, anyway.

--
===========
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]                         21-Sep-99 00:10:05
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Jason Bowen writes:

> OS/2 out of the box right now can't install on most modern hardware

What do you consider "modern hardware", Jason?  I installed OS/2 out
of the box on a Pentium II 400 MHz machine, 256 MB of memory, and a
monitor running at 1600x1200x24bits.  It has ultra-wide SCSI drives,
a CD rewriteable, audio, ethernet card...

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         21-Sep-99 00:11:19
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Jason Bowen writes:

> I have never had a probelm with Windows anything not supporting hardware.

I've read about people complaining about how Microsoft refused to help
out with an NT problem because the hardware they were using wasn't on
the HCL.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 21:17:02
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Stardock Releases WindowBlinds v.99 - Shuns OS/2

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Tim Martin wrote:
>
> > > The authors of CandyBarZ at OS/2 Netlabs are working on WindowBlinds
themes
> > > support for OS/2. They have to implement stuff like transparency and for
sure
> > > they also try to fix the bugs, but then we are able to have this on OS/2
for
> > > free!
>
> Question:  If Stardock is such an ardent supporter of OS/2
> why aren't they offering WindowBlinds themes for OS/2
> themselves?  Why is it up to the programmers at NetLabs
> to use their valuable time to give us what Stardock, "The
> Self-Proclaimed Number One OS/2 Software Developer"
> is offering to the world of Microsoft users?

Now please show us Tim, where Stardock proclaimed themselves the "Number
One OS/2 Software Developer".  Then when you're done with that, show us
where they promised to deliver all of their products on both Win32 and
OS/2.  We're waiting...

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 01:09:18
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 00:03:15, [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)
wrote:

| > (EVERY OS/2 software developer is suffering, right now.
|
| How can you say that, Esther?  I'm an OS/2 software developer, and you
| certainly have no information from me that allows you to make such a
| statement.

Okay. I stand corrected.

Every one of the several dozen OS/2 ISVs with whom I have corresponded
about their OS/2 sales reports that they are suffering.

Is that better?

--Esther

P.S. So how many sales _have_ you had in the last twelve months? How
do they compare to the previous twelve months? Are you able to support
yourself wholly from sales of OS/2 products?


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

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

From: [e-mail]                      20-Sep-99 19:18:12
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

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

On 20 Sep 1999 23:51:26 GMT, Dave Tholen wrote:

> .....I've seen several
> people comment on how they're going to start looking at Linux as a
> result.

It's hard to avoid the Linux noise.  I installed it, just to see
what all the fuss was about.  After WPS, it's hard to see
the benefit in GUIs whose developers are still struggling
with 'cut' and 'paste'.

I have Win95 installed as well.  I'm sitting here typing this
in OS/2 because it is still what I use 90% of the time.  It's
solid and it works.  The existence of Linux does not affect
that.

I don't see the big deal here.  It looks to me like IBM
leaks most of the goodies from (ongoing) Warp Server
development, in the form of fixpacks for us "abandoned"
client users.  Today we got the final build of Netscape
4.61.  Who's abandoned?


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 20:51:21
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: OS/2 is ALIVE! [8-)

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:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Right! After all, let's look at the successes that Netscape
4.61, Open32, NCs,
> >> >> >> >> and Java all had for OS/2.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> With successes like this, who needs failures?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >What do you know about how any of the above mentioned items run in
OS/2?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >- Marty
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Are you even bothering to read the thread? This person who is 200%
commited to
> >> >> >> an application seems to feel that the the DOJ/MS trial will have
some positive
> >> >> >> effect on IBM, and therefore OS/2.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >If I wanted to respond to that statement, I'd respond to the original
> >> >> >poster.
> >> >>
> >> >> I am responding to that person. By implication, any response to my
response is
> >> >> a support or condemnation of that persons statement. That's why we
have
> >> >> threads.
> >> >
> >> >My response is a condemnation of your statement.  That's why we have
> >> >Replies.
> >>
> >> Fine. On what grounds? Would you like for me to pull from DejaNews the
various
> >> statements saying that those various technologies were going to revive
OS/2?
> >>
> >> It would be embarrassingly easy.
> >
> >That's not what the products were intended for, therefore they're not
> >failures as such.  They didn't live up users' (possibly unreasonable)
> >expectations perhaps, but they operate as intended.
>
> That may be true, but the context I'm speaking of is user expectations. If
you
> don't want to discuss that, move on.

Gotcha.  Just a misunderstanding.  Your statement came across differently.
Relying on two or three pieces of software to revive a market for an OS is
unlikely at best.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                    20-Sep-99 20:06:15
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Judgement Day ... Stardock and OS/2

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

On 20 Sep 1999 17:57:57 GMT, Jason Bowen wrote:

>Tell me about Warp 4 out of the box on a 10 gig hard drive.

What do you want to know?  That when my old 5 gig went bad and Maxtor
replaced it for free with a new 10 gig, that I installed it into my computer,
popped in the Warp 4 CD and floppies (unmodified mind you), booted,
partitioned, formated, installed, applied fixpack, installed new java, etc.
Basically it took me no more than one day to bring my system fully current.
Oh, and about that S3 card.  S3 makes many drivers, but if you (like me) are
a little displease with a driver or two, then get GRADD.  Hmmm...   I dunno,
maybe, just maybe, I am an anomlie in the universe.  Maybe, just maybe, my
computer was assembled by aliens and blessed by a priest (actually I built
it).

This is about the oldest argument on the books.  Give it up.  Words on a
screen will not convince someone who is determined not be be convinced no
matter what the situation.  OS/2 is not for everyone.  However, if you are
willing to actually invest a little bit of time and actually learn one or two
things about that $1,000-$2,000 piece of high tech electronics you have
blocking your view the wall behind your desk, and you are willing to buy a
PlayStation if you want the latest games, then OS/2 just may be for you.
Speaking as a former non-user, just give it a try.  You'll love it.

I've been using OS/2 now for 5 years.

Tony.



{}{}{} Posted via Uncensored-News.Com, http://www.uncensored-news.com {}{}{}
{}{}{}{} Only $8.95 A Month, - The Worlds Uncensored News Source {}{}{}{}
{}{}{}{}{} Five News Servers with a BINARIES ONLY Server {}{}{}{}{}

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Uncensored-News.Com $8.95 Uncensored Newsgroups. (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 18:08:02
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Stardock Releases WindowBlinds v.99 - Shuns OS/2

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

> > The authors of CandyBarZ at OS/2 Netlabs are working on WindowBlinds
themes
> > support for OS/2. They have to implement stuff like transparency and for
sure
> > they also try to fix the bugs, but then we are able to have this on OS/2
for
> > free!

Question:  If Stardock is such an ardent supporter of OS/2
why aren't they offering WindowBlinds themes for OS/2
themselves?  Why is it up to the programmers at NetLabs
to use their valuable time to give us what Stardock, "The
Self-Proclaimed Number One OS/2 Software Developer"
is offering to the world of Microsoft users?

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                             20-Sep-99 19:20:08
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>

Esther Schindler wrote:
>
> 1. The issue isn't good press or bad press, but that there's *some*
> visibility for OS/2. During the media panel at Warp Expo West on
> Saturday, someone asked why OS/2 wasn't mentioned in the computer
> magazines any more, and I challenged the attendee to give me something
> I could write _about_. IBM isn't saying anything about it, there
> aren't any new apps to write about (keeping in mind that most
> magazines don't cover general utilities, much less minor ones).
>
Actually, there are quite a few significant recent new OS/2 apps to
write about.  Star Office 5.1a is a major package off apps all by itself
that was nearly invisible until Sun bought it.  Visual Age for Java.
DB2.  MAUL Publisher.  TrueSpectra v2.02 (not  new but recently became
freeware).  Robotics Messenger/2.  Communicator v4.61 and associated
apps.  These are all native OS/2.  There is, or course, also a lot of
stuff that is Java, EMX, or x86.  For example, I have never seen any
version of Sun's Hot Java Browser reviewed in the press but it runs
quite well on OS/2.  I'm trying to list "business" stuff (and not
utilities) rather than software that might be more likely to be used by
home users.  Obviously, OS/2 has a relatively small user base and
relatively few commercial software vendors so big write-ups in major
computer mags are improbable.  But that does not mean there is not a lot
of software available and even new software.  But "major" software is
getting kind of generic, isn't it?  A word processor is a word
processor, Microsoft's Office 2000 hype, notwithstanding.  It's mostly
about what you have become used to.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            20-Sep-99 22:41:16
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: OS/2 is ALIVE! [8-)

From: [e-mail] (David H. McCoy)

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:
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Right! After all, let's look at the successes that Netscape
4.61, Open32, NCs,
>> >> >> >> >> and Java all had for OS/2.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> With successes like this, who needs failures?
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >What do you know about how any of the above mentioned items run
in OS/2?
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >- Marty
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Are you even bothering to read the thread? This person who is 200%
commited to
>> >> >> >> an application seems to feel that the the DOJ/MS trial will have
some positive
>> >> >> >> effect on IBM, and therefore OS/2.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >If I wanted to respond to that statement, I'd respond to the
original
>> >> >> >poster.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I am responding to that person. By implication, any response to my
response is
>> >> >> a support or condemnation of that persons statement. That's why we
have
>> >> >> threads.
>> >> >
>> >> >My response is a condemnation of your statement.  That's why we have
>> >> >Replies.
>> >>
>> >> Fine. On what grounds? Would you like for me to pull from DejaNews the
various
>> >> statements saying that those various technologies were going to revive
OS/2?
>> >>
>> >> It would be embarrassingly easy.
>> >
>> >That's not what the products were intended for, therefore they're not
>> >failures as such.  They didn't live up users' (possibly unreasonable)
>> >expectations perhaps, but they operate as intended.
>>
>> That may be true, but the context I'm speaking of is user expectations. If
you
>> don't want to discuss that, move on.
>
>Gotcha.  Just a misunderstanding.  Your statement came across differently.

Did you see the other guys statment about the DOJ trial? If you did, and my
statements were not clear in that context, my bad.

>Relying on two or three pieces of software to revive a market for an OS is
>unlikely at best.

I agree. However, that was, and still is the thought. We see it almost every
day.

>- Marty
>

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 21:17:06
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Tim Martin wrote:
>
> Sorry Bennie but you have to sit in my seat.  I oversee
> the largest OS/2-only private subscription web site on
> the 'Net which services thousands of OS/2 users.

Spam away Tim!  How's the BSD web server holdin up?

> I have
> to deal with the reality of members writing to say, "Now
> that IBM has killed OS/2 will you help us move over to
> Linux and other supported operating systems?"
>
> Many see Brad to be a leader (self-proclaimed) within the
> OS/2  community.  That self-proclaimed leader has stepped
> forward and literally declared the end of any OS/2 future.

Actually, Bennie proclaimed him a leader of the OS/2 community.  You should
really get your attributions right.

> Look around you now.  The Register, one of the most
> well respected News Media Sources on the 'Net, is now
> running the "poor Brad" story and citing the death of
> OS/2 once again.  By the end of this week you'll see
> other commercial tech news sites reporting the final
> death of OS/2.  Folks like "Wired" "InfoWorld"  "CNET"
> "Mercury News"  "ZDNews" and so on.

At least Brad tried to do something.  What have you done to bring about a
new OS/2 client Tim?

> If you think many OS/2 users won't believe these
> constant flood of false stories and leave OS/2 then
> there's a golden bridge in San Francisco I'd love to
> sell you.

And if you think you have an ounce of credibility amongst those that have
read your posts in COOAdvocacy, I have a nice white jacket for you.

Now that we all know about Wardell's big conspiracy to drive away OS/2
users, why don't you tell us why he would have <any> reason to do so (be it
personal or for his business)?

But don't bother responding Tim.  We all know you have no such reason,
logic, or rationale.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            20-Sep-99 22:51:02
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

From: [e-mail] (David H. McCoy)

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] says...
>On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 00:03:15, [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)
>wrote:
>
>| > (EVERY OS/2 software developer is suffering, right now.
>|
>| How can you say that, Esther?  I'm an OS/2 software developer, and you
>| certainly have no information from me that allows you to make such a
>| statement.
>
>Okay. I stand corrected.
>
>Every one of the several dozen OS/2 ISVs with whom I have corresponded
>about their OS/2 sales reports that they are suffering.
>
>Is that better?
>
>--Esther
>
>P.S. So how many sales _have_ you had in the last twelve months? How
>do they compare to the previous twelve months? Are you able to support
>yourself wholly from sales of OS/2 products?
>
>
>

Most I've heard of are suffering? From "large" ISVs to small shareware guys,
the news isn't good.

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 18:28:07
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Esther Schindler wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 22:52:53, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> | He has single handedly
> | chased hundreds if not thousands of OS/2 users away from OS/2.
>
> According to...?

What's the upcoming title of your next ZD hit piece
Esther?  "IBM Shafts The King Of OS/2?", subtitled:
"Bottom Nails To OS/2 Coffin Pounded In  By Lou!"

I see Mary Jo Folly now dancin' with madness,
rubbing her palms deliriously together, cigarette
dangling from her lips as she dictates into her
Microsoft Dragon voice dictation software.  "It's
dead I tell you - God Damn it IS DEAD this time!
It HAS TO BE!"

:-)


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

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

From: [e-mail]                          21-Sep-99 02:10:29
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>Bennie Nelson
>OS/2 works with hardware that is current.  I have built brand new systems
>with recently released off-the-shelf components, this year.  No problems.

>Windows 95, on the other hand, did not fare so well.

Only because you're obviously not competent enough to do what many,
many other people (including myself) do routinely -- install Windows.
In fact, just this week I put together 3 various systems and installed
Windows 9x from scratch. No problems. But then, unlike you, I know
what I'm doing and have the skills to do it

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          21-Sep-99 03:02:14
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>>>Marty
>>>Need I remind you that this group does not represent people who use OS/2 in
>>>any way, shape, or form?

>>Of course this group represents people who use OS/2. After all, people
>>who use OS/2 post here all of the time.

>Does it also represent windoze users since they post here too?

Yes, it does represent some windows users (although not as many as
OS/2 users). Do you not see Windows users posting here?

>>>A lot of Windoze users that formerly used OS/2 had a lot of problems with
it

>>I don't think that a lot of Windows users ever used OS/2.

>>Of the ones I know who are former OS/2 users, most left OS/2 because
>>they found that Windows made it easier for them to get more and better
>>work done. I know that's true in my own case.

>Of the ones that have used OS/2 and have posted here, many have claimed
>they had stability problems with OS/2.

That may be. I haven't talked to all of the Windows users who have
posted in here (and you likely haven't either). But some that I have
heard, such as Steven Den Beste or David McCoy, cited that their main
"problem" with OS/2 is that they didn't find it to be as useful a tool
as other choices. As I report above, that jives with what I've
personally seen from former OS/2 users who now use Windows.

>This, of course, is just going by what is posted in this group.

Well, I don't know whom you're polling and what they said. I reported
my experience above

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

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

From: [e-mail]                           20-Sep-99 19:23:14
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]>, on
09/20/99
   at 02:12 PM, [e-mail] (rj friedman) said:

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

What many of us are fuming about is the way IBM has abandoned home users,
and our investment of time and money in OS/2 software. With a little help
from IBM, OS/2 would be wiping the floor with Microsloth, especially given
the expose of Billy's business practices in the last year or two. Instead,
when all kinds of people are looking for alternatives to MS, IBM doesn't
promote OS/2, doesn't make sure drivers are available for popular
hardware, doesn't upgrade the software except through obscure and arcane
fixpacks, and doesn't work to get products ported to OS/2.

In short, IBM sucks at marketing OS/2, and obviously cares diddly for its
customers.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------
[e-mail]
-----------------------------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Islandnet.com in B.C. Canada (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                            20-Sep-99 22:38:03
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Judgement Day ... Stardock and OS/2

From: [e-mail] (David H. McCoy)

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] says...
>On 20 Sep 1999 17:57:57 GMT, Jason Bowen wrote:
>
>>Tell me about Warp 4 out of the box on a 10 gig hard drive.
>
>What do you want to know?  That when my old 5 gig went bad and Maxtor
>replaced it for free with a new 10 gig, that I installed it into my computer,
>popped in the Warp 4 CD and floppies (unmodified mind you), booted,
>partitioned, formated, installed, applied fixpack, installed new java, etc.
>Basically it took me no more than one day to bring my system fully current.
>Oh, and about that S3 card.  S3 makes many drivers, but if you (like me) are
>a little displease with a driver or two, then get GRADD.  Hmmm...   I dunno,
>maybe, just maybe, I am an anomlie in the universe.  Maybe, just maybe, my
>computer was assembled by aliens and blessed by a priest (actually I built
>it).
>
>This is about the oldest argument on the books.  Give it up.  Words on a
>screen will not convince someone who is determined not be be convinced no
>matter what the situation.  OS/2 is not for everyone.  However, if you are
>willing to actually invest a little bit of time and actually learn one or two
>things about that $1,000-$2,000 piece of high tech electronics you have
>blocking your view the wall behind your desk, and you are willing to buy a
>PlayStation if you want the latest games, then OS/2 just may be for you.
>Speaking as a former non-user, just give it a try.  You'll love it.
>
>I've been using OS/2 now for 5 years.
>
>Tony.

As a former user who knows quite a bit about the overclocked piece of
electronics on my table, I have to say that it just doesn't make sense to
spend
all that time and money learning about that wall-blocker just to spend even
more on a Playstation that *doesn't* play the latest games. The Playstation
won't even get Half-life until next year. Why not, instead, use an OS that
really does allow you to play the latest games like Homeworld, Quake3, or
Starfleet Command, as well as development work, the full-internet experience
via many plugins, Online payments via Quicken, full PDF capabilities via Adobe

4, full Quicktime via Quicktime4, etc.

I used OS/2 from 2.1 to Warp 4. I convinced others to try it. I wrote about it

for an OS/2 e-Mag, and a left it behind when it failed to do all I listed and
many things I didn't.

>
>
>{}{}{} Posted via Uncensored-News.Com, http://www.uncensored-news.com {}{}{}
>{}{}{}{} Only $8.95 A Month, - The Worlds Uncensored News Source {}{}{}{}
>{}{}{}{}{} Five News Servers with a BINARIES ONLY Server {}{}{}{}{}
>

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            20-Sep-99 22:49:15
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

From: [e-mail] (David H. McCoy)

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] says...
>
>I remember thinking that the OS/2 2.0 UI was pretty slick. Then I saw
>Warp 3's interface, and couldn't imagine that I'd ever liked 2.x. And
>so on... I'm sure you've had similar experiences. I'm sure that clever
>programmers could come up with more improvements, including several we
>haven't thought to ask for.
>
>Personally, I'd like a "shut down and reboot" option built into the
>OS. (Aside: yes I *know* there are utilities that do this. That's not
>the point.)
>

Heck, how about some support for other filesystems? People gripe about Windows

dropping HPFS. How about OS/2 adding real, R/W/Security support for other
OSes?

How about some user security? I recently pulled my old P166 128 machine back
from the grave, installed NT Server, moved my modem to it and gave my wife a
user account. She logs on, does her teaching stuff, checks here email, and
logs
off. She. Loves. It.

And how about some built in Internet sharing. Win98 has it. Win2000 has it. I
personally use a slick program named Sygate to share my internet connection. I

don't have problems with PAYING for good software. Call it upgrade-itis...

How about some security in HPFS. And compression. And encryption. And since so

many still use Win16 programs, how about 8.3 generated names so people can
install have long filenames.

And something equivalent to the Disk Administrator on NT/2000. Much better
than
fdisk.

And ACPI support? DVD support? USB support?

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                    21-Sep-99 03:26:00
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <[e-mail]>,
Nick Danger <[e-mail]> wrote:
>On 20 Sep 1999 23:51:26 GMT, Dave Tholen wrote:
>
>> .....I've seen several
>> people comment on how they're going to start looking at Linux as a
>> result.
>
>It's hard to avoid the Linux noise.  I installed it, just to see
>what all the fuss was about.  After WPS, it's hard to see
>the benefit in GUIs whose developers are still struggling
>with 'cut' and 'paste'.

The unix shell is an aquired taste to be sure, I like it.  Gnome and KDE
are two answers to the WPS and the Windows Explorer.  I always loved the
WPS, just thought it was darn ugly.

>
>I have Win95 installed as well.  I'm sitting here typing this
>in OS/2 because it is still what I use 90% of the time.  It's
>solid and it works.  The existence of Linux does not affect
>that.

Market momentum does.  When the unix desktop matures it is going to be a
real threat to Windows.  Bill Gate realizes this and has started the
Unix/Linux fud campaign.

>
>I don't see the big deal here.  It looks to me like IBM
>leaks most of the goodies from (ongoing) Warp Server
>development, in the form of fixpacks for us "abandoned"
>client users.  Today we got the final build of Netscape
>4.61.  Who's abandoned?
>
>

From what I have read there will be no more free downloads soon, software
choice is going to all paid subscription.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                    21-Sep-99 03:29:13
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <[e-mail]>,
Tim Martin  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Sorry Bennie but you have to sit in my seat.  I oversee
>the largest OS/2-only private subscription web site on
>the 'Net which services thousands of OS/2 users.

Any proof to backup your claims?  Are you just lying again as usual?
>I have
>to deal with the reality of members writing to say, "Now
>that IBM has killed OS/2 will you help us move over to
>Linux and other supported operating systems?"

To bad you are to incompetent to help.

>
>Many see Brad to be a leader (self-proclaimed) within the
>OS/2  community.  That self-proclaimed leader has stepped
>forward and literally declared the end of any OS/2 future.

Can you provide proof that Brad is the "self-proclaimed" leader?  You
can't and insist on lying.  Sound like deep rooted jealousy to me.

>
>Look around you now.  The Register, one of the most
>well respected News Media Sources on the 'Net, is now
>running the "poor Brad" story and citing the death of
>OS/2 once again.  By the end of this week you'll see
>other commercial tech news sites reporting the final
>death of OS/2.  Folks like "Wired" "InfoWorld"  "CNET"
>"Mercury News"  "ZDNews" and so on.

The register is a joke.  Too bad IBM won't issue a press release saying
that they will be offering a new client.  I wonder why they won't do that?

>
>If you think many OS/2 users won't believe these
>constant flood of false stories and leave OS/2 then
>there's a golden bridge in San Francisco I'd love to
>sell you.

You don't expect them to believe a libeler like you do you?
>
>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: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                    21-Sep-99 03:35:03
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-khguoWRcoCg3@localhost>,
Karel Jansens <jansens_at_ibm_dot_net> wrote:
>On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 20:17:01, [e-mail] (Jason
>Bowen) wrote:
>
>> In article <[e-mail]>,
>> Craig Benbow  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> >> OS/2 can't install on a hard drive greater than 8.4 megs.  It doesn't
have
>> >> basic support for current hardware but I do see Windows getting
pre-loaded
>> >> on all kinds of new hardware, how about you?  How do you know the reason
>> >> for not releasing Win95B?  Do you have a reference?
>> >>
>> >
>> >How the hell did you come up with this???
>> >Of course you can install OS/2 on a drive bigge than 8.4 megs.  All thats
needed
>> >is updated install disks!
>> >There is heaps of OS/2 hardware support out there.  Take a look at lots of
>> >installation cds for peripherals and wow theres OS/2 drivers.
>>
>> Why don't they ship a new client with those updates?  Not enough demand?
>
>Maybe, but it should now have become painfully clear that you are
>talking about things you know absolutely nothing about: OS/2 *will*
>install on +8.4GB drives (there's not enough room to install it on 8.4
>MB drives). It just needs a little tweaking.

It needs to have the install disk modified right?  The could do lots of
things with a new client right?  By the way the OS/2 user continued my use
of 8.4 megs, why didn't you lambast him?

>
>All this is quite ironic in view of the recent accusations of certain
>Winvocates against OS/2 advocates knowing nothing about Windows,
>wouldn't you agree?

I am not a Winvocate and I do know that you have to get to new files,
can't remember the exact names, to install on a drive above 8.4 gigs,
Warp 4 can't do this out of the box.

 >
>> Linux and Window get much more support than OS/2 and who can blame people
>> when IBM won't commit on OS/2's future
>>
>The overwhelming Linux support comes from the fact that it's open
>source and windows, wweelll... it probably needs it.

To bad IBM won't issue a press release pledging support for a new OS/2
client.

>
>Karel Jansens
>jansens_at_ibm_dot_net
>=======================================================
>If we could have our cake _and_ eat it,
>people would start whining about seconds.
>=======================================================


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 01:04:27
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

Okay, point by point:

1. The issue isn't good press or bad press, but that there's *some*
visibility for OS/2. During the media panel at Warp Expo West on
Saturday, someone asked why OS/2 wasn't mentioned in the computer
magazines any more, and I challenged the attendee to give me something
I could write _about_. IBM isn't saying anything about it, there
aren't any new apps to write about (keeping in mind that most
magazines don't cover general utilities, much less minor ones).

A new client would remind people that it exists. There's an old saying
in press circles: I don't care what you say, just spell my name right.

2. YOU might not choose to do a platform specific application, but
please recognize that your needs may not be representative of another
developer's requirements. Smack! takes advantage of OS/2, such as its
REXX integration, and that's one of the program's strengths -- and
unique selling points. Other applications require direct hardware
access, or need maximum system performance, or... well, plenty of
other things.

Plus, my point isn't technical. If the users feel all warm and fuzzy
inside, and positive about the platform's future, they'll spend more
money on applications.

3. Assuming that fixpacks continue to be available for free -- and I
make no such assumptions -- then yes, the moment that a new fixpack is
out, the shrinkwrap version is out of date. But the bar is raised so
that device drivers and other support issues are much less likely to
present a problem at install-time, which is the worst possible moment
for any program. (If you haven't used it yet, it's hard to be
encouraged to push your way through a difficult install.)

4. I don't particularly care whether IBM's vision encompasses clients
or servers or little green men. The stark fact is that a client sells
more servers, and they do want to sell more servers. (Or at least I
like to think they do.)

5. What new features? Beats me. My creativity follows different paths,
and I merely admire the people who can envision better ways for
technology to serve us.

I remember thinking that the OS/2 2.0 UI was pretty slick. Then I saw
Warp 3's interface, and couldn't imagine that I'd ever liked 2.x. And
so on... I'm sure you've had similar experiences. I'm sure that clever
programmers could come up with more improvements, including several we
haven't thought to ask for.

Personally, I'd like a "shut down and reboot" option built into the
OS. (Aside: yes I *know* there are utilities that do this. That's not
the point.)

Thanks for taking the time to exchange ideas with me, David. I think
this is what the newsgroup is _supposed_ to be about. <warm smile>

--Esther

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 20:58:39, "David T. Johnson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

| Esther Schindler wrote:
| >
| > On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 17:33:03, "David T. Johnson"
| > <[e-mail]> wrote:
| >
| > | Well???  Aren't you going to TELL us these reasons?  We're all waiting!
| > | Stand and deliver, woman!
| >
| > In no particular order, and off the top of my head:
| >
| > * A new client (whether from IBM or a third party) will get press. It
| > would raise the visibility of the operating system again, in the midst
| > of a time when computer users are once again considering alternatives.
|
| Okay I agree with you here but I would frankly expect most of the press
| to be bad (present company excepted, of course) based on past history.
|
| >
| > * A new client will help ISVs sell new and upgraded applications,
| > because it would be a clear statement that OS/2 has a viable
| > *commercial* future. (EVERY OS/2 software developer is suffering,
| > right now. While there are plenty of people who love OS/2 and the
| > applications they own, many wonder, "How much of a financial
| > investment do I want to make in new apps for this platform?")
|
| Again I agree but I think is the same thing as the "warm inside" feeling
| that rj was taling about.  But if I were a developer, I would not do any
| platform-specific development for OS/2 regardless, unless technical
| considerations demanded it.  And I would say this even if OS/2 owned 50%
| of the desktop share.  There are too many cross-platform options
| available.  I think it's nuts for a developer to marry a platform, ANY
| platform, with the development technology available today.  This idea
| was started by Microsoft with Windows 3.0 and it's time for it to end.
| The OS should be focused on extracting maximum performance out of the
| hardware and OS/2 does that very well with the x86 hardware.  The
| developer should be focused on what the apps are supposed to accomplish
| and not on what OS they are running on.
| >
| > * A new client would presumably make the OS easier to install, without
| > Fixpack City.
|
| Well, yes, but only until the first fixpack was released.  And then Java
| 2.2...  And TCP/IP v6.2.  And so on...
|
| >
| > * A new client would sell more copies of Warp Server; client and
| > server sales go hand in hand.
|
| Yes, this is probably true...but this is not IBM's vision.   From IBM's
| point of view, they will sell you the 'server' and they will toss in a
| few handful of 'clients' for free.
|
| >
| > * A new client might include new features. You might think, "What new
| > features? I have everything I need now!" but innovators don't rely on
| > what people _say_ they want. Nobody shouted, "I must have a handheld
| > computer or I shall surely die!" yet millions of people snarfed up
| > PalmPilots because they solved a need _they didn't know they had_.
|
| What new features?  (Okay, I had to ask.)  This sort of stuff changes so
| fast that I just can't see upgrading the client to keep up.  A
| modular/plug-in approach to adding functionality to the client would be
| better.  We already do that with 'drivers' that are added to the client
| to give it more capabilities with new hardware.  I would much rather see
| driver development than new client development.  I think the client life
| will become longer and longer to the point where it will last the life
| of the hardware or maybe even cross to the next hardware upgrade.
|
| >
| > ..and that's without any deep thought. I'm sure that other people
| > here, much wiser than I, could add to this list.
|
| Thanks for your reply.  It is a pleasure to read your comments and I
| hope they will prompt some of those wiser than both of us to post.
| Computing is nothing but ideas...


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

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

From: [e-mail]                    21-Sep-99 03:36:28
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <37e6f9e7$1$yvsrqngn$[e-mail]>,
 <[e-mail]> wrote:
>jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) said:
>
>>Maybe, but it should now have become painfully clear that you are  talking
>>about things you know absolutely nothing about: OS/2 *will*  install on
+8.4GB
>>drives (there's not enough room to install it on 8.4 MB drives). It just
needs
>>a little tweaking.
>
>A little tweaking.  To someone less of a genius it can be a big problem - in
>addition to other similar screwing around you have to do that computer
geniuses
>think are great fun.

I adopted Linux when it was in the 1.0.x kernel stage, I know about
tweaking.  The fact that IBM doesn't wish to update OS/2 so that it can
install a lot of the new hardware released since 96 says a lot about what
IBM thinks of OS/2.

>
>Jim L
>Remove XX from address to Email
>More gun laws will cure the nations ills - just like drug laws do.
>
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]               20-Sep-99 19:51:10
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: A public thank-you to the Warp Expo West organizers

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

On 21 Sep 1999 00:12:34 GMT, Esther Schindler wrote:

>"Kim Cheung" wrote:
>
>| >(like chocolate chip cookies in the exhibit hall).
>
>| How can you not mention those apples and bananas?
>
>You expect me to mention fruit when there's chocolate around?!
>

Hey, we are Californians.   How many shows have you gone to where the host
put fruit on the table along side those chocolates ?




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

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

From: [e-mail]                         21-Sep-99 03:33:23
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Tell us about your sofware Dave

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Jason Bowen writes:

> How are sales doing?

That's proprietary information, which is why Esther can't speak for me.

> Can you give us a 5 year graph of sales and revenue?

That's proprietary information, which is why Esther can't speak for me.

> Do it in volume and not percentages.

That's proprietary information, which is why Esther can't speak for me.

> Where do you stand among OS/2 isv's?

In what way?  I don't know every OS/2 ISV.

> What percentage of the OS/2 software pie do you have?

In what way?  I don't know every OS/2 ISV.

> Could you support yourself off of the sales of your software?

That's proprietary information.

> Do you represent the average software vendor?

I represent myself.  I'm not representing anyone else.

> We are in an OS/2 advocacy group and what better
> place to answer these questions posed to you.

You're erroneously presupposing that they should be answered at all.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         21-Sep-99 03:38:10
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Jason Bowen writes:

>>> I have never had a probelm with Windows anything not supporting hardware.

>> I've read about people complaining about how Microsoft refused to help
>> out with an NT problem because the hardware they were using wasn't on
>> the HCL.

> I've heard that OS/2 users have to patch their install disks to install
> Warp on new hardware.

I didn't have to.  What you've heard doesn't change the fact that Windows
isn't a panacea to hardware support problems.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         21-Sep-99 03:35:22
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Esther Schindler writes:

>>> (EVERY OS/2 software developer is suffering, right now.

>> How can you say that, Esther?  I'm an OS/2 software developer, and you
>> certainly have no information from me that allows you to make such a
>> statement.

> Okay. I stand corrected.
>
> Every one of the several dozen OS/2 ISVs with whom I have corresponded
> about their OS/2 sales reports that they are suffering.
>
> Is that better?

Yes.  Now, just how many OS/2 ISVs are there overall?

> P.S. So how many sales _have_ you had in the last twelve months?

That's proprietary information.

> How do they compare to the previous twelve months?

That's proprietary information.

> Are you able to support yourself wholly from sales of OS/2 products?

That's proprietary information.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         21-Sep-99 03:43:09
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

[e-mail] writes:

> What many of us are fuming about is the way IBM has abandoned home users,
> and our investment of time and money in OS/2 software.

I'm a home user, and IBM is providing me with Netscape 4.61, which isn't
what I call abandonment.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         21-Sep-99 03:40:21
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Jason Bowen writes:

>>> OS/2 out of the box right now can't install on most modern hardware

>> What do you consider "modern hardware", Jason?  I installed OS/2 out
>> of the box on a Pentium II 400 MHz machine, 256 MB of memory, and a
>> monitor running at 1600x1200x24bits.  It has ultra-wide SCSI drives,
>> a CD rewriteable, audio, ethernet card...

> What do you think the chances are of walking into a random computer store,
> grabbing a random piece of hardware, and having support for it under
> Linux, Windows 9x/NT or OS/2?

What I think is irrelevant, Jason.

> OS/2 out of the box can't install on EIDE hard drive over 8.4 gigs
> unless it is patched.

Evidence, please.  I've read several responses to you from people who
have installed on larger drives without needing a patch.

> How many DVD drive/decoder combinations have support under OS/2?

How does the number address your claim that OS/2 can't install on most
modern hardware, Jason?

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

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

From: [e-mail]                     21-Sep-99 03:43:29
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: [e-mail] (Byron Desnoyers Winmill)

In article <[e-mail]> you wrote:

: The SIQ was a problem. A big one, no, but it isn't a problem at all
: for me with Win2k(or NT).

Ah, now that is a problem with OS/2.  There was a fix, albeit an unsatisfying
one, in the later Warp 3 fixpaks.  But this was a PMShell problem, it did not
interfere with CLI and Windows sessions (full screen, of course), it would
not have been a problem with XFree86 either.

To my knowledge, it did not have any impact upon the background processes
(outside of intercepting input).  And it could also be attributed to poor
programming on the applications end.  (Remember, the applications are
supposed to check the Queue regularly!)

Oh well, it's just one point against OS/2.  Not a huge one at that either,
since there are easy work arounds.  (It was what, a one or 1.5 second
wait?)  So, perhaps, you are blowing this problem out of proportion.

--
Stopped (SIGTTOU)         byron.
$

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 20-Sep-99 22:55:06
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Jeff Glatt wrote:
>
> >Bennie Nelson
> >OS/2 works with hardware that is current.  I have built brand new systems
> >with recently released off-the-shelf components, this year.  No problems.
>
> >Windows 95, on the other hand, did not fare so well.
>
> Only because you're obviously not competent enough to do what many,
> many other people (including myself) do routinely -- install Windows.
> In fact, just this week I put together 3 various systems and installed
> Windows 9x from scratch. No problems. But then, unlike you, I know
> what I'm doing and have the skills to do it

Jeff,
Are you saying that no one who is competent has ever had problems
installing Windows 95?  Or, that if a person has problems installing
Windows 95, then that is conclusive proof that the person doing the
install is incompetent?  Surely, you are not guilty of asserting
that?

How about Windows 95's notoriously bad support for modems (well
documented on MS' Knowledgebase website)?  How about the fact that
at least one version of Windows 95 cannot find a requested device
driver on a diskette if the *.INF file has the name in a different
case from the way the file is stored on the diskette?  The Linksys
ethernet driver diskette had that exact condition, and Windows 95
could not find the file, even when pointed directly to it.  In
other words, Windows 95 would find the file, and then issue an error
message saying the file was not found.  There's definitely some
incompetence involved in that situation, but it wasn't me.  I had
to edit the *.INF file and change the filename's case before Windows
could find the driver.

Regards,
Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 23:57:24
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Jeff Glatt wrote:
>
> >>>Marty
> >>>Need I remind you that this group does not represent people who use OS/2
in
> >>>any way, shape, or form?
>
> >>Of course this group represents people who use OS/2. After all, people
> >>who use OS/2 post here all of the time.
>
> >Does it also represent windoze users since they post here too?
>
> Yes, it does represent some windows users (although not as many as
> OS/2 users).

To some extent, I suppose it does, but I firmly feel that it cannot be used
as a means of generalization, just as I would not generalize windoze users
by those who post here.

> Do you not see Windows users posting here?

Yes, otherwise I wouldn't have asked.

> >>>A lot of Windoze users that formerly used OS/2 had a lot of problems with
it
>
> >>I don't think that a lot of Windows users ever used OS/2.
>
> >>Of the ones I know who are former OS/2 users, most left OS/2 because
> >>they found that Windows made it easier for them to get more and better
> >>work done. I know that's true in my own case.
>
> >Of the ones that have used OS/2 and have posted here, many have claimed
> >they had stability problems with OS/2.
>
> That may be. I haven't talked to all of the Windows users who have
> posted in here (and you likely haven't either). But some that I have
> heard, such as Steven Den Beste or David McCoy, cited that their main
> "problem" with OS/2 is that they didn't find it to be as useful a tool
> as other choices. As I report above, that jives with what I've
> personally seen from former OS/2 users who now use Windows.

Well, my point in mentioning any of this is because I disagree with the
original statement in which I was (perhaps inadvertently) included:

Gerben:
> Why is it that OS/2 users are always this unlucky when trying out Windows?

Jeff:
> I don't think that it's quite as much luck as it is competence. To be
> frank, based upon what I've seen of OS/2 users in newsgroups such as
> this, they don't seem to be too savvy in general.

> >This, of course, is just going by what is posted in this group.
>
> Well, I don't know whom you're polling and what they said. I reported
> my experience above

Acknowledged.  I was just pointing out that several people [specifics
omitted, but I think you'll agree] have pointed out that in their use of
OS/2 they have had stability problems and that was part of the reason (but
probably not all) for switching.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 04:07:14
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 02:02:04
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 03:35:44, [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)
wrote:
| Yes.  Now, just how many OS/2 ISVs are there overall?

In what time frame? Set your context.

| > P.S. So how many sales _have_ you had in the last twelve months?
| That's proprietary information.
| > How do they compare to the previous twelve months?
| That's proprietary information.
| > Are you able to support yourself wholly from sales of OS/2 products?
| That's proprietary information.

That bad, huh?

--Esther

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 21-Sep-99 02:47:16
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:02
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail]

>Tim Martin wrote:
>>
>> If you think many OS/2 users won't believe these
>> constant flood of false stories and leave OS/2 then
>> there's a golden bridge in San Francisco I'd love to
>> sell you.
>

hmm, where's that ? the one that goes from SF to Marin is orangey-red
and the one to Oakland is silver coloured. Truth in advertising, anyone ?


skål !

----------------------------------------------------------
Härad Ængravvård
Windows NT - the Ornithopter of Operating Systems
-----------------------------------------------------------

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 21-Sep-99 03:01:23
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dan Casey) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]>,
>[e-mail] (Esther Schindler) wrote:
>>On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 01:15:33, Tarquelne <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>| I imagine
>>
>>I recommend you don't make additional assumptions. The waters are
>>already muddied... there's no reason to stir them.
>>
>>Let's find out what _did_ happen, instead of speculating on what
>>_might_ have happened, okay?
>>
>>--Esther
>
>I agree 110% with Esther on this. There is already  too much
>speculation, and too many conflicting reports on this subject as it
>is.
>

In a nutshell, that's my beef with IBM. How about a little open and honest
dissemination of intentions from the ONLY people who know their plans -
IBM ? We all bought the product, we all have time and effort and money
invested, whatever they want to do is their business, just TELL US ! then
we can get on with our lives, decide what is best for us individually, not
have to sift rumours and innuendo for scraps of insight.  Or does IBM shelter
under the CIA umbrella now ? If anyone can be said to be responsible for the
OS/2 FUD campaign, it'd be IBM for never being upfront with us. And YES,
we deserve it - we bought the product, now come out and tell the truth,
get it over with !


>--
>**************************************************************
>*  Dan Casey                                                 *
>*  President                                                 *
>*  V.O.I.C.E. (Virtual OS/2 International Consumer Education *


skål !

----------------------------------------------------------
Härad Ængravvård
Windows NT - the Ornithopter of Operating Systems
-----------------------------------------------------------

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          21-Sep-99 02:54:13
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>>>>>Bennie Nelson
>>>>>Your corollary does not allow for those who won't bet because they oppose
>>>>>betting on moral grounds.

>>>>jglatt
>>>>Steven's stock market speculation in this newsgroup is "immoral
>>>>gambling"???

>> >While I did not say that

>> Yes, you proposed that this is indeed what some people think.

To quote one of the people for whom you're fond of performing your
"Kook Mouthpiece" ritual:

"Note: no response above. Figures."

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Perhaps you're too "unskilled in logic" to respond to
my observations about what you actually have said and done in this
newsgroup. After your notorious faux pas about dismissing Tholen's
detractors as "emotionally blocked" people who are "unskilled at
logic", I would think that you'd be less inclined to shove your foot
in your mouth, but apparently that isn't the case.

>>Indeed, you seem to be a spokesman for kooks lately -- voicing the
>>opinions of all manner of cultish religious-political beliefs. What's
>>the matter -- don't you think that the fringe groups are getting
>>enough good press lately, so in addition to being an unpaid salesman
>>for an oddball, niche IBM product, you're now moonlighting free as a
>>mouthpiece for esoteric religious-political affiliations?

>That's an interesting way of describing being tolerant of other
>people and their right to have and express their own beliefs which
>do not harm or infringe upon the rights and beliefs of others.

I never said that you were intolerant of kooks. I merely point out
that you seem to champion all manner of kooky, oddball, cultish
beliefs and affiliations here. I wasn't aware that the Amish needed
their beliefs trumpeted in COOA. I doubt that they're even aware that
they needed that.

But aside from the chuckles that some of your truly misguided "kook
defending" elicits, I'm wondering why you feel the need to do this. Is
this because you see yourself as a social misfit, and therefore
identify with people who have oddball beliefs, such as a belief that
playing card games is a sin?

BTW, using Bennie's misguided notions of "tolerance", if someone
decided that using OS/2 is a sin, and he went around telling people in
the newsgroups about his beliefs (just like you seem to feel the need
to point out what others consider "a sin" and "morally wrong"), that
wouldn't infringe upon the rights and beliefs of others, and would be
a great thing to do according to Bennie. For that matter, if someone
decided to trumpet the belief that Tholen's posts are utter nonsense,
that would be great too. Well, wait a minute, suddenly Bennie doesn't
seem quite so "tolerant" when you consider what he has said about
people who express such views. Oh wait, that's right, he's an OS/2
kook, and therefore his ideas of "tolerance" and "rights" get filtered
through that brand name affiliation first.

>>And there are people who believe OS/2 is dead. Maybe you should make
>>sure that their message is also not lost among the multitude of other,
>>prevailing views in OS/2 newsgroups? I mean, you don't have to
>>subscribe to the belief in order to followup messages by people who
>>are saying that OS/2 isn't dead, and remind them that there are people
>>who believe otherwise, so they shouldn't express such "exclusionary"
>>views?

>Those who hold and express the view that "OS/2 is dead" do not need
>my assistance.

Ah, so then one of the prerequisites to your "kook defense" is that
the kook must be incapable of putting forth his own views. I wasn't
aware that you believed Tholen to be so helpless, but being that
Tholen is indeed a dimwit, I suppose that's understandable.

>They've been saying that for years, so I guess it must be true.

I have no doubt that it's *at least* as true as any of the other
beliefs you've been trumpeting here, such as the belief that playing
card games is a sin.

>>Oh wait, I forgot, you're a fan of Tholen's Kook of Month policy
>>toward "being unbiased". You don't "have time" to dole out the same
>>criticism toward those whose oddball, kooky views jive with your own.

>I certainly have need expressed that view.  I have posted what I
>believe to be polite corrections for errors Tim Martin has made in
>some of his posts.  Not to single out Tim Martin, but I believe he
>is the current lightning rod in cooa.

>> Or, is the latest flimsy excuse that your news server mysteriously
>> doesn't receive any messages except those of people whom you
>> criticize? I forget which pathetic excuse you kooks are clinging to
>> this week.

>Actually, both news servers I use have had trouble in the last week due
>hurricane Floyd.  One server was simply powered off.  I'm not sure why
>the other went dormant for a time.  I've been trying to get caught up
>on the messages in this newsgroup for several days, now.

hahahahah. riiiiiiiiiiiiight.

>I use Os/2 v4, Windows NT v4 (both Workstation
>and server editions), Windows 95, Linux, Solaris 7, and OS/390.

How do you use certain operating systems that you previously claimed
you couldn't install because it didn't support your hardware?

>>Do you find association only with ones comprised of people who espouse
>>oddball, esoteric, religious-political ideals? (I've already noted in
>>previous posts when you've expressed notably negative views of
>>humanity and society in general.

>This is quite amusing, Jeff.

Yes, your vaudeville routine *is* amusing.

>You have been mocking the morals of
>many people

Imagine that! Mocking the morals of people who believe that it's a sin
to play card games!!

hahahahaha!!! You OS/2 kooks are sooooooooooo amusing!

>the OS choice of many people, the political views of
>many people, etc. I have a made a few general comments about human
>nature as seen in the various posts in USENET. I will leave it to
>others to decide which of us has "expressed notably negative views."

The "Tholen detractors" whom you dismissed as "emotionally blocked"
people who are "unskilled at logic" have already seen through your
brand name inspired, hypocritical ruse, and found it to be "naive"
nonsense, to quote just one appraisal from someone whom I think has
demonstrated far more real-world, positive contributions than you ever
will.

>>Offhand, I'd say that you are likely
>>a person who has been an outcast for a good portion of his life, if
>>not for your entire life, and therefore tends to view society as
>>something that you're not really a part of -- a large, amorphous group
>>of humans that are "bad" and "evil" because you couldn't find a way to
>>fit in nor identify with them. This is a very common trait among
>>people who tend to support, endorse, defend, etc, cultish views from
>>oddballs. I think that you've already well-established your tendency
>>to do that).

>Jeff, you've overdone it. To state that the views exist and the people
>who hold them have the right to hold and express their views is not the
>same as endorsing those views. I defend their rights, because the
>Constitution of the United States established a nation for that very
>purpose.

Yep, you're the sort of person who supports the Nazi party simply
because they have the right to exist here.

So be it.

But don't be surprised if people dismiss you as a kook when/if you
happen to decide that it's necessary to trumpet kooky views
publically, and tell someone that they're "wrong" about something
because they haven't given proper "tolerance" and consideration to the
kooks' beliefs.

>Are you opposed to the liberties Americans enjoy as expressed
>in the Bill of Rights? If so, then you are opposed to your own right
>to express your ideas in this newsgroup.

It's within U.S. rights for someone to decide that you're a kook for
trumpeting certain views.

Brad Wardell attempted to explain this to you, but you don't seem to
grasp these legal issues. Go back to school, and this time, study
these documents that you're citing so that you know exactly what they
do and do not guarantee. You're obviously arguing out of ignorance

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 03:02:25
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: what's worth writing about?

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

David,

Several of those are viable applications, but few or none are worth a
product review. (None of them would earn mention in S@R, irrespective
of platform, but as I said earlier we don't cover desktop apps.)

VisualAge has been reviewed in the publications that write about
development software and DB2 has gotten coverage in magazines that
review database software. (Those cross platform tools tend to get
reviewed under NT, though, in part because their competition is
usually an NT app so it's easier to draw comparisons.)

StarOffice got attention in the press a few versions ago, and if I
recall correctly it got some good reviews. Right now it's getting
attention because of the Sun purchase; in fact I have an appointment
to talk with a Sun spokesperson about it on Wednesday. I never took
the time to download MAUL, but as a shareware DTP app it has a decent
chance of getting some attention... assuming, that is, that anybody
discovers that it exists. (Most shareware authors -- again, unrelated
to platform -- have no idea how to offer a product for review. That's
one reason I wrote the "Care and Feeding of the Press" with/for the
Internet Press Guild, at http://www.netpress.org/careandfeeding.html)

Photo>Graphics was reviewed when it came out -- in fact, I reviewed it
for Computer Shopper or PC Magazine. (Oh dear, I no longer remember
clearly. I reviewed Embellish in PC Mag, so I think I did
Photo>Graphics for Shopper.) The fact that it's free doesn't make it
worth another look. Nobody writes about point releases of browsers
anymore. And I've never heard of Robotics Messenger/2, so I think it's
safe to say that most of the computer press is unaware of it as well.
(Mind you, I compile the "new and improved" column for extended
attributes every month. It behooves OS/2 software vendors to let me
know that they've come out with something new.)

And, as you say, OS/2 has a relatively small user base. Every time I
write an article I have to weigh it against the article I could have
written instead. Is it more useful to my readers to compare intranet
site builders or Java development tools? Do more readers care about a
BeOS banner builder application or a 360-degree video server for
Macintosh?

When not even _IBM_ wants to talk about OS/2, it makes it awfully hard
to sell an editor on writing a review of an OS/2 product.

And _that's_ why it's important to the OS/2 community for a new client
to come out.

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 23:20:16, "David T. Johnson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

| Esther Schindler wrote:
| >
| > 1. The issue isn't good press or bad press, but that there's *some*
| > visibility for OS/2. During the media panel at Warp Expo West on
| > Saturday, someone asked why OS/2 wasn't mentioned in the computer
| > magazines any more, and I challenged the attendee to give me something
| > I could write _about_. IBM isn't saying anything about it, there
| > aren't any new apps to write about (keeping in mind that most
| > magazines don't cover general utilities, much less minor ones).
| >
| Actually, there are quite a few significant recent new OS/2 apps to
| write about.  Star Office 5.1a is a major package off apps all by itself
| that was nearly invisible until Sun bought it.  Visual Age for Java.
| DB2.  MAUL Publisher.  TrueSpectra v2.02 (not  new but recently became
| freeware).  Robotics Messenger/2.  Communicator v4.61 and associated
| apps.  These are all native OS/2.  There is, or course, also a lot of
| stuff that is Java, EMX, or x86.  For example, I have never seen any
| version of Sun's Hot Java Browser reviewed in the press but it runs
| quite well on OS/2.  I'm trying to list "business" stuff (and not
| utilities) rather than software that might be more likely to be used by
| home users.  Obviously, OS/2 has a relatively small user base and
| relatively few commercial software vendors so big write-ups in major
| computer mags are improbable.  But that does not mean there is not a lot
| of software available and even new software.  But "major" software is
| getting kind of generic, isn't it?  A word processor is a word
| processor, Microsoft's Office 2000 hype, notwithstanding.  It's mostly
| about what you have become used to.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 20-Sep-99 22:44:17
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Richard Steiner)

Here in comp.os.os2.misc, [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)
spake unto us, saying:

>I've heard that OS/2 users have to patch their install disks to install
>Warp on new hardware.

Feh.  Real machines use SCSI.  :-)

--
   -Rich Steiner  >>>--->  [e-mail]  >>>---> Bloomington, MN
     OS/2 + Linux + BeOS + FreeBSD + Solaris + WinNT4 + Win95 + DOS
      + VMWare + Fusion + vMac + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven! :-)
                 "Look at all the indians!" - G. Custer

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: FIELDATA FORTRAN ENTHUSIASTS CLUB (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                         21-Sep-99 04:36:13
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Esther Schindler writes:

>> Yes.  Now, just how many OS/2 ISVs are there overall?

> In what time frame? Set your context.

You already did.  In order for you to have talked to them, they must
be current ISVs.

>>> P.S. So how many sales _have_ you had in the last twelve months?

>> That's proprietary information.

>>> How do they compare to the previous twelve months?

>> That's proprietary information.

>>> Are you able to support yourself wholly from sales of OS/2 products?

>> That's proprietary information.

> That bad, huh?

Illogical.  Just because some information is proprietary doesn't
automatically make the information bad.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 00:49:17
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Tim Martin wrote:
>
> Take it or leave it - Brad Wardell and Stardock have damaged
> the future of OS/2's user base.

Far less than you have Tim.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                    21-Sep-99 04:44:24
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <[e-mail]>,
Richard Steiner <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Here in comp.os.os2.misc, [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)
>spake unto us, saying:
>
>>I've heard that OS/2 users have to patch their install disks to install
>>Warp on new hardware.
>
>Feh.  Real machines use SCSI.  :-)

yeah I know :-)
>
>--
>   -Rich Steiner  >>>--->  [e-mail]  >>>---> Bloomington, MN
>     OS/2 + Linux + BeOS + FreeBSD + Solaris + WinNT4 + Win95 + DOS
>      + VMWare + Fusion + vMac + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven! :-)
>                 "Look at all the indians!" - G. Custer


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                 20-Sep-99 23:07:02
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Jeff,
It is really a pity that you went to all of the effort to post such
a lengthy article that is so completely full of mistakes, misquotes,
and misguided opinions.  You even laughed when I told you that my
schedule in the last week has been altered because of a hurricane
and associated flooding.  I suppose you would have really enjoyed
it if I was one of the people who live a few miles south in Franklin.
Their whole town is still under water, and it's supposed to rain
tonight.  Oh, and they are under a flash flood warning.  Gee haw!

Isn't freedom wonderful?

Regards,
Bennie Nelson

Jeff Glatt wrote:
>
> >>>>>Bennie Nelson
> >>>>>Your corollary does not allow for those who won't bet because they
oppose
> >>>>>betting on moral grounds.
>
> >>>>jglatt
> >>>>Steven's stock market speculation in this newsgroup is "immoral
> >>>>gambling"???
>
> >> >While I did not say that
>
> >> Yes, you proposed that this is indeed what some people think.
>
> To quote one of the people for whom you're fond of performing your
> "Kook Mouthpiece" ritual:
>
> "Note: no response above. Figures."
>
> Tsk, tsk, tsk. Perhaps you're too "unskilled in logic" to respond to
> my observations about what you actually have said and done in this
> newsgroup. After your notorious faux pas about dismissing Tholen's
> detractors as "emotionally blocked" people who are "unskilled at
> logic", I would think that you'd be less inclined to shove your foot
> in your mouth, but apparently that isn't the case.
>
> >>Indeed, you seem to be a spokesman for kooks lately -- voicing the
> >>opinions of all manner of cultish religious-political beliefs. What's
> >>the matter -- don't you think that the fringe groups are getting
> >>enough good press lately, so in addition to being an unpaid salesman
> >>for an oddball, niche IBM product, you're now moonlighting free as a
> >>mouthpiece for esoteric religious-political affiliations?
>
> >That's an interesting way of describing being tolerant of other
> >people and their right to have and express their own beliefs which
> >do not harm or infringe upon the rights and beliefs of others.
>
> I never said that you were intolerant of kooks. I merely point out
> that you seem to champion all manner of kooky, oddball, cultish
> beliefs and affiliations here. I wasn't aware that the Amish needed
> their beliefs trumpeted in COOA. I doubt that they're even aware that
> they needed that.
>
> But aside from the chuckles that some of your truly misguided "kook
> defending" elicits, I'm wondering why you feel the need to do this. Is
> this because you see yourself as a social misfit, and therefore
> identify with people who have oddball beliefs, such as a belief that
> playing card games is a sin?
>
> BTW, using Bennie's misguided notions of "tolerance", if someone
> decided that using OS/2 is a sin, and he went around telling people in
> the newsgroups about his beliefs (just like you seem to feel the need
> to point out what others consider "a sin" and "morally wrong"), that
> wouldn't infringe upon the rights and beliefs of others, and would be
> a great thing to do according to Bennie. For that matter, if someone
> decided to trumpet the belief that Tholen's posts are utter nonsense,
> that would be great too. Well, wait a minute, suddenly Bennie doesn't
> seem quite so "tolerant" when you consider what he has said about
> people who express such views. Oh wait, that's right, he's an OS/2
> kook, and therefore his ideas of "tolerance" and "rights" get filtered
> through that brand name affiliation first.
>
> >>And there are people who believe OS/2 is dead. Maybe you should make
> >>sure that their message is also not lost among the multitude of other,
> >>prevailing views in OS/2 newsgroups? I mean, you don't have to
> >>subscribe to the belief in order to followup messages by people who
> >>are saying that OS/2 isn't dead, and remind them that there are people
> >>who believe otherwise, so they shouldn't express such "exclusionary"
> >>views?
>
> >Those who hold and express the view that "OS/2 is dead" do not need
> >my assistance.
>
> Ah, so then one of the prerequisites to your "kook defense" is that
> the kook must be incapable of putting forth his own views. I wasn't
> aware that you believed Tholen to be so helpless, but being that
> Tholen is indeed a dimwit, I suppose that's understandable.
>
> >They've been saying that for years, so I guess it must be true.
>
> I have no doubt that it's *at least* as true as any of the other
> beliefs you've been trumpeting here, such as the belief that playing
> card games is a sin.
>
> >>Oh wait, I forgot, you're a fan of Tholen's Kook of Month policy
> >>toward "being unbiased". You don't "have time" to dole out the same
> >>criticism toward those whose oddball, kooky views jive with your own.
>
> >I certainly have need expressed that view.  I have posted what I
> >believe to be polite corrections for errors Tim Martin has made in
> >some of his posts.  Not to single out Tim Martin, but I believe he
> >is the current lightning rod in cooa.
>
> >> Or, is the latest flimsy excuse that your news server mysteriously
> >> doesn't receive any messages except those of people whom you
> >> criticize? I forget which pathetic excuse you kooks are clinging to
> >> this week.
>
> >Actually, both news servers I use have had trouble in the last week due
> >hurricane Floyd.  One server was simply powered off.  I'm not sure why
> >the other went dormant for a time.  I've been trying to get caught up
> >on the messages in this newsgroup for several days, now.
>
> hahahahah. riiiiiiiiiiiiight.
>
> >I use Os/2 v4, Windows NT v4 (both Workstation
> >and server editions), Windows 95, Linux, Solaris 7, and OS/390.
>
> How do you use certain operating systems that you previously claimed
> you couldn't install because it didn't support your hardware?
>
> >>Do you find association only with ones comprised of people who espouse
> >>oddball, esoteric, religious-political ideals? (I've already noted in
> >>previous posts when you've expressed notably negative views of
> >>humanity and society in general.
>
> >This is quite amusing, Jeff.
>
> Yes, your vaudeville routine *is* amusing.
>
> >You have been mocking the morals of
> >many people
>
> Imagine that! Mocking the morals of people who believe that it's a sin
> to play card games!!
>
> hahahahaha!!! You OS/2 kooks are sooooooooooo amusing!
>
> >the OS choice of many people, the political views of
> >many people, etc. I have a made a few general comments about human
> >nature as seen in the various posts in USENET. I will leave it to
> >others to decide which of us has "expressed notably negative views."
>
> The "Tholen detractors" whom you dismissed as "emotionally blocked"
> people who are "unskilled at logic" have already seen through your
> brand name inspired, hypocritical ruse, and found it to be "naive"
> nonsense, to quote just one appraisal from someone whom I think has
> demonstrated far more real-world, positive contributions than you ever
> will.
>
> >>Offhand, I'd say that you are likely
> >>a person who has been an outcast for a good portion of his life, if
> >>not for your entire life, and therefore tends to view society as
> >>something that you're not really a part of -- a large, amorphous group
> >>of humans that are "bad" and "evil" because you couldn't find a way to
> >>fit in nor identify with them. This is a very common trait among
> >>people who tend to support, endorse, defend, etc, cultish views from
> >>oddballs. I think that you've already well-established your tendency
> >>to do that).
>
> >Jeff, you've overdone it. To state that the views exist and the people
> >who hold them have the right to hold and express their views is not the
> >same as endorsing those views. I defend their rights, because the
> >Constitution of the United States established a nation for that very
> >purpose.
>
> Yep, you're the sort of person who supports the Nazi party simply
> because they have the right to exist here.
>
> So be it.
>
> But don't be surprised if people dismiss you as a kook when/if you
> happen to decide that it's necessary to trumpet kooky views
> publically, and tell someone that they're "wrong" about something
> because they haven't given proper "tolerance" and consideration to the
> kooks' beliefs.
>
> >Are you opposed to the liberties Americans enjoy as expressed
> >in the Bill of Rights? If so, then you are opposed to your own right
> >to express your ideas in this newsgroup.
>
> It's within U.S. rights for someone to decide that you're a kook for
> trumpeting certain views.
>
> Brad Wardell attempted to explain this to you, but you don't seem to
> grasp these legal issues. Go back to school, and this time, study
> these documents that you're citing so that you know exactly what they
> do and do not guarantee. You're obviously arguing out of ignorance

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                   21-Sep-99 04:50:29
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

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

On 21 Sep 1999 03:40:42 GMT, Dave Tholen wrote:

|> OS/2 out of the box can't install on EIDE hard drive over 8.4 gigs
|> unless it is patched.
|
|Evidence, please.  I've read several responses to you from people who
|have installed on larger drives without needing a patch.

Does this help
everyone:

http://service.software.ibm.com/os2ddpak/html/647679D565C73E0F862565980068EFB0
.html




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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 20-Sep-99 23:12:07
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Tim Martin wrote:
>
> Bennie Nelson wrote:
>
> > Tim Martin wrote:
> > >
> > > [e-mail] wrote:
> > >
> > > > Personally I think that Brad Wardell ( trying to keep the Brads
straight )
> > > > has done a wonderful job of getting all the vocal os/2 supporters
incensed
> > > > about this supposed statement/decision by IBM.
> > >
> > > Wardell has done that and much more.  He has single handedly
> > > chased hundreds if not thousands of OS/2 users away from OS/2.
> >
> > Tim,
> > It seems to me that you've overplayed your hand, again.  You do have
> > a habit of that.  I doubt seriously that you can find and produce
> > any evidence to show that Brad W. has chased away a dozen people
> > from using OS/2.
> >
> > I much prefer the helpful Tim Martin who posts in the other
> > newsgroups.  I believe you have been shabbily treated by some
> > in this newsgroup, but you don't have to respond in the way you
> > do.  That only tends to stir other people up who don't know the
> > whole story.  Besides, as is so often the case, it's the guy who
> > swings second who draws the penalty flag.
> >
> > Please give it some thought.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Bennie Nelson
>
> Sorry Bennie but you have to sit in my seat.  I oversee
> the largest OS/2-only private subscription web site on
> the 'Net which services thousands of OS/2 users.  I have
> to deal with the reality of members writing to say, "Now
> that IBM has killed OS/2 will you help us move over to
> Linux and other supported operating systems?"
>
> Many see Brad to be a leader (self-proclaimed) within the
> OS/2  community.  That self-proclaimed leader has stepped
> forward and literally declared the end of any OS/2 future.
>
> Look around you now.  The Register, one of the most
> well respected News Media Sources on the 'Net, is now
> running the "poor Brad" story and citing the death of
> OS/2 once again.  By the end of this week you'll see
> other commercial tech news sites reporting the final
> death of OS/2.  Folks like "Wired" "InfoWorld"  "CNET"
> "Mercury News"  "ZDNews" and so on.
>
> If you think many OS/2 users won't believe these
> constant flood of false stories and leave OS/2 then
> there's a golden bridge in San Francisco I'd love to
> sell you.

Tim,
You didn't supply any real evidence of real people
whom Brad Wardell has personally stopped from using
OS/2.  Anecdotal evidence is simply hearsay.

Besides, I've been reading the OS/2 is dead stories for
years.  It's really amazing how these reporters and
pundits can repeat that message year after year and
do it with a straight face and still take themselves
seriously.  Those are the ones you should sell the
bridge to.

Thanks for the reply,
Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                20-Sep-99 23:19:29
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail]

jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) said:

>Maybe, but it should now have become painfully clear that you are  talking
>about things you know absolutely nothing about: OS/2 *will*  install on
+8.4GB
>drives (there's not enough room to install it on 8.4 MB drives). It just
needs
>a little tweaking.

A little tweaking.  To someone less of a genius it can be a big problem - in
addition to other similar screwing around you have to do that computer
geniuses
think are great fun.

Jim L
Remove XX from address to Email
More gun laws will cure the nations ills - just like drug laws do.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 20-Sep-99 22:56:15
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: [e-mail] (Richard Steiner)

Here in comp.os.os2.apps, [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)
spake unto us, saying:

>On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 04:45:27, [e-mail] (Richard Steiner)
>wrote:
>
>| Whatever is happening is strange, yes.  I suspect many of us are quite
>| curious what The Real Story might be.
>
>Indeed.
>
>But be aware that, to find out, we'll have to gaze into the gaping maw
>of IBM politics. It's entirely possible that we'll _never_ find out
>what actually happened.

Yes, that's possible.  Thank you for being a voice of sanity, Esther.

--
   -Rich Steiner  >>>--->  [e-mail]  >>>---> Bloomington, MN
     OS/2 + Linux + BeOS + FreeBSD + Solaris + WinNT4 + Win95 + DOS
      + VMWare + Fusion + vMac + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven! :-)
         Press CTRL-ALT-INS-DEL-END-HOME-SHIFT-PAUSE to continue.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: FIELDATA FORTRAN ENTHUSIASTS CLUB (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                      21-Sep-99 00:58:23
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Jason <[e-mail]>

In comp.os.os2.advocacy Jason Bowen <[e-mail]> wrote:

: The unix shell is an aquired taste to be sure, I like it.  Gnome and KDE
: are two answers to the WPS and the Windows Explorer.  I always loved the
: WPS, just thought it was darn ugly.

But it's sure better looking then Windows Explorer or MacOS, yeach


: From what I have read there will be no more free downloads soon, software
: choice is going to all paid subscription.

Can you site any proof to add credability to that statement?

-Jason

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

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

From: [e-mail]                     21-Sep-99 03:31:11
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

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

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 17:49:41 GMT, Mooo wrote:

>>  Not providing an updated client that can install out of the box on
>>a machine with say a 10 gig hard drive seems to be a barrier to adoption
>>to me.
>
>You've done this with NT I gather?  I mean, NT with no fixes applied?

I can buy a CD that has "NT 4, SP3" on it.  Is there such a CD as "OS/2 Warp
4, FP5"?
---
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]                                 20-Sep-99 22:45:17
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Richard Steiner)

Here in comp.os.os2.misc, [e-mail] (David H. McCoy)
spake unto us, saying:

>Welcome to the world of OS/2 advocacy.

Yes, but I'm wondering why it's crossposted to c.o.o.misc...?

--
   -Rich Steiner  >>>--->  [e-mail]  >>>---> Bloomington, MN
     OS/2 + Linux + BeOS + FreeBSD + Solaris + WinNT4 + Win95 + DOS
      + VMWare + Fusion + vMac + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven! :-)
                       Death to all fanatics!!  :-)

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: FIELDATA FORTRAN ENTHUSIASTS CLUB (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                     21-Sep-99 03:33:28
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: [e-mail] (Byron Desnoyers Winmill)

David H. McCoy ([e-mail]) wrote:
: >Older hardware, certainly.  There is no sense getting stuck in the upgrade
: >cycle when all that it is for is to make money for software developers.

: With you guys is always an upgrade cycle. You ever stop to consider that
: people buy what they think they need? It seems to me that the only people
who
: shout "upgrade cycle" are those without software.

No, I am serious about the upgrade cycle.  Though I you are probably correct
about my learning to hate the upgrade cycle because of the lack of popular
applications for OS/2.  I also learned about it because I am cheap.  I also
learned about it when I picked up an 8MHz, 16-bit Macintosh SE and figured
out that it fulfill most of my needs just as easily as a bleeding edge
machine.  So there are lots of contributing factors.

Then again, you are the one who suggested that people should buy what they
need.

: >With regards to the faults of Windows NT, I will only list responsiveness
: >(or the lack thereof).  Otherwise, I have not used it enough to comment.
: >Well, I shouldn't even say that.  I did have some time to play with one NT
: >system.  But that was 3 years ago, and on version 3.5 or so (my memory is
: >failing me).  Outside of speed, I don't recall having any problems with
: >that machine.  In fact, it was a great deal better than using the plain
: >DOS box.  (Or had they installed 95 by that point?  I forget.)

: Don't you think that a couple of uses 3 years ago is a bit much on which to
: draw such a conclusion. You are woefully out of date. I used OS/2 from 2.1
to
: Warp 4, and I once had the same opinion as you. Three years ago. IMO, when I


Sorry, but my wordiness got in the way of my clarity.  I have used recent
versions of NT (yes, version 4).  Those are the versions which I have used
rather infrequently.  Probably about a few dozen time.  And if you think
that NT is so much more stable, well consider this: OS stability isn't worth
a damn when the applications are so flakey that they are terminated by NT.
I rarely had this problem under NT.  (In particular, my problems were with
Guide 6.  It was next to impossible to chart the star cluster which I wanted
to observe or reduce data for.)

It was with version 3.5 for which I had the most experience.  In particular,
programming experience.  But you are correct: such knowledge is woefully
out of date.  (Unless, of course, you are a person who is satisfied with
an older version of NT.  Well, I'm not.  :-)

: tried NT 4 on my OS/2 box, a P166 with 64 megs of ram, they are at similar
: speeds in terms of program launching, downloading, and multitasking.

Congratulations.  But my processor was one generation and 116MHz slower.
It also had half the RAM and 2/3 the memory bus speed.  Oh, and it was
about as responsive (subjective term) as NT on these blazingly fast and
astoundingly expensive machines I see every day.  Mind you, I was using
older software.  Mind you, I find that when you are in the upgrade cycle
you are in it good!  (Ie. latest OS *and* applications.)

: my hardware worked better. For example, my then SB16 PnP under OS/2, could
: not be shared between Win-OS/2 sessions and OS/2. In fact, if one Win-OS/2
: session grabbed the soundcard, nothing else could use it.

If you don't mind my bothering, Creative Labs support for OS/2 was pathetic.
That thought will never leave my mind after picking up an el-cheapo Crystal
sound card, and seeing the performance of my machine go through the roof for
audio applications.  Applications which consumed virtually all of the CPU
cycles with my SBPro (and with lousy output at that) were down to 20% of the
CPU cycles with that el-cheapo sound card.

When you work on an OS/2 system, you buy your hardware for OS/2.  You most
certainly do not buy hardware and simply expect it to work.  You learn to
live with that and, you know what, it doesn't matter when you care more
about functionality than whiz-bang features.

: NT(and now Win2k), play MP3s using RealJukebox, listen to SpinnerPlus, and
: still get system alerts. Also, things like my Ziptools existed for NT

MP3's and RealAudio and SpinnerPlus (what?) are non-issues.  If I want to
listen to audio, I listen to the radio.  Radio's tend not to crash, after
all.  I can allso take my radio everywhere.  (My computer with an Internet
connection, not.)  Perhaps this is because I care more about getting content
from my computer.  (The sound card stuff was only playing with module files.)

As for ZipTools, if you are refering to the software for the Iomega Zip
drive, who really cares.  The Zip drive works fine on most platforms which
support removable hard drives.  This ranges from the Apple II, to Macintosh,
to OS/2, and yes, to Windows.  (And Linux, NetBSD, etc..)

: like my generic PCI soundcard and my Diamond TNT2 Ultra videocard. And
unlike
: OS/2 it seems, it can recognized drives greater than 8 gig.

I lost respect for Diamond products when I discovered that the $100 dollar
VGA card that I bought was really a $50 Cirrus Logic based card.  OTOH, it
made life really easy when it came to OS/2 and Linux driver support.  ;-)

8Gb drives have never been an issue on my end.  My desires don't consume
more than 1Gb on all of my machines.

: >Windows 95 is another story altogether.  There my experiences go from so=so
: >to just plain sour.  It ranges from loosing the system while programming

: Why is it that most people don't have such problems. When I worked at AT&T,
: hundreds of people used Win95. Dozens were around me and none, to my
: knowledge, complained of such widespread problems.

Humph.  Don't try telling that to somebody who has supported these machines.
I was involved with the Win95 rollout at a ScotiaBank call center.  (Guess
what, I was selected for my knowledge of Win95.  Must have been spending
too much time in OS-DEBATE.)  Installation was hellish on most machines,
the network had a lot of fun freezing from time to time (we learned that
Win95 and Win 3.x would not co-operate on the same controller); and
certain machines would fail at unexpected times, for unexpected reasons
and for unknown durations.  Most of these problems were solved in time,
but many simply became parts of the support regiment.

Even if they were simply install issues, I have said this before and I will
say this again: there is too little time in my life to waste on the tedium
of getting something which should work to work.  The only issue that I have
ever run into with OS/2 was finding the appropriate drivers, then installing.
Not so for Win95.  (Debating over OSes is, OTOH, fun.  So I choose to do
this.  ;-)

: Heck, my mother-in-law is almost
: totally computer illiterate and has called me about problems like my mouse
: doesn't work. A problem caused by the fact that it was 4 years old, BTW.

Hum, I use decade old ADB keyboards and mice (on M*cs and my IIgs) every
day.  Just shows that PC quality is job #1.  This probably has a lot to do
with why my PC is on the shelf, and I am telneting into servers with a M*c
right now.  (Curse co-operative multitasking!  It wastes my time.)

: >But it is sure a devil to maintain.  As I said before, I do not have that
: >much time to devote to one computer.  If you do, have your fun maintaining
: >your system.  I like having my system available for work when there is
: >work to do, and available for tinkering when there is time to spare.

: I don't agree. Every company I've ever worked at has some kind of Unix box
: and for the most part, you left them alone. You cannot find a more reliable
: system.  For the most part, you just leave them alone.

Once it is running, maybe.  Perhaps I am confusing installation with
maintenance.  So let me rephrase that: setting up UNIX and its associated
applications is a devil.

And servers are a different matter anyway.  Web servers and FTP servers
use a fixed set of software.  Servers which involve some form of user
interaction my be very maintenace intensive.  Security, application support,
account support, etc..  Not an issue for home users though.  But getting
the thing running properly is still a lot of work for users which have to
figure out how to use the software in the first place.

: >As for the reliability of UNIX over OS/2: from my meager accomplishments
: >with Linux and NetBSD, it seems to me that OS/2 is more reliable from the
: >users point of view.  For example: running DeScribe simply requires that
: >the OS and progam are installed properly.  For something like LaTeX you
: >really need the OS, a text editor, LaTeX, ghostview, (ghostscript?), and
: >lpd to be installed properly.  Never mind the need of the user to know
: >how to use all of those programs properly.

: Please. No offense, but you don't know what you are talking about. You keep
: making claims of reliability and response for systems on which you obviously

: have little experience. Unix boxes can run hundreds of concurrent users.
OS/2
: cannot come close to touching it.

OS/2 and UNIX boxes also have very different levels of user interaction,
and of output quality.  But honestly, I have hundreds or even thousands of
hours of experience with most of the platforms which I discuss.  In the
case of OS/2, it is from actually maintaining my own system.  Same with
Windows 3.x, MacOS, and NetBSD.  Let's not forget that I also supported a
Win95 network professionally.  (Not administered, thank god.)  NT is the
big exception here.

On big systems, most of my reflections are from the user end.  The system
that I am writing this on is running an uncounted number of processes in
about 100 logins.  But I do not ask my computers to do that.  The fastest
computer which I ever owned was 50MHz.  Not very realisting for supporing
hundreds of concurrent logins.

No offense taken.

: It sound like you are talking about ease of use, and Windows has it over
OS/2
: there. Better hardware support, no-brainer software purchases, and
: installshield make for the best user experience.

Ease of use is slightly different from maintaining your own system.  M*c
can probably rip the heart out of Win95 and OS/2 when it comes to that,
though OS/2 is certainly easier to maintain that Win95.  Hardware support
is also a non-issue if you try to stick with what you have, and buy for
the operating system.  Cuts back on the options, sure.  But it does not
cut back on the options enough to discount OS/2.  (For one, I do not care
about 3D accelerators, 3D audio, AGP, or other stuff which is clearly
intended for the gaming market -- and a few professionals.)  No brainer
software purchases also leave you with quite brainless software.  I have
seen some of the junk passed off as software (just check the latest version
of Microsoft Office), and all it does is push you into buying a new machine.

Installshield is also pretty unfriendly when compared to M*c install
software and even some of the installers that I have used in OS/2.

About the only advantage of using Win95 (from the perspective of most
of the people I know), is seeing Byron tuck his tail between his legs,
cowering and submitting an answer to your support question.

And my support is not all that bad.  I can even handle it over the
telephone after not touching a Win95 system for four months.   (Though I
have come into contact with several NT machines in that period, humm.)

--
Stopped (SIGTTOU)         byron.
$

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                  20-Sep-99 16:17:04
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Jim Stuyck <[e-mail]>


Tim Martin wrote:

>
>
> ...  Nothing has ever brought so many in the OS/2 community to run

> away from OS/2 either.  Brad [Wardell] may have single handedly

> whittled OS/2 users down by half and for his own (Company's) benefit.

Then you are saying that "overnight" half of the 6000 "members" of "Warp
City" have abandoned OS/2?  Right...  Did "Nick" or "Mai" or "Larry" or
"Kathy" or some of the "vice presidents" of "Chauver & Company"
abandon OS/2?

Since Wardell's announcement was (for the moment, at least) confined to
the Internet, it's quite a stretch of the imagination to figure that so many
OS/2 users are (1) Internet-connected and (2) aware of Wardell's
announcement.

Ah, but I forget:  "Imagination" is the whole of "Chauvet & Company."

Jim Stuyck


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: J. D. Stuyck and Associates -- Retired (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]...               21-Sep-99 04:10:12
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: Why do you cling to this OS?

Message sender: [e-mail]

From: [e-mail] (Allen Beddingfield)

On Tue, 17 Aug 1999 22:33:05 -0600, [e-mail] (Binkie) wrote:

Hmmm....I wish I could find that "dipshit" and offer him a job..

Allen B.



>This is very entertaining...
>
>
>Just for fun I started this thread to see what would happen. Well, you all
>met my expectations. This probably explains why the dipshit that tried to
>force OS/2 on all of our desktops was fired a couple of years ago...
>
>Please contine having fun bantering (round and round) about yourselves and
>OS/2... Considering the crap that is quoted below I could have fun for
>months.
>
>You people are so like the 60's hippies that just can't get rid of that
>Volkswagen Van.
>
>Flame away if you will. I won't be back for a couple of weeks.
>
>
>In article <7oos9b$4kb$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
wrote:
>
>> Tony Wright writes:
>>
>> > You get 1 credit on your term work
>>
>> I'm not doing any "term work".
>>
>> > for every "irrelevant", "illogical", "non sequitur", "balderdash",
>> > "typical invective" you avoid using....
>>
>> Are you saying that because you intend to write irrelevant, illogical,
>> non sequitur, nonsensical, or insulting remarks and don't want to have
>> that fact called to your attention?
>>
>> > (no, I ought to give you a bonus for at least attempting the Latin<g>)
>>
>> Why?  Wouldn't that make it less accessible to the average reader?
>>
>> > An "Absolute drivel - My starchart calculations don't agree with yours"
>> > is an automatic failure requiring you to resit the finals next year....
>>
>> You're presupposing that we've both done some starchart calculations.
>>
>> >>>> Binkie writes:
>>
>> >>>>> Inquiring minds just want to know.
>>
>> >>>> Inquiring minds just want to know why you bother to post such drivel
>> >>>> here.
>>
>> >>> Talking of drivel whats this got to do with OS/2?
>>
>> >> Everything.  Check the subject line and newsgroups line.
>>
>> > This is almost too funny for words......a farcical tragedy.
>>
>> On what basis do you make that claim?
>>
>> > Even Sophocles would have "giggled" at that one......
>>
>> How would you know?
>>
>> > Apart from the news group being OS2 advocacy how the h*ll am I supposed
>> > to deduce that your querying of another persons motives for appending is
>> > still referring to OS/2 when the subject line specifically only states
>> > "....this OS"?
>>
>> Isn't the newsgroup being about OS/2 sufficient?  Or do you expect
>> someone posting in an OS/2 newsgroup, referring to "this OS", is
>> really talking about Solaris?  Gad...
>>
>> > Wait a minute, read the previous appends in context, right?......
>>
>> Wrong.  There weren't any previous appends.
>>
>> > Now that could set a very dangerous precedent for you!<g>
>>
>> Illogical, given that there weren't any previous appends to read in
>> context.
>>
>> > Nevertheless you still have a distinct "collimation" error in that
>> > "logical" telescope your using...
>>
>> Typical unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective.
>>
>> > That chromatic abberation in the "lens" of your mind is definitely
>> > affecting your spectroscopy results, "professor"<g>.
>>
>> Yet another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective.
>>
>> >>>>> Let it go people, it's dead.
>>
>> >>>> Obviously not, as evidenced by the fact that you, and others, find it
>> >>>> necessary to come here and beat on this allegedly "dead horse".
>>
>> >>> If you really want to wind me up just keep illogically referring to
>> >>> "beating" and "dead horses" in the same topic<vbg>.....or just about
>> >>> anything detrimental to a "horse's" well being.... :-(
>>
>> >> I take it you've never heard of "beating a dead horse" before,
>>
>> > You have no real comprehension of logic
>>
>> Yet another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, and rather ironic,
>> coming from someone who thinks there's insufficient information to
>> conclude that Binkie was referring to OS/2.  I'll also note that you
>> didn't confirm or deny my take on your familiarity with the phrase.
>>
>> > so how in G*d's name do I explain such an abstract concept as humour
>> > or wit
>>
>> Irrelevant, given that I wasn't asking you to do so.
>>
>> > when you're totally devoid of any basic foundation in both?
>>
>> On what basis do you make that claim?
>>
>> >> especially in cases that don't involve actual horses?  What's
>> >> allegedly illogical about the reference?
>>
>> > You have to ask?
>>
>> Yes, given that it wasn't illogical, yet you claimed it was.
>>
>> > "incredulus odi!" - Oh sorry I forgot, you don't understand that
>> > language either....
>>
>> On what basis do you make that claim?
>>
>> > Were you ever a sophomore?
>>
>> How is that supposedly relevant?
>>
>> > At what University specifically did you actually read for your
>> > doctorate in "Philosophy"?
>>
>> What difference does it make to you?
>>
>> > ..... no let me guess, it was one of those paper PhD's......
>>
>> You guessed wrong.
>>
>> > and the only Latin that was required was how to translate the "motto"?
>>
>> I already had Latin in high school, Tony.  By the way, just how many
>> universities actually require Latin for a Ph.D. nowadays?
>>
>> >>> On a more "savoury" note - I take it you're not travelling to
>> >>> India(forecast is cloudy anyway) or Cornwall(UK) to observe the eclipse
>> >>> realtime(sunspot activity is up so might get some interesting solar
>> >>> prominences)?........
>>
>> >> "Talking of drivel whats this got to do with OS/2?"
>>
>> > Congratulations you actually mentioned OS/2!
>>
>> That was a quotation, Tony.
>>
>> > ...No, wait a minute, that was my line you just plagiarised!<g>.
>>
>> On the contrary, there are quotation marks around it.  You do know
>> what a quotation is, don't you?
>>
>> > Now you  remember the "point" about reading in context?
>>
>> Too bad it doesn't apply to this case, given that there were no
>> previous appends when Binkie posted his item.
>>
>> > .....well....
>>
>> Well what?
>>
>> > I know your memory retention is not as good as it should be,
>>
>> No, you don't know that.
>>
>> > but if you forgot, just  point that expensive 8m reflector roughly
>> > equidistant between Dabih & Deneb in the Constellation of Capricornus
>> > (you can find that without your star charts can't you?)
>>
>> Deneb is the brightest star in Cygnus.
>>
>> > and you should find it immediately below NGC7009 at midnight on 9th Aug.
>>
>> How is that supposedly relevant?
>>
>> > No manual coarse tracking on that thing? - No problem as I'm sure your
>> > OS/2 based tracker can work it out for you.
>>
>> Indeed it can.
>>
>> > Now Longitude 157 degrees 51 minutes Latitude 21 degrees 19 minutes at
>> > 00:00hrs GMT on 9th Aug gives a relative position for you of Altitude 51
>> > degrees and Azimuth 169.(I think your TZ is -10hrs so I'll leave you to
>> > work that correction for yourself and any offset from Honolulu to
>> > whatever Pacific atoll you were exhiled to.).
>>
>> You're erroneously presupposing that I've been exhiled to some Pacific
>> atoll.  By the way, the time zone correction is irrelevant when working
>> in Universal Time, what you call GMT.  Oh, and the 8 m reflectors are
>> on a different island, so your coordinates are off.  And why work in
>> azimuth and altitude, which change so much faster than right ascension
>> and declination?
>>
>> > Even as a semi competent astronomer you should now be staring at Uranus.
>>
>> Not at 00:00 GMT.  The Sun is up.  Uranus is down.
>>
>> > Which both phonetically and metaphorically just about explains it all
>> > really. :-(
>>
>> I take it you're referring to an explanation for your behavior?
>>
>> > Never mind - I initially offer you a friendly opportunity to discuss the
>> > only thing you're possibly capable of discoursing intelligently and
>> > instead of that you go "Hawking" off in the interstellar dust again....
>> > :-(
>>
>> On the contrary, I didn't bring up interstellar dust at all.
>>
>> > So it appears we're obviously observing the mental residue from your
>> > own personal "Big Bang"...the 2 deg Kelvin remains of your intellect.
>>
>> Who is "we"?
>>
>> > Perhaps that "wild unscientific" theory about 4" refracting telescopes
>> > funneling alpha particles and "stewing" amateur astronomers brains
>> > wasn't completely so farfetched after all?
>>
>> Where did that alleged "theory" come from?
>>
>> > I just thought viewing an eclipse would minimise your exposure to
>> > secondary radiation and thus ultimately save OS/2 from at least one of
>> > its two own worst enemies?
>>
>> How can an observation of Uranus lead to an eclipse viewing?  And who
>> are allegedly OS/2's two worst enemies?
>>
>> >>> ....and if only I could find a cost effective way of digitising the
>> >>> subsequent video analog output into the OS/2 system I'm still clinging
>> >>> to.         ;-)
>>
>> >> Inquire in the appropriate newsgroup.
>>
>> > Well a more definitive pointer from such a self professed OS/2 exponent
>> > would have been helpful? :-(
>>
>> Can't you figure that out for yourself?  Don't you think the multimedia
>> newsgroup is the best match?
>>
>> > So which other 5 words in the sentence containing "digitising video
>> > analog output" and "OS/2" didn't you understand?<g>
>>
>> What makes you think I didn't understand any of them?
>>
>> > Over 2 months ago I set MR Tholen his Latin homework,
>>
>> Incorrect.
>>
>> > but apparently he's still struggling to complete it!
>>
>> You're erroneouslt presupposing the existence of some Latin homework.
>>
>> > Perhaps it's time to offer a helping hand?
>>
>> More like the time to offer the truth.
>>
>> > And so Mr Tholen can catch up with the rest of the class...
>>
>> What alleged class?

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          21-Sep-99 05:40:09
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>>>Bennie Nelson
>>>OS/2 works with hardware that is current.  I have built brand new systems
>>>with recently released off-the-shelf components, this year.  No problems.

>>>jglatt
>>>Windows 95, on the other hand, did not fare so well.

>>Only because you're obviously not competent enough to do what many,
>>many other people (including myself) do routinely -- install Windows.
>>In fact, just this week I put together 3 various systems and installed
>>Windows 9x from scratch. No problems. But then, unlike you, I know
>>what I'm doing and have the skills to do it

>Are you saying that no one who is competent has ever had problems
>installing Windows 95?

To paraphrase a kook whom you think exhibits great logic:

Reading comprehension problems, Bennie? I didn't say anything of the
sort. I merely pointed out that you don't appear to be competent
enough to do what many, many other people (including myself) do
routinely -- install Windows without problems upon a variety of
hardware.

>if a person has problems installing
>Windows 95, then that is conclusive proof that the person doing the
>install is incompetent?

If a person has problems installing an operating system, and he knows
what he's doing, he usually can troubleshoot what is causing the
problem and solve the problem. I do that all of the time.

You likely don't have the skills to do that.

Nevertheless, that's not to say that I often have trouble installing
Windows. Typically, I do not. Nor do I have more problems with one
operating system versus another. After all, I know what I'm doing, and
so I'm able to install operating systems with reasonably little
trouble,

It appears that a number of the OS/2 users posting in this newsgroup
are not qualified likewise.

>How about Windows 95's notoriously bad support for modems (well
>documented on MS' Knowledgebase website)?

How about OS/2's notoriously bad support for sound cards? Even the
latest Creative Labs' cards aren't supported in OS/2, and those are
the biggest selling sound cards.

>How about the fact that
>at least one version of Windows 95 cannot find a requested device
>driver on a diskette if the *.INF file has the name in a different
>case from the way the file is stored on the diskette?
>I had
>to edit the *.INF file and change the filename's case before Windows
>could find the driver.

How about the fact that OS/2 users have to edit the files on their
install disks in order to install upon >8.4 gig IDE hard drives?

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

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

From: [e-mail]                    21-Sep-99 04:44:06
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <7s6ujd$29n$[e-mail]>,
Dave Tholen <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Jason Bowen writes:
>
>>>> I have never had a probelm with Windows anything not supporting hardware.
>
>>> I've read about people complaining about how Microsoft refused to help
>>> out with an NT problem because the hardware they were using wasn't on
>>> the HCL.
>
>> I've heard that OS/2 users have to patch their install disks to install
>> Warp on new hardware.
>
>I didn't have to.  What you've heard doesn't change the fact that Windows
>isn't a panacea to hardware support problems.
>

Why are you making that statement?  I didn't make any claim about Windows.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 23:01:29
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Kim Cheung wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 01:43:17 -0400, Brad Barclay wrote:
>
> >Either way, however, I doubt if national-language versions were such a
major decision
> >factor as Tim makes them out to be
>
> It was.

Brad's supporters are simply not going to accept
this.  They can't and they won't.

Tim...

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          21-Sep-99 05:57:13
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: Tell us about your sofware Dave

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>Jason Bowen
>How are sales doing?  Can you give us a 5 year graph of sales and revenue?

The alleged software is supposedly an astrology program. When an
inquiry was posted to the astrology newsgroup, not one person (other
than Tholen) reported using this software.

Calls to the "contact person" for the alleged company that makes this
software, Celestech, as allegedly provided by some Celestech
representative, went unanswered. The phone number was not listed under
the name Celestech, but was in fact, Tholen's private number. Here's
an apropos excerpt from Jim Stuyck's post:

==============================================
A call to Directory Assistance for area code "808" gets a "no listing
for Celestech" response.  But, in the most recent [IBM publication]
"Sources & Solutions" booklet, I found this entry:

    Celestech
    PO Box 61091
    Honolulu, HI 96839-1091
    Sales phone:  [phone]

That's the number I tried.  BTW, when asked for a listing for "Tholen,
Dave", Directory Assistance provided that same number.

Both times -- during the day in Hawaii, on week days -- the phone rang
"forever" without an answering service or even an answering machine to
solicit orders, provide information, what have you.
==============================================

The OS/2 certification for this product was intentionally *dropped* by
IBM on IBM's "Ready for OS/2 Warp Compatible Products" web page. (ie,
The product's OS/2 certification went from certified to uncertified).

I'll leave it up to you to decide whether this "product" and "company"
even merits any note beyond the above. Frankly, I think not.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 22:50:24
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Esther Schindler wrote:

> Tim,
>
> YOU are the one claiming that OS/2 users are being chased away from
> OS/2. Not me. I haven't seen a single OS/2 user walk away from the
> platform.
>

Esther - stop.

You are simply not going to wash this way, sweep it under
the rug or publicly declare Brad Wardell and Stardock have
not harmed the OS/2 community.  You have time and again
come to Brad's aide and assistance when he is under attack.
As a Ziff Davis employee and writer it is expected.

It simply is not going to work here to save your friend and
buddy Brad Wardell.  Stardock needs to cleanly walk away
from their so-called support of OS/2 and quit playing their
OS/2 customers as chumps.  Stardock develops software
for Microsoft-systems and gives as little lip service as they
need to retain their naive OS/2 customers.  Their eventual
hope is, "You came to us for OS/2 now follow us to Microsoft."

Many Stardock fans simply don't want to see the forest
'fore the trees and I feel sorry for them but those few
-in all likelihood- already have a foot in the door of Microsoft
and see nothing wrong with leaving OS/2.  When I see
one of Microsoft's recruiters standing on the side of the
information highway in their bright Kmart suits telling OS/2
users their operating system is dead, I'll make sure the
OS/2 user  knows what a real snake salesman looks like.

Brad Wardell's statement, which purports to speak on
behalf of IBM and says OS/2 is -in effect- dead, is just
plain Microsoft snake oil.

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                     20-Sep-99 22:54:02
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: what's worth writing about?

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


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

On 9-21-99, 3:02:51 AM, [e-mail] (Esther Schindler) wrote
regarding what's worth writing about? (was: This too shall pass):


>
> StarOffice got attention in the press a few versions ago, and if I
> recall correctly it got some good reviews. Right now it's getting
> attention because of the Sun purchase; in fact I have an appointment
> to talk with a Sun spokesperson about it on Wednesday.

PCWeek gave the new StarOffice a great review. They did so at a time
when the unknown suite was offered in comparison to MS Office97.

I've been using 5.1a downloaded from SUN's site.  It is a vast
improvement in speed and usability over 5.0.  The SO/2 environment
replaces the WPS and WarpCenter.  I like it.

> And, as you say, OS/2 has a relatively small user base. Every time I
> write an article I have to weigh it against the article I could have
> written instead. Is it more useful to my readers to compare intranet
> site builders or Java development tools? Do more readers care about a
> BeOS banner builder application or a 360-degree video server for
> Macintosh?

IMHO the measure of a magazine and its credibility is in how they
cover the lesser used OSs.  It is sometimes hard to take a windows
centric magazine review seriously.  If SR covers a host of OS then it
is more likely the readership will trust a good review.

> When not even _IBM_ wants to talk about OS/2, it makes it awfully hard
> to sell an editor on writing a review of an OS/2 product.

> And _that's_ why it's important to the OS/2 community for a new client
> to come out.

I agree although I think a 4.1 release or 4.01 would make more sense -
a major upgrade is sometimes frowned upon and extra work and at a time
when Y2K is coming.  Who in business has the time or money for a new
client?  4.01 could roll out the fixpacks and add some driver updates.
 What is in a name?  A rose...




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

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

From: [e-mail]               20-Sep-99 22:10:00
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: Stardock's Biggest Failure

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

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 01:43:17 -0400, Brad Barclay wrote:

>Either way, however, I doubt if national-language versions were such a major
decision
>factor as Tim makes them out to be

It was.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                     20-Sep-99 23:09:28
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: Perhaps Stardock is wrong?

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


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

On 9-20-99, 7:15:20 PM, "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]> wrote
regarding Re: Perhaps Stardock is wrong?:


> Kendall Bennett wrote:
> >
> > OS/2 *has* been doing well for IBM recently, they *have* released Warp
> > Server for e-Business and Workspace On Demand is doing well. It would
> > seem to me that perhaps IBM is not ready for a Warp 5 client just yet.
> > Their focus is after all on the business end of the OS/2 spectrum, but
to
> > me an updated Warp 5 client *does* make a lot of sense for IBM, but
> > perhaps they are just not ready for it yet. IBM has made absolutely no
> > public statements about this, and when IBM does a press release
stating
> > that there will never be a Warp 5 client, then I will believe it.
Until
> > then I personally believe IBM is biding their time until it makes
sense
> > to release a Warp 5 client.

> Very insightful comments and I completely agree with you.

Major OS revisions are often seen as a lot of work to deploy and test
so a 5.0 number would work against IBM.

IMHO A better offering would be a 4.1 or even a 4.05 release with
updated install disks, Fixpacks, Java, Browser, Dialer, drivers and
some minor changes to the current 4.0 client.  These kind of low
number releases would show support and I think I'd buy it \ oh and
throw in the StarOffice 5.1a client if SUN will let them.

Better still, in the long run, is to replace the current PC hairball
with a better technology.  Improve Java and it's performance, adopt
JVM 1.2 ASAP and push Java3D.



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

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

From: [e-mail]                               20-Sep-99 21:33:05
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 03:35:03
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Bennie Nelson wrote:

> Tim Martin wrote:
> >
> > Bennie Nelson wrote:
> >
> > > Tim Martin wrote:
> > > >
> > > > [e-mail] wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Personally I think that Brad Wardell ( trying to keep the Brads
straight )
> > > > > has done a wonderful job of getting all the vocal os/2 supporters
incensed
> > > > > about this supposed statement/decision by IBM.
> > > >
> > > > Wardell has done that and much more.  He has single handedly
> > > > chased hundreds if not thousands of OS/2 users away from OS/2.
> > >
> > > Tim,
> > > It seems to me that you've overplayed your hand, again.  You do have
> > > a habit of that.  I doubt seriously that you can find and produce
> > > any evidence to show that Brad W. has chased away a dozen people
> > > from using OS/2.
> > >
> > > I much prefer the helpful Tim Martin who posts in the other
> > > newsgroups.  I believe you have been shabbily treated by some
> > > in this newsgroup, but you don't have to respond in the way you
> > > do.  That only tends to stir other people up who don't know the
> > > whole story.  Besides, as is so often the case, it's the guy who
> > > swings second who draws the penalty flag.
> > >
> > > Please give it some thought.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Bennie Nelson
> >
> > Sorry Bennie but you have to sit in my seat.  I oversee
> > the largest OS/2-only private subscription web site on
> > the 'Net which services thousands of OS/2 users.  I have
> > to deal with the reality of members writing to say, "Now
> > that IBM has killed OS/2 will you help us move over to
> > Linux and other supported operating systems?"
> >
> > Many see Brad to be a leader (self-proclaimed) within the
> > OS/2  community.  That self-proclaimed leader has stepped
> > forward and literally declared the end of any OS/2 future.
> >
> > Look around you now.  The Register, one of the most
> > well respected News Media Sources on the 'Net, is now
> > running the "poor Brad" story and citing the death of
> > OS/2 once again.  By the end of this week you'll see
> > other commercial tech news sites reporting the final
> > death of OS/2.  Folks like "Wired" "InfoWorld"  "CNET"
> > "Mercury News"  "ZDNews" and so on.
> >
> > If you think many OS/2 users won't believe these
> > constant flood of false stories and leave OS/2 then
> > there's a golden bridge in San Francisco I'd love to
> > sell you.
>
> Tim,
> You didn't supply any real evidence of real people
> whom Brad Wardell has personally stopped from using
> OS/2.  Anecdotal evidence is simply hearsay.
>
> Besides, I've been reading the OS/2 is dead stories for
> years.  It's really amazing how these reporters and
> pundits can repeat that message year after year and
> do it with a straight face and still take themselves
> seriously.  Those are the ones you should sell the
> bridge to.
>
> Thanks for the reply,
> Bennie Nelson

Apparently you don't read these newsgroups.  Many
people have stated outrightly they intend on dropping
OS/2 and moving to other operating systems in reaction
to Wardell's public but false statement on the death of
OS/2.  I monitor these newsgroups, I have read them.
Take the time to peruse Deja News and you'll find them.
One company CEO has stated blankly he will drop his
present OS/2 systems for Linux and never give IBM the
time of day again.  He make this announcement in
response to Wardell's false statement on the death of
OS/2.

The false perception of the death of OS/2 coming from
a self-proclaimed "Number One OS/2 Software Developer"
is sufficient to chase many established OS/2 users away
and let's not even mention those who may have been
sitting on the fence.   You're a seasoned OS/2 user and
apparently wise enough to discount the peer pressure
imposed by those of the Microsoft persuasion.  Many
people are not but their current investment in OS/2 has
had them in a holding pattern.  Brad Wardell, a self-
proclaimed leader of the OS/2 community has spoken
directly to them and told them they have no future with
OS/2.  They have no future because IBM has turned
down Stardock's self-centered desire to provide a Stardock
version, chock with their buggy Stardock technologies and
plastered with the Stardock name, on to the IBM OS/2
customer.

Take it or leave it - Brad Wardell and Stardock have damaged
the future of OS/2's user base.

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                   21-Sep-99 00:32:15
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 06:30:10
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail]   (Joe Kovacs)

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

Yes, that occurs to me, very much so.

It also occurs to me that IBM and Stardock, seeing the
almost violent reaction to the proposal, might not announce a
deal openly.

I said there's an odour.

Joe Kovacs
Guelph Ontario Canada


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Water Utilities Hydraulic Analysis (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                    21-Sep-99 05:11:06
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 06:30:10
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <[e-mail]>,
Jason  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>In comp.os.os2.advocacy Jason Bowen <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>: The unix shell is an aquired taste to be sure, I like it.  Gnome and KDE
>: are two answers to the WPS and the Windows Explorer.  I always loved the
>: WPS, just thought it was darn ugly.
>
>But it's sure better looking then Windows Explorer or MacOS, yeach

With 3rd party enhancements.  Well under Warp 4 it looks nice too.
>
>
>: From what I have read there will be no more free downloads soon, software
>: choice is going to all paid subscription.
>
>Can you site any proof to add credability to that statement?

I was just reprinting hearsay that I saw other OS/2 users type, unhappy
OS/2 users.  I can't prove that it is true.

>
>-Jason


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                       21-Sep-99 15:22:27
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 06:30:10
Subj: Re: Who to believe?  Brad or Tim

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

Brad Wardell <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:a5vkEluA$[e-mail]...
>
> Brad Hubley <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> news:[e-mail]...
> > Brad,
> >
> > I copied this from one of the comp.os.os2 newsgroups.  What is of
interest
> is
> > Tim Martin's comments about talking to someone at Warp Expo West who
> claims
> > the meeting never took place.  Now I take everything I read on the
> internet
> > with a grain, nay, should I say a "cup" of salt.
> >
> > Care to comment on what Tim has said?
> >
>
> Tim Martin has a long long history of fabricating things, I consider his
> latest barrage of nonsense to be more of the same.
>
> Bear in mind that our statement thanked specifically by name some of the
IBM
> people who were involved.  And as I have stated, IBM is always free to
> change their mind.  You'll note that Tim went with his usual "unnamed
> sources" to back his claims.
>
> But of any statement coming from IBM:
>
> Their official statement is always going to be "X is true at this time."
> which implies that it could change.
>
> IBM has no plans to make beanie babies at this time.  However, they could
> change their mind about that.
>
> Any statement by IBM is going to say something like "IBM has no plans for
a
> new OS/2 client at this time and no proposal for its existence will be
> turned away without review."  If you want to read hope into such
statements,
> be my guest.  Realistically though, IBM has made the high level decision
> that there will be no new OS/2 client from a third party or IBM.  IBM may
> change its mind in the future.  On the other hand, IBM may get into the
> beanie baby business in the future too.  I'd bet on the beanie babies
> myself.
>
> People are free to live in denial as much as they would like, it's none of
> my business whether certain OS/2 users wish to live in denial.  The bottom
> line is that the decision on the OS/2 client *was* made last week.
Whether
> that decision was made at the IPMT meeting or some meeting that took place
> earlier in the week that we are unaware of is kind of irrelevant wouldn't
> you agree?  The bottom line is that IBM did make a decision last week.
>
> Let me put it this way, Stardock, as a real company, could be held liable
> for its statements if they were fabricated.
>
> Tim Martin working for "Warpcity" which is arguably probably not even a
real
> corporate entity has shown time and time again that he has a long history
of
> fabricating stories to gain attention.
>
> Stardock has no incentive to post negative news on this.  Indeed, we have
an
> active dis-insentive -- our OS/2 software sales will take a hit and given
we
> have publicly stated that we are not going to drop OS/2 support in the
> foreseable future the negative news on the client cannot be seen as
> something good for us.
>
> We cannot get into the business to respond to every fanatic's rantings on
> Usenet nor will we.  All I can say is that every word in our official
> statement "Judgement day results" is absolutely factual in every detail.
>
> Brad
> --
> Brad Wardell
> Stardock - http://www.stardock.com
>
>
>
> > Brad
> >
> >
> > Bob Stan wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 10:48:10 -0700, Tim Martin wrote:
> > >
> > > >And please note:  It is written by Brad Wardell.  It is not an
> > > >official statement by IBM.  What constitutes "indicated" in
> > > >Brad's mind means nothing in the real world.  ZDNet and
> > > >Mary Jo Folly "indicated" OS/2 was dead years ago yet I
> > > >still use it, IBM still updates it and I still get new applications
> > > >to run on it.
> > > >
> > > >IBM has no made official statement regarding the death of
> > > >OS/2 or eventual release of a Warp 5 client.  NONE.  What
> > > >they have said is that they have no plans to release a Warp
> > > >5 client this year.  It took three years after Warp 3 for the
> > > >release of Warp 4.  Warp 4 is just two years old and still
> > > >outperforms anything Microsoft is offering todate.
> > > >
> > > >For all of those who believe there will never be a Warp 5
> > > >client take faith, there is every likelihood IBM will release
> > > >a Warp 5 AFTER the year 2000.
> > >
> > > I have no vested interest in Stardock or IBM.  However, seeing as Brad
> and
> > > Stardock were involved in this attempt over a period of time,
including
> face
> > > to face meetings with the upper echelons of IBM, I am inclined to
accept
> his
> > > appraisal.
> >
> > And yet an IBM official attending Warp Expo West
> > stated publicly yesterday that no such meeting
> > took place - and he should know, he is on the
> > committee.   He said it was cancelled due to travel
> > problems.  He also said Brad was wrong.  AND he
> > said IBM has made no decision on whether or not
> > they will release a Warp 5 client 'this year'.
> >
> > Stardock has a vested financial interest in all this
> > free publicity.  Brad does not and cannot speak for IBM.
> >
> > > I wish there would be a new client, but I think it unlikely.
> >
> > And I see the glass as half full.  I say there will be a
> > Warp 5 client.  Just not in 1999.
> >
> > Tim Martin
> > The OS/2 Guy
> > Warp City
> > http://warpcity.com
> > "E-ride the wild surf to Warp City!"
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________
> >   Windoze 95 @ work 'cause I have to,
> >   OS/2 Warp 4 @ home 'cause I want to!
> >
> >   Visit my Cable Modems and OS/2 Warp 4 website @
> >   http://members.home.net/bhubley/cableintro.html
> > ____________________________________________________
> >
> >   Please remove 1 bhubley from my address before replying
> >
> >
>
>


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                     20-Sep-99 22:52:18
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 10:41:07
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


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

On 9-21-99, 3:31:23 AM, "Darin McBride" <[e-mail]>
wrote regarding Re: Why blame IBM?:


> On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 17:49:41 GMT, Mooo wrote:

> >>  Not providing an updated client that can install out of the box on
> >>a machine with say a 10 gig hard drive seems to be a barrier to
adoption
> >>to me.
> >
> >You've done this with NT I gather?  I mean, NT with no fixes applied?

> I can buy a CD that has "NT 4, SP3" on it.  Is there such a CD as
"OS/2 Warp
> 4, FP5"?

I'm not sure for shrinkwrap.  I have pressed a Fixpack 11 and Netscape
4.04 on CD ROM  in case I need to do a reinstall at some future date.
I would like to see a OS/2 CD with Fixpacks applied.

You can buy SmartSuite/2 which comes with FP5 on CD ROM.  You have to
apply FP5 first.  This is more reliable than having the application
update the OS during the install.




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

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

From: [e-mail]                          21-Sep-99 06:12:20
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 10:41:07
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>Bennie Nelson
>It is really a pity that you went to all of the effort to post such
>a lengthy article that is so completely full of mistakes, misquotes,
>and misguided opinions.

It's a pity that you foolishly shove your foot in your mouth to defend
kooks such as Tholen, even maintaining that his detractors are
"emotionally blocked" people who are "unskilled at logic". It's a pity
you did this because you have a misguided fanaticism regarding a brand
name product.

But, that's the way that it is.

>You even laughed when I told you that my
>schedule in the last week has been altered because of a hurricane
>and associated flooding.

I laughed at you using it as a response to my contention that you OS/2
kooks always manage to cite some "calamity" that prevents you from
ever exhibiting anything even remotely resembling the sense of
perspective, fair play, and "lack of kookiness" that you claim to
have, but never manage to have the time and opportunity to
demonstrate. Something always comes up to prevent you from holding
OS/2 kooks to the same standards that you whine for everyone else to
uphold.

My, you OS/2 kooks sure are a sorry, hapless lot.

And again, I'll paraphrase your "logical", "christ-like" buddy Tholen,
and note that you have no response to any of the points I raised. I'm
not surprised. That's always the case with OS/2 fanatics.

Maybe if you weren't so unskilled at logic...

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                     21-Sep-99 06:50:21
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 10:41:07
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: Mirage Media <[e-mail]>

"Darin McBride" <[e-mail]> :

> On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 17:49:41 GMT, Mooo wrote:
>
> >>  Not providing an updated client that can install out of the box on
> >>a machine with say a 10 gig hard drive seems to be a barrier to adoption
> >>to me.
> >
> >You've done this with NT I gather?  I mean, NT with no fixes applied?
>
> I can buy a CD that has "NT 4, SP3" on it.  Is there such a CD as "OS/2
Warp
> 4, FP5"?
> ---

Actually, yes, you can. I just got mione from Mensys:
http://www.mensys.nl/mb10.html
(in Holland, although BTMicro and others in the US have the same thing). Mine
has about 8 different Fixpaks, several flavors of Netscape, Java 1.1.8, Adobe
Acrobat, an updated boot disk.....lots and lots of goodies. And it cost
$11.82 (US dollars).

Regards,

Corey
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: Mirage Media (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                         21-Sep-99 08:14:13
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 10:41:07
Subj: Re: Tell us about your sofware Dave

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Jeff Glatt writes:

> The alleged software is supposedly an astrology program.

A lie.

> The OS/2 certification for this product was intentionally *dropped* by
> IBM on IBM's "Ready for OS/2 Warp Compatible Products" web page.

Another lie.

> (ie, The product's OS/2 certification went from certified to uncertified).

Another lie.

> I'll leave it up to you to decide whether this "product" and "company"
> even merits any note beyond the above. Frankly, I think not.

Jeff, you just engaged in libel.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         21-Sep-99 08:19:00
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 10:41:07
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Jason Bowen writes:

>>>>> I have never had a probelm with Windows anything not supporting
hardware.

>>>> I've read about people complaining about how Microsoft refused to help
>>>> out with an NT problem because the hardware they were using wasn't on
>>>> the HCL.

>>> I've heard that OS/2 users have to patch their install disks to install
>>> Warp on new hardware.

>> I didn't have to.  What you've heard doesn't change the fact that Windows
>> isn't a panacea to hardware support problems.

> Why are you making that statement?  I didn't make any claim about Windows.

Incorrect:

JB] I have never had a probelm with Windows anything not supporting hardware.

It's right at the top of the article, Jason.

See Message-ID: <7s5qf7$[e-mail]> for the original.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         21-Sep-99 08:12:10
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 10:41:07
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Jason Bowen writes:

> Jason wrote:

>>> From what I have read there will be no more free downloads soon, software
>>> choice is going to all paid subscription.

>> Can you site any proof to add credability to that statement?

> I was just reprinting hearsay that I saw other OS/2 users type, unhappy
> OS/2 users.

Who are these other users, and how do you know they use OS/2?

> I can't prove that it is true.

So, you admit to spreading FUD?

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

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

From: [e-mail]                    20-Sep-99 17:57:28
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 10:41:07
Subj: Re: Judgement Day ... Stardock and OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <[e-mail]>, Mooo <[e-mail]>
wrote:
>[e-mail] (Jason Bowen) wrote:
>
>>Makes it a pain to install on new hardware heh?  Why doesn't IBM care
>>about that?
>
>I dont know about this.  I keep hearing a lot of noise in general
>about how hard OS/2 is to install on 'new' hardware but as a system
>integrator and assembler, I just don't see it.

Tell me about Warp 4 out of the box on a 10 gig hard drive.

>
>In fact, I'd go the other way and say that its never been easier to
>install OS/2.  You should have seen me frothing at the mouth with
>frustration back in '95 trying to get Warp 3 Red Spine to install!

I just couldn't get 1024x768 at 75 hz, only 43 interlaced on a S3 Trio64v+
based card.  That was the last straw for me.

>
>A lot depends on hardware choice.  If you choose carefully, and buy
>quality kit, it nearly always works.

Why should you have to do this?  You are letting IBM dictate to you what
you should and shouldn't own hardware wise?

>
>I don't consider patching the boot diskettes much of a hassle as far
>as installation goes.

Yeah most new users wouldn't mind doing that.  Apparently IBM doesn't care
either as they won't provide a new updated client.  That sure says a lot
to the marketplace.

>
>
>>>» I mean, OS/2 makes money for IBM and IBM
>>>»only...
>>>
>>>I don't know about that, either. As a small business user,
>>>OS/2 makes money for ME - and quite nicely, thank you.
>
>Yes, I'd agree with this.
>
>
>>>»I don't know about you, but I'm not seeing Corel porting their
>>>»WordPerfect suite over to OS/2....
>
>Have you seen Wordperfect 8 for Linux?  You're not missing much.
>SO5.1 is a much better product.
>
>
>>>We've already got two suites - one of which is absolutely
>>>free - that are just as functional as anything else out
>>>there. We don't NEED Corel to port their WordPerfect suite
>>>over to OS/2 in order to be productive.
>
>After the looong wait I was very very dissapointed with Smartsuite/2
>If this is what you get when you cough up AU$400.00 I'll just stick
>with cheap/free ware thanks (Staroffice)...incidently, anyone used the
>Win32 version of SS?  Its crap too.  I can't believe Lotus isn't broke
>if this is the best they can do.
>
>
>>>»I don't see RealPlayer for OS/2.  I
>>>»don't see Civilization being ported over to OS/2...
>>>
>>>As a business user, I don't care about RealPlayer for OS/2,
>>>much less about Civilization (or any other games). If those
>>>things are important to you, then OS/2 (alone) is not the OS
>>>for you.
>
>Yep.  Windows95 (not 98 or NT) is the primary gaming/novelty/passtime
>OS by far.  Market share in this arena must be close to 100%
>
>Nothing anyone does will change this juggernaught now thats its
>steaming ahead.  Business is another matter entirely though.
>
>
>Craig


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                             20-Sep-99 11:47:19
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 10:41:07
Subj: Re: It doesn't bother people that a new client won't be confirmed?

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>

Jason Bowen wrote:
>
> You didn't answer how this affects ISV's and the overall OS/2 market.  If
> the market is stagnant and people don't buy new software software isn't
> developed for OS/2 anymore.  App availibility drives buyers.  You didn't
> answer how it affects new purchases either.

I thought you were asking about IBM's software update approach.  Your
questions above relate to what you term a 'stagnant OS/2 market,' to new
purchases of OS/2, and to developer support for OS/2.  By way of answer,
software developers are interested in whether the OS/2 platform will run
their application.  If, a particular requirement exists, such as
'fixpack 5 or greater,' they will specify it.  As for new purchasers of
OS/2, customers of the client don't even care if they get a box.  They
are buying licenses to use the software.  They will install these
licenses with the service level and features they require.  Hope this is
helpful.

>
>  In article
> <[e-mail]>,
> David T. Johnson <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >Jason Bowen wrote:
> >>
> >> Warp 4 out of the box has to be patched to be installed on new hardware.
> >> Do you think this helps acceptance?  Do you think this would stall sales
> >> of software if the current userbase is perfectly happy to keep using the
> >> software they have as new users avoid adopting it due to IBM's
> >> unwillingness to provide a new client?  How does this affect ISV's
writing
> >> OS/2 software? Do you think this is an acceptable scenario for OS/2's
> >> continued existance?  Is the fixpack way really good?  It seems a lot of
> >> users in this group do find this acceptable.
> >
> >Not an issue.  OS/2 v4 fixpacks are released at regular intervals of
> >about 3 months.  Even if the OS/2 GA package were revised to include the
> >"latest" fixpack, it would be out-of-date in 3 months.  You are thinking
> >about software the way that Microsoft does...as a 'package' that you
> >install and use for some period of time without any further support,
> >other than to get it installed and working.  This is fine for consumer
> >software and is also very lucrative for Microsoft.  In contrast, IBM
> >sells to business customers and looks at software as a 'service' and a
> >'process' where the software enables system functionality.  IBM plans
> >and expects to provide regular updates as a part of their software
> >support process.  Their software products, including OS/2, are designed
> >to be updated periodically, both to correct bugs (APARs in IBM lingo)
> >and to provide support for new technology and hardware and software
> >changes.  Microsoft looks at their service packs as patches to correct
> >flaws...not as a means of supporting their customers.  When updating is
> >required, Microsoft instead provides a new product.  As far as I know,
> >Microsoft has never gone back and added new features or support to an
> >existing product.  Well, actually, I can think of one case.  When Office
> >97 was released, Microsoft released a converter for Office 95 users to
> >allow them to read and write the new Office 97 "Word" format.  But I
> >think this was done in response to loud yells from Office 95 sites.
> >
> >In the IBM view, customers will use a software product throughout the
> >entire support period of 5 or more years.  In the Microsoft view,
> >customers will use a software product only until a new and "better"
> >replacement product is released.  At that time, Microsoft expects that
> >users will install the newer replacement product and all support for the
> >earlier product effectively ends.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                           21-Sep-99 07:24:18
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 10:41:07
Subj: Re: Credibility

From: Bob Germer <[e-mail]>

On <[e-mail]>, on 09/19/99 at 04:00 PM,
   Marty <[e-mail]> said:

> You also encourage piracy and leeching of OS/2 software, and try to
> encourage OS/2 ISV's to halt their production of OS/2 software and give
> it away for free.  You also lie about Stardock "advertising" the "new
> OS/2 client."  Your credibility is very much in question here.

No, Marty, you are wrong. Tim's credibility is not in question. One cannot
question something that doesn't exist. Tim has proven time and again to be
a liar, a poseur, and a con man extraordinaire. --
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [e-mail]
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 8
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]                           21-Sep-99 07:26:09
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 10:41:07
Subj: Re: Credibility

From: Bob Germer <[e-mail]>

On <[e-mail]>, on 09/19/99 at 12:30 PM,
   Tim Martin <[e-mail]> said:

> You still do not provide one verifiable source in your
> article.  You expect -because you believe you are the
> self-proclaimed queen of OS/2- people to believe you.
> I see you only as an employee of Ziff Davis publications
> and that is not a dubious honor (at least to me).

Tim, you haven't posted a verifiable anything in years. You lost all
credibility years ago. You are a liar, a poseur, and a con man
extraordinaire!

In other words you are nothing but a snake oil salesman trying to dupe
idiots into subscribing to your website where they wind up paying for
garbage, more garbage, and nothing but garbage.



--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [e-mail]
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 8
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: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            21-Sep-99 11:49:28
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 10:41:07
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 03:35:06, [e-mail] (Jason
Bowen) wrote:

> In article <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-khguoWRcoCg3@localhost>,
> Karel Jansens <jansens_at_ibm_dot_net> wrote:
> >On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 20:17:01, [e-mail] (Jason
> >Bowen) wrote:
> >
> >> In article <[e-mail]>,
> >> Craig Benbow  <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> >> >> OS/2 can't install on a hard drive greater than 8.4 megs.  It doesn't
have
> >> >> basic support for current hardware but I do see Windows getting
pre-loaded
> >> >> on all kinds of new hardware, how about you?  How do you know the
reason
> >> >> for not releasing Win95B?  Do you have a reference?
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >How the hell did you come up with this???
> >> >Of course you can install OS/2 on a drive bigge than 8.4 megs.  All
thats needed
> >> >is updated install disks!
> >> >There is heaps of OS/2 hardware support out there.  Take a look at lots
of
> >> >installation cds for peripherals and wow theres OS/2 drivers.
> >>
> >> Why don't they ship a new client with those updates?  Not enough demand?
> >
> >Maybe, but it should now have become painfully clear that you are
> >talking about things you know absolutely nothing about: OS/2 *will*
> >install on +8.4GB drives (there's not enough room to install it on 8.4
> >MB drives). It just needs a little tweaking.
>
> It needs to have the install disk modified right?  The could do lots of
> things with a new client right?  By the way the OS/2 user continued my use
> of 8.4 megs, why didn't you lambast him?
>
He was polite. No reason to hit on him for that.
I on the other hand am an utter bastard. So there you go.
> >
> >All this is quite ironic in view of the recent accusations of certain
> >Winvocates against OS/2 advocates knowing nothing about Windows,
> >wouldn't you agree?
>
> I am not a Winvocate and I do know that you have to get to new files,
> can't remember the exact names, to install on a drive above 8.4 gigs,
> Warp 4 can't do this out of the box.
>
Yes it does. I did it with a copy of Warp 4 dating back from early
'98. It depends on your motherboard and/or BIOS. I don't think you can
blame Warp for a BIOS that needs updating. (it was an ancient Intel
Zappa board and after the flash upgrade of the BIOS warp installed
like a charm, without tweaking or changing installation disks. I
really couldn't believe my eyes. I sometimes go back there just to see
the machine run).
>  >
> >> Linux and Window get much more support than OS/2 and who can blame people
> >> when IBM won't commit on OS/2's future
> >>
> >The overwhelming Linux support comes from the fact that it's open
> >source and windows, wweelll... it probably needs it.
>
> To bad IBM won't issue a press release pledging support for a new OS/2
> client.
>
<sound of grudging agreement>
Maybe they still will.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net
=======================================================
If we could have our cake _and_ eat it,
people would start whining about seconds.
=======================================================

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

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            21-Sep-99 11:50:00
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 10:41:07
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 00:59:10, Marty <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Karel Jansens wrote:
> >
> > > Linux and Window get much more support than OS/2 and who can blame
people
> > > when IBM won't commit on OS/2's future
> > >
> > The overwhelming Linux support comes from the fact that it's open
> > source and windows, wweelll... it probably needs it.
>
> I gotta disagree with you on the Linux support issue.  If there were any
> reason not to have hardware support in Linux, it would be because it is
> open source.  No one wants their proprietary information distributed in
> source form to the masses.  That's part of the reason why it has been so
> historically slow to get video cards supported by XFree86.  Anyone remember
> waiting for the SVGA server to start supporting Matrox cards?
>
Yes I do (marginally, because I don't have a Matrox card and I didn't
use Linux at the time). I also remember the argument always was that
writing drivers was too expensive... until someone in the know pointed
out that writing a driver for a graphics card is essentially trivial
work for a manufacturer. The tricle seemed to become a gentle stream
after that.

> The only reason things are changing now is because more companies are
> finding Linux a viable platform.  Also, the "invention" of compiled modules
> a while back has helped the situation a bit, where drivers can be
> distributed <without> source.  Open source is definitely not something that
> encourages hardware support for sure.

I've heard that plenty times but I still don't get that argument. What
in the name of seven hells would someone *do* with the source code for
a hardware thingie if he didn't buy the hardware gizmo in the first
place? Like I said above: it's not like video drivers are rocket
science or something, so what would a manufacturer gain by keeping
them locked away? "Gain" less customers?

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net
=======================================================
If we could have our cake _and_ eat it,
people would start whining about seconds.
=======================================================

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

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

From: [e-mail]                           21-Sep-99 07:32:12
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 10:41:07
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: Bob Germer <[e-mail]>

On <[e-mail]>, on 09/20/99 at 03:29 PM,
   juvenaly <[e-mail]> said:



> rj friedman wrote:

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

> Good point. Consider this too, which can be said in Big Blue' defense:
> For years we've heard criticism of certain companies (guess which ones?)
> for "vaporware" -- talking, for strategic reasons, about software they
> had not yet released, and sometimes had no intention to release. IBM, in
> refusing to divulge its plans, avoids this questionable practice. Which
> makes sense, too -- because plans can always change.

IBM, of course, invented vaporware in the 1950's and wound up with an
anti-trust action filed against it by the younger Clark who was US
Attorney General and son of the Clark who was Truman's Attorney General
(and who also filed a much different anti-trust action against IBM on the
day Eisenhower took office). The net result of both suits was a settlement
in the form of a consent agreement which requires IBM to take certain
actions and not do other things or the suits become active once again.
Among the provisions are the announcement of products (hardware and
software) which don't actually exist or at least very nearly ready for
retail.

Read TJ Watson's (son of the "founder" of IBM) and himself former Chairman
of IBM. It's called "Father, Son, and Company" for a very thorough
discussion of the first anti-trust action. He was retired by the time the
second suit was settled if memory serves. BTW, TJ, Senior didn't found
IBM. He became President of a company making time clocks (which are still
in use in many factories) which used time cards. He expanded it and
renamed it IBM in the 1920's or 30's. TJ, Junior says in his book words to
the effect, "I though it funny that Dad would name this little outfit
'International" anything."

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [e-mail]
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 8
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]                               21-Sep-99 12:51:20
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:10
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

Tim,

If you're going to try your hand at PR spin, Tim, I suggest that you
learn _how_, first. This effort was utterly ineffective, and was
furthermore marred by your lack of knowledge of the phrase "see the
forest for the trees." (It's not "'fore the trees" or "before the
trees." Please, get a dictionary. Such poor grammar pains me.) And
really, if you're going to swipe phrases from Tom Nadeau's Web site,
you ought to get them right.

This isn't about whether I defend Brad or whether OS/2 users support
Stardock. Your efforts to distract us by changing the subject aren't
working. Let me repeat:

*** You're the one saying that people are leaving OS/2 because of this
announcement. You have not backed up this statement in any manner
whatsoever. ***

Moreover, you are using this incident to indulge in your own vengeful
activities against Stardock, without any effort to serve the OS/2
community by reporting only verifiable facts.

What matters, Tim, is the OS/2 community. Not you. Not me. Not
Stardock. The OS/2 users who are wondering, "what really happened
here? what effect, if any, does it have?" deserve straightforward
_accurate_ statements, and a minimum of speculation.

So, once again: You claim that Brad's statements have chased OS/2
users away from the platform. Provide verifiable statistics, or shut
up on the subject.

We'll be watching, either way.

--Esther

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 05:50:48, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:

| Esther Schindler wrote:
|
| > Tim,
| >
| > YOU are the one claiming that OS/2 users are being chased away from
| > OS/2. Not me. I haven't seen a single OS/2 user walk away from the
| > platform.
| >
|
| Esther - stop.
|
| You are simply not going to wash this way, sweep it under
| the rug or publicly declare Brad Wardell and Stardock have
| not harmed the OS/2 community.  You have time and again
| come to Brad's aide and assistance when he is under attack.
| As a Ziff Davis employee and writer it is expected.
|
| It simply is not going to work here to save your friend and
| buddy Brad Wardell.  Stardock needs to cleanly walk away
| from their so-called support of OS/2 and quit playing their
| OS/2 customers as chumps.  Stardock develops software
| for Microsoft-systems and gives as little lip service as they
| need to retain their naive OS/2 customers.  Their eventual
| hope is, "You came to us for OS/2 now follow us to Microsoft."
|
| Many Stardock fans simply don't want to see the forest
| 'fore the trees and I feel sorry for them but those few
| -in all likelihood- already have a foot in the door of Microsoft
| and see nothing wrong with leaving OS/2.  When I see
| one of Microsoft's recruiters standing on the side of the
| information highway in their bright Kmart suits telling OS/2
| users their operating system is dead, I'll make sure the
| OS/2 user  knows what a real snake salesman looks like.
|
| Brad Wardell's statement, which purports to speak on
| behalf of IBM and says OS/2 is -in effect- dead, is just
| plain Microsoft snake oil.
|
| 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: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                         21-Sep-99 13:13:19
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:10
Subj: Re: No decision regarding OS/2 client was made???

From: [e-mail] (Richard R. Klemmer)

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 19:52:40, [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)
wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 17:24:57, [e-mail] (Richard R.
> Klemmer) wrote:
>
> | I wouldn't doubt that it's true, though.
>
> Some of us, Richard, have learned to doubt _everything_ that a vendor
> says... until we see the result in our hot little hands. <smile>
>

I've always been a trusting person. :-)

 Of course, I wouldn't bet any money on anything a vendor say,
especially IBM (re. Visualage Java for Linux story).  :-)  However,
since my sources were individuals, and not vendors, I'll take their
word for it.


-----------------------------
Richard R. Klemmer
[e-mail]
http://www.webtrek.com
-----------------------------

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         21-Sep-99 13:01:11
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:10
Subj: Aside

From: [e-mail] (Richard R. Klemmer)

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 01:04:54, [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)
wrote:

> Personally, I'd like a "shut down and reboot" option built into the
> OS. (Aside: yes I *know* there are utilities that do this. That's not
> the point.)

I think we discussed this on the POSSI list, but I wanted to make sure
you didn't miss it.  The SETBOOT command will do this for you (and
it's built into the OS) if you have Boot  Manager installed.  You can
even set up a Desktop menu item, icon, or whatever to do this,
prompting you if you are sure.

It would be better if this were automatically built into the system,
though.

-----------------------------
Richard R. Klemmer
[e-mail]
http://www.webtrek.com
-----------------------------

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 13:10:26
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:10
Subj: Re: what's worth writing about?

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 22:54:05, Joseph <[e-mail]> wrote:
| IMHO the measure of a magazine and its credibility is in how they
| cover the lesser used OSs.  It is sometimes hard to take a windows
| centric magazine review seriously.  If SR covers a host of OS then it
| is more likely the readership will trust a good review.

We do write about a host of OSs. But we don't do it to gain some sort
of credibility. We choose what we write about in order to be _useful_
to the readers. A review of a Windows product that you can't use isn't
useful to you, as an OS/2 user. Similarly, a review of a Mac or OS/2
product isn't useful to the vast majority of our readers, who do use
Windows platforms. We give more attention to products that are
available on multiple platforms, because that widens the scope of
usability.

"Useful" isn't a sexy word, Joseph, but it's the one I use to guide my
choices in what I write.

--Esther

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

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

From: [e-mail]                      21-Sep-99 06:56:08
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:10
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

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

On 21 Sep 1999 12:56:16 GMT, Esther Schindler wrote:

> .....purposefully  vague.
>
> I'm not saying that this is the right thing to do, but it's a common
> corporate thing to do. <sigh>

That's because it's a common lawyer thing to sue them
unless their predictions of the future are 100% accurate.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                    21-Sep-99 13:59:09
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <7s7f1k$dlc$[e-mail]>,
Dave Tholen <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Jason Bowen writes:
>
>>>>>> I have never had a probelm with Windows anything not supporting
hardware.
>
>>>>> I've read about people complaining about how Microsoft refused to help
>>>>> out with an NT problem because the hardware they were using wasn't on
>>>>> the HCL.
>
>>>> I've heard that OS/2 users have to patch their install disks to install
>>>> Warp on new hardware.
>
>>> I didn't have to.  What you've heard doesn't change the fact that Windows
>>> isn't a panacea to hardware support problems.
>
>> Why are you making that statement?  I didn't make any claim about Windows.
>
>Incorrect:
>
>JB] I have never had a probelm with Windows anything not supporting hardware.
>
>It's right at the top of the article, Jason.
>
>See Message-ID: <7s5qf7$[e-mail]> for the original.
>

I didn't claim it was a panacea.  I said I didn't have problems with it.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 10:09:07
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Credibility

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Bob Germer wrote:
>
> On <[e-mail]>, on 09/19/99 at 04:00 PM,
>    Marty <[e-mail]> said:
>
> > You also encourage piracy and leeching of OS/2 software, and try to
> > encourage OS/2 ISV's to halt their production of OS/2 software and give
> > it away for free.  You also lie about Stardock "advertising" the "new
> > OS/2 client."  Your credibility is very much in question here.
>
> No, Marty, you are wrong. Tim's credibility is not in question. One cannot
> question something that doesn't exist. Tim has proven time and again to be
> a liar, a poseur, and a con man extraordinaire. --

I stand corrected.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                  21-Sep-99 10:17:01
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

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

Ugh.  Tholen tholened:\

> I guess it depends on how you choose to place the blame.  Several
> other people have posted their own interpretations of Brad's latest
> message regarding no client from Stardock, and I've seen several
> people comment on how they're going to start looking at Linux as a
> result.

It depends on how you wish to apportion the blame.  Several other people
have written about the kooks in this group -- Tholen chief among those
kooks -- and have decided on other OSs regardless of anything Brad has said.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                  21-Sep-99 09:52:11
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

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

Oy vey!  Something claiming to be a <[e-mail]> tholened ad
infinitum:

> >>> Are you able to support yourself wholly from sales of OS/2 products?
>
> >> That's proprietary information.

In other words, you can't even begin to support yourself with that DOS-based
software.

> > That bad, huh?
>
> Illogical.  Just because some information is proprietary doesn't
> automatically make the information bad.

Illogical.  A few message up the chain, you claim that either someone can
prove something or else he's FUDding.  Do make up you mind, Tholen (Kook of
the Month)!


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 13:20:26
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Credibility

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

> Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:

>>> You don't have to believe it at all.  We don't advertise Warp
>>> City.  It is my job to monitor and assist in these newsgroups
>>> and that's the only reason you hear about it.

>> Hmmm. ... monitoring is of course OK. But to whom can we
>> complain about the error in judgement introducing into your
>> job-description you having to "assist in these newsgroups"?

> Call your momma.

Dangerous answer Tim. Yo would not know if my momma is
alive or not. She might (at her age of 83) very well have passed
away recently. One more point to take up with your employer.

Besides it is no answer. You know as well as I do that my momma
and you have no relation whatsoever. Which I consider a lucky si-
tuation, for you that is. Otherwise the way you behave in newsgroups
would have been dealt with for a long time now. My mother may be at
a respectable age, she is still a very keen lady. With a kind of class you
will never be able to achieve. I have to add that I even have to doubt if
those esteemed  Chauvets you are telling us about will ever be able to co-
me into that kind of class. Appointing you and letting you wander through the
newsgroups the way you do, makes that very unlikely. My momma would sure
not have made that kind of error of judgement.

So allow me to help your employer. Please send me an email with the
name, phone and fax-number, the streetadress were I can reach himher.

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]                               21-Sep-99 13:20:26
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Judgement Day ... Stardock and OS/2

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


>>> It's quite possible that Aurora was developed only because one or more
>>> really big customers insisted.

>> Makes the idea of forming an OS/2 SOHO/Users buying (and thus now
>> pressure) group all the more interesting. If it works for them, why not for
us?

> Because even with a buying group we wouldn't be in the dollar category IBM
> is interested in.

As someone said: If a German Bank called Lou and said I want to send you an
order for upgrading xxx seats and there is more coming in new orders, that
would
be declined? Beginning this year there was a (number from memory) 30.000
copies
interest conveyed to IBM as pre-orders. If it would be an order, would it be
sent back?

The problem is that IBM is not making its money (if I understood Brad Barcley
well)
from base OS/2 (be it client or not), but from the add-ons and the services
supplied
to those strategic customers. The old story of those customers running on OS/2
being
such a big part of IBM's business that they simply cannot stop continuing to
service them.

OK, let's assume the worst. IBM turns down the order for 10-20.000 copies.
That would at least give a clear view of IBM's intended directions and
strategy.

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]                               21-Sep-99 13:20:06
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: New OS/2 client not to be

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

[ .. ]

> The problem to me is: when I bought my first copy of Warp (red three),
> I - the SOHO - *was* IBM's intended customer base. They said flat-out
> that they wanted everybody to run Warp.

Completely agreed here. It is a scandal (and time they realize the
long term negative effects for their brand if they continue to do so)
that we are constantly getting the impression that they want to show
us the way out as soon as possible. Of course they cannot predict the
continued availability for the next millennium. After all noone would have
expected Linux to be as promising so soon a few years ago.

But the point is they (eh .... <g> Brad says that they) claim it is
not in their strategic plans for now to release a new client. Be it
by IBM or another party. If that is true (if I may advise Serenity that
is the first thing they should establish at a high corporate level before
spending time on a whole round of negotations), it is time we get some
insight in what we may expect as a result from those strategic decisions.

[..  about IBM's actions destroying brand-loyalty]

> In another thread someone proposed we (the users) all shell out USD
> 400 to form a company to make IBM continue to support and develop
> Warp. I find that plain silly: I'm not going to pay money to make IBM
> do the right thing. If they're not interested in me as a customer any
> more, I'll be doing my work in Applix... and I'll buy some beer for my
> USD 400... probably to drown my blues for having had to leave Warp.

If it is USD 400 to form a company there must be ways to do that
a lot cheaper. However, if I had to put a twenty-five USD bill into
an envelope I would do it right away (dependant on the people as-
king me to do that, of course). If they would strike a deal with IBM to
deliver the (upgrade) client version for lets say 100-200 USD that mo-
ney would be well spent. If I have to shell out 400 USD I would at least
expect to get a copy of WSeB (without support) for that kind of money.

[ .. ]

> To me, thin clients are taking away choice: a fat client can always
> emulate a thin one (that's the good part of a computer; it's
> essentially a machine that can become any other machine), but it
> doesn't work the other way around. Remember: PS's were born
> because users were fed up with those pesky terminals.

More fed up with the way they were treated by those huge
machine computing departments never having time or being
able to fullfill their needs on request, I think. Personally I think
that the move to trimmed down, single or few-function apparatus
is unavoidable. Looking at the huge costs of moving to Win2000
(Gartner 3.100 USD per desktop in a 25.000 seat corporation) and
the costs currently made to maintain the current userbase I think we
(and the SOHO, the HOME users and corporations) are in mucho need
of simpler ways to do things. Otherwise people will need their whole days
just to manage their SOHO or home network, very soon.

I get the impression that the original idea of thin clients (closed box
without any expandability options) has been replaced by a system with
some expandability on a very smal basic set. If your software comes from
the (worldwide) network servers or from your hard disk will be a moot point
(given that communication costs are low enough and infrastructure is depen-
dable) . It might add some functionality without any hassling. If you log on
from
the office, from your home, from the car or from the cabin in the wood. All
data,
applications and settings / preferences will be there for you.

> True, Linux takes a lot out of the kernel (sometimes so much it
> becomes confusing), but it's still there on *your* machine if you want
> to. You don't need to log into some internet server to recompile your
> kernel, which - I just found out - is actually quite a trivial thing,
> comparable to changing your config.sys file (needless to say I was
> pleasantly surprised).

Glad to hear that this is possible. However Linus Torvald himself
seems to reckon that it will take another two years to get the desk-
top functionality available which you get from the shelf now on Win.
Of course this is a dangerous remark, because I am comparing apps
for Win and Linux, where one's OS/2-situation might be closer to Linux.

> > We can feel pissed off, we can try to fight the industries intended
direction but
> > both will not help us (me at least) to keep (or get) a grip on day-to-day
business.
> > One can call that playing oystrich, I believe salmon's only fight the
uphill (eh up-
> > stream) battle if there is <VBG> something really desirable to do there. I
am opti-
> > mistically waiting for that season to arrive, then I will decide (<g>
environmental
> > circumstances may have changed by then) which upstream I am going to
fight.

> Sofar, it seems that the Linux way of looking at computers is the way
> I like it. We'll see. After all, Warp is far from being deleted from my
computer.

Perhaps IBM's strategy will be moving desktops to a blend of Linux and OS/2?

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]                                  21-Sep-99 09:40:20
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Tell us about your sofware Dave

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

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

> > The alleged software is supposedly an astrology program.
>
> A lie.

Prove it, if you think you can.

> > The OS/2 certification for this product was intentionally *dropped* by
> > IBM on IBM's "Ready for OS/2 Warp Compatible Products" web page.
>
> Another lie.

Prove it, if you think you can.

> > (ie, The product's OS/2 certification went from certified to
uncertified).
>
> Another lie.

Prove it, if you think you can.

> > I'll leave it up to you to decide whether this "product" and "company"
> > even merits any note beyond the above. Frankly, I think not.
>
> Jeff, you just engaged in libel.

Oh boy, Tholen's going to call his mythical and totally ineffective "lawyer"
on Jeff, I guess.  Go to it, Tholen, you Kook of the Month!


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                  21-Sep-99 09:43:08
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

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

Something FUDdy claiming to be a <[e-mail]> tholened:

> > I can't prove that it is true.
>
> So, you admit to spreading FUD?

Only in the Kook-of-the-Month's eyes is it a "simple" case of correct or
in-.  Tholen, you KOTM, just because I can't prove your existence doesn't
mean you don't.  Of course, you FUD quite a lot, but, hey, that's a
different matter.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                21-Sep-99 11:05:12
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail]

jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) said:

>Idiots shouldn't install or run OS/2. That's why Windows was invented  (this
is
>really true!).

I knew this was boiling down to elitism.

One self styled paragon said he hoped OS/2 stayed hard to use so the general
public wouldn't spoil the OS/2 community with inferior intelligence.  Sad.

Jim L
Remove XX from address to Email
More gun laws will cure the nations ills - just like drug laws do.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                    21-Sep-99 14:02:22
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <7s7el5$dlc$[e-mail]>,
Dave Tholen <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Jason Bowen writes:
>
>> Jason wrote:
>
>>>> From what I have read there will be no more free downloads soon, software
>>>> choice is going to all paid subscription.
>
>>> Can you site any proof to add credability to that statement?
>
>> I was just reprinting hearsay that I saw other OS/2 users type, unhappy
>> OS/2 users.
>
>Who are these other users, and how do you know they use OS/2?

usenet users.

>
>> I can't prove that it is true.
>
>So, you admit to spreading FUD?
>

You admit to spreading fud?  You have reproduced others claims without
knowing if they are factual.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 14:20:26
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: No decision regarding OS/2 client was made???

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 13:13:39, [e-mail] (Richard R.
Klemmer) wrote:

| However,
| since my sources were individuals, and not vendors, I'll take their
| word for it.

Ah, that makes it even more questionable. <grin> I've spoken to plenty
of well-meaning individuals (inside a company or otherwise) who didn't
have the whole story.

--Esther


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

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

From: [e-mail]                      21-Sep-99 10:28:06
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail]

In <7s7el5$dlc$[e-mail]>, on 09/21/99
   at 08:12 AM, [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)
said:


>> I can't prove that it is true.
>So, you admit to spreading FUD?

Just like you can't prove your OS/2 software program sells.
 So, you admit to spreading FUD?

=====================
Fred Emmerich
[e-mail]
=====================




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

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

From: [e-mail]                             21-Sep-99 08:10:25
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: what's worth writing about?

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>

Esther Schindler wrote:
>
> David,
>
> Several of those are viable applications, but few or none are worth a
> product review. (None of them would earn mention in S@R, irrespective
> of platform, but as I said earlier we don't cover desktop apps.)
>
> VisualAge has been reviewed in the publications that write about
> development software and DB2 has gotten coverage in magazines that
> review database software. (Those cross platform tools tend to get
> reviewed under NT, though, in part because their competition is
> usually an NT app so it's easier to draw comparisons.)
>
> StarOffice got attention in the press a few versions ago, and if I
> recall correctly it got some good reviews. Right now it's getting
> attention because of the Sun purchase; in fact I have an appointment
> to talk with a Sun spokesperson about it on Wednesday. I never took
> the time to download MAUL, but as a shareware DTP app it has a decent
> chance of getting some attention... assuming, that is, that anybody
> discovers that it exists. (Most shareware authors -- again, unrelated
> to platform -- have no idea how to offer a product for review. That's
> one reason I wrote the "Care and Feeding of the Press" with/for the
> Internet Press Guild, at http://www.netpress.org/careandfeeding.html)
>
> Photo>Graphics was reviewed when it came out -- in fact, I reviewed it
> for Computer Shopper or PC Magazine. (Oh dear, I no longer remember
> clearly. I reviewed Embellish in PC Mag, so I think I did
> Photo>Graphics for Shopper.) The fact that it's free doesn't make it
> worth another look. Nobody writes about point releases of browsers
> anymore. And I've never heard of Robotics Messenger/2, so I think it's
> safe to say that most of the computer press is unaware of it as well.
> (Mind you, I compile the "new and improved" column for extended
> attributes every month. It behooves OS/2 software vendors to let me
> know that they've come out with something new.)
>
> And, as you say, OS/2 has a relatively small user base. Every time I
> write an article I have to weigh it against the article I could have
> written instead. Is it more useful to my readers to compare intranet
> site builders or Java development tools? Do more readers care about a
> BeOS banner builder application or a 360-degree video server for
> Macintosh?
>
> When not even _IBM_ wants to talk about OS/2, it makes it awfully hard
> to sell an editor on writing a review of an OS/2 product.
>
> And _that's_ why it's important to the OS/2 community for a new client
> to come out.


Esther, listen to yourself.  You say there aren't any new apps to write
about and I listed some.  Now, you are switching gears and saying that
you don't want to write about OS/2 because the user base is too small
and IBM doesn't want to talk about OS/2.  I don't disagree that the user
base makes reviews in large-circulation pubs unlikely.  But, even in
cross-platform stuff like DB2, Netscape 4.61, Star Office 5.1a, or
Visual Age for Java, the national pubs never seem to mention that OS/2
is a supported platform or that additional features and functionality
might be available in the OS/2 version that are not available in the
other versions.  Why is this?  Well, the answer, of course, is that most
of the writers know next to nothing about OS/2.  And that's why IBM
doesn't want to talk about OS/2.  They know their market and their
customers and the media computer pubs are not going to be worth any of
their time, right?

Your original point was that a new OS/2 client would generate new press
and increase visibility for OS/2.  I think it would generate a small
amount of new press, most of it inaccurate and unflattering, and would
undoubtedly conclude by pointing out that there was no software for the
platform and wasn't it amazing that it was even still alive after all of
these years.  I could write the review right now without even booting
the client!  I think IBM is exactly right-on with their current OS/2
program.  They know their product, they know their customers, they know
its uses and limitations, and they are developing and distributing it in
a very professional and business-like way.  OS/2 is not a platform that
would benefit from being mass-marketed to the general public right
now.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                     21-Sep-99 16:01:17
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: Mirage Media <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] :

> Mirage Media <[e-mail]> said:
>
> >Actually, yes, you can. I just got mione from Mensys:
> >http://www.mensys.nl/mb10.html
> >(in Holland, although BTMicro and others in the US have the same thing).
> Mine
> >has about 8 different Fixpaks, several flavors of Netscape, Java 1.1.8,
> Adobe
> >Acrobat, an updated boot disk.....lots and lots of goodies. And it cost
> $11.82
> >(US dollars).
>
> Same old problem of having to figure out which bits and pieces to use.
>
> Jim L
> Remove XX from address to Email
> More gun laws will cure the nations ills - just like drug laws do.
>
>
The Fixpaks are for different languages (Dutch, English, German, etc) and for
both Warp 4 and Warp 3. Not TOOOO big a problem.

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: Mirage Media (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                         21-Sep-99 16:32:17
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Joe Malloy writes:

>> I'm a home user, and IBM is providing me with Netscape 4.61, which isn't
>> what I call abandonment.

> Where is Netscape 4.61 for your beloved OS?  Why, nowhere to be seen!

It was released yesterday.  Go to IBM's Software Choice web site.

Chalk up another bonehead posting by Joe Malloy.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         21-Sep-99 16:38:23
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Bennie Nelson writes [to Jeff Glatt]:

> You've taken to using Dave Tholen's words to convey your meaning.  That's
> risky, don't you think?  People might actually say that because you're
> using his words, that means you're just like him.  In fact, that's the
> kind of thing you've done in the past.

Except I haven't engaged in libel the way Jeff did recently.

> You really need to be careful what you post here.

Yes, he should.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          21-Sep-99 13:03:03
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Dave Tholen wrote:
>
> Bennie Nelson writes [to Jeff Glatt]:
>
> > You've taken to using Dave Tholen's words to convey your meaning.  That's
> > risky, don't you think?  People might actually say that because you're
> > using his words, that means you're just like him.  In fact, that's the
> > kind of thing you've done in the past.
>
> Except I haven't engaged in libel the way Jeff did recently.

I guess I could have put <g> at the end of that paragraph.

I wasn't trying to imply the reverse situation: that you are like Jeff.
I was simply pointing out to Jeff a ramification of a tactic he'd used
earlier.  I'd cited the fact that some people believe that playing cards
is immoral.  He used that to assert that I was allied with those people
as an active supporter, and moreover, that I was just like those people.

Given his train of thought: since he'd cited your words, that makes
him a Tholen supporter, and furthermore, it means he's just like you.

>
> > You really need to be careful what you post here.
>
> Yes, he should.

Regards,
Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                21-Sep-99 14:52:03
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

From: [e-mail] (rj friedman)

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 17:22:44, [e-mail] (Esther
Schindler) wrote:

εI take your response to mean that you don't really understand the
εposition of the people who feel otherwise.

Then you are sadly mistaken. I understand their position
quite clearly. I just happen to feel that it is an
unrealistic position when viewed in the light of what IBM
has stated for close to two years now, and in light of the
shift taking place in the nature of what falls under the
rubric of personal computing.


εWhile, as I said, I do understand your viewpoint, I also understand
εthe perspective of those who want a new client. There are plenty of
εreasons why one might do so -- and not all of them are related to
εtechnical enhancements of the OS.

I understand their perspective. I also understand that they
feel that they have plenty of reasons for why they want a
new client. What I also understand is that they don't get
the fact that - at this time - IBM is flat out NOT
INTERESTED in providing a home "desktop" operating system,
and they are flat out not going to get one - at this time.
Period.

What they want, and why they want it flat out does not
matter. As a mature adult there are three viable choices
that they can make at this point: 1) Recognize that OS/2 is
the best desktop OS for business purposes (including the
SOHO business), and that it will continue to be so via the
FREE fixpack/update route - whose cumulative result provides
all the benefits of a new client sans the shiny shrinkwrap
`event', and continue to use it effectively; 2) if the
excitement of a shiny shrinkwrap `event' every year or two
is so important, they can dump OS/2 and climb on the latest
and greatest bandwagon; 3) if they want to continue with the
benefits of OS/2, but gain some of the glitzy `multimedia'
type stuff that windows (for example) provides, they can
dual boot; if they want games, they can dual boot or buy a
game console.

The bottom line is that OS/2 is not dead - nor is it dying -
because there are large companies shelling out large amounts
of money for it that keep it alive and growing. The
viability of OS/2 as tool for business computing is
established, and is independent of whether there is a client
for OS/2. Whether these people get a new client - for
whatever reason they want it has nothing to do with the
reality of the situation.

As far as the Stardock thing goes - which started all the
venting and whining that I am responding to, it does not
prove that OS/2 is dead, nor does it prove that there will
never be a new OS/2 client. It only proves that Stardock did
not come up with a business plan that was sufficiently
persuasive so as to convince IBM to entrust OS/2 to their
care.



________________________________________________________

[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]                          21-Sep-99 12:49:29
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Tim Martin wrote:
>
> Bennie Nelson wrote:
>
> > Apparently, you aren't reading my posts.  I have asked you
> > to provide the evidence to support your claim.  Now you're
> > trying to say I won't provide you with evidence to support
> > your claim.  I'm not going to do that.  You've made a bold
> > claim, and I've called you on it.  You've made some general
> > statements below, but none can be rightly labeled as
> > evidence.
> >
>
> Here's the main point Bennie.  The evidence is before
> you.  You've seen other posters writing here in these
> newsgroups of their desertion from OS/2.  If I listed a
> hundred you'd say it was enough.
>
> I won't play that kind of game with you.  I don't work
> for you and you can ignore or fall into the "you're a
> liar" category others use when they can't win the game.

Tim,
I will not engage in ceaseless and senseless name calling.
I did not use the word liar nor did I introduce the concept
into this thread.  The word liar is slung around this
newsgroup by others, but not by me.

I have requested that you support what you have asserted.
You refuse to do that.  I am not to blame for your refusal
to supply proof for your statements: you must accept that
responsibility or hide from it, as you choose.

I do not accept anecdotal stories from strangers as found in
USENET as proof.  Why?  Because email addresses are so easy
to counterfeit.  That may be arbitrary on my part, but I
believe it is quite reasonable.  Now, if there is incontrovertible
evidence from a source other than USENET, then I will consider
the USENET data in light of the other information.  But, to
solely rely upon USENET is not, in my estimation, sufficient
for establishing your position.

It is too easy for Microsofties to mount an anti-OS2 FUD
campaign on USENET referencing the SD decision.  That tactic
has been used before by Microsofties.  Do you see why I won't
accept USENET alone?

If you want to establish and maintain credibility, then there
are rules to be followed.  If you violate any or all those
rules, don't be surprised when people don't believe you.



>
> > Perhaps my meaning in using the word evidence has not been
> > clear.   From Webster's:
> >
> > evidence: something that furnishes proof; testimony
>
> As stated above, the evidence lies in Deja News.  You
> refuse to go and get it.  You insist I go and get it for
> you.  I don't work for you.  You get it.  You read it.
>
> > You have made a claim: Brad Wardell has caused people to stop
> > using OS/2.  What proof do you offer other than hearsay and
> > anecdotal stories?  Neither of those constitutes proof.  You
> > have not supplied one link that substantiates even one user's
> > decision.
>
> None is needed because those posters have already made
> their public statements here in these newsgroups.  The evidence
> is there.  You simply refuse to look for it.

You are correct.  I won't accept USENET alone.  It's not a
credible source, as I noted above.

>
> > Furthermore, you have stated that B.W. "has single handedly
> > chased hundreds if not thousands of OS/2 users away from OS/2."
>
> Then don't believe it.  Time will tell.  Ignore it.  Call it a falsehood.
> Call it bravado opinion.  I do not claim to be a leader of the
> community just an OS/2 advocate who lives in the world of OS/2.
> I report what I see and hear.
>
> > Frankly, I believe your statement is an exaggeration of the
> > truth, at best.  The reports surrounding the "decision" may
> > have caused some to drop OS/2,
>
> Now you've got a problem.  If it caused even ONE person
> to drop OS/2 that was unnecessary.  Had Brad Wardell
> simply kept his mouth shut, kept his negotions private
> and out of the newsgroups and made no public statement
> in which he purports to speak for IBM and declares, in
> essence, that OS/2 is dead then that one person would
> still be using OS/2.  But thousands of people read these
> newsgroups all around the world  And thousands more
> read the public OS/2 web sites.  Yet they don't post here,
> they don't let their names be known.  It is those thousands
> who will take Brad's false message to heart and walk
> quietly away from OS/2.  And they do it because they
> read a message from a man who heads a software company
> that purports to be the number one OS/2 software developer.

I'll grant you that the situation could have and probably
should have been concluded and reported in a different
way.  But, I do believe that Brad Wardell wanted to be
successful in providing the world with the next OS/2 client,
and it's quite possible that, after as much effort as was
apparently expended, there was quite a letdown when the
proposal was rejected.

But, I still maintain that this incident alone is not
responsible for any exodus of users from the OS/2 install
base.

>
> > but not because of B.W. alone.
> > IBM's track record has far more to do with decisions against
> > OS/2 than this one isolated event, which, to some, may be the
> > last straw.
>
> Yet IBM has made no decision regarding ever releasing a
> Warp 5 client - unless you believe Brad Wardell.  And that's
> exactly what Brad Wardell wants people to believe.  For
> two reasons (in my opinion).  (1) To strike out against IBM
> in the most venditive way possible because he didn't get
> his way and (2) to help shift his OS/2 customers over to
> Microsoft operating systems where he makes his money.
>
> (1)  Brad has demonstrated his childish vendictive attitude
> time and again in these newsgroups and he's been called
> on it.  He has stooped to calling me, a proven OS/2 advocate,
> every vile name in the book.  He has publicly threated to sue
> me if I speak out about his unethical activities.
>
> (2)  Stardock has in every sense of the word, dropped OS/2.
> The staff don't use it on their own work stations (as evidenced
> here by their postings), they have publicly stated there is little
> to no reason for them to develop OS/2 software because there
> is no market for it (yet I have over 6,000 registered OS/2 users
> and I'm a private site who limits the number of members
> for God's sake) and Stardock spends the largest proportion
> of the R&D dollars to develop applications for the Microsoft
> operating system yet they are a 'nobody' in the world of
> Microsoft software developers.  Converted OS/2 users
> (to MS systems) give them at least some semblence of
> being a Microsoft player.  Stardock's forte has always been
> marketing, not quality product.
>
> > Tim, it seems to me that you'll do better in this newsgroup
> > if you stay away from hyperbole and exaggeration.
>
> What seems to you is irrelevant.

Is it, really?  I have stated that you have been shabbily treated
by some in this newsgroup.  Is that also irrelevant?  But, as I've
said before, I appreciate what you've posted in the other OS/2
newsgroups much more than the style you so often adopt in cooa.
I hope that you'll reconsider your position.

>  I do quite well in these
> newsgroups thank you.  I am but one of the few true OS/2
> advocates who is willing to step to the edge and point
> out the the fox in sheep's clothing.   I love OS/2 and I won't
> give it up until they pry it out of my dead cold hands.  And
> I'll be damned if I'm going to let some little weasle who
> runs a Windows software development company pull the
> wool over the eyes of unsuspecting or naive OS/2 users
> and chase them away to be eaten up by Microsoft.
>
> I've spent many months in these newsgroups pointing
> out time and again Stardock's "Warp 5" campaign was
> folly and vaporware.  I was called every name in the book
> by those who believe they've been left behind by IBM
> and Stardock was our only hope. Threatened by Wardell
> himself time and again for calling a spade a spade - for
> claiming smoke when there was no fire.
>
> Yet here we are today.  There is no Stardock Warp 5
> product and there is a public statement from Brad
> Wardell which purports to speak on behalf of IBM.
> That statement says falsely that OS/2 has no future.
>
> What has no future is the Stardock Warp 5 ripoff.
> IBM was wise.  I applaud their decision.  I hope another
> more respected OS/2 entity steps forward and is given
> the green light to provide a serious Warp 5 product.

I have not considered the Stardock proposal for a new
Warp client to be the best solution.  I also hope that
a better solution is found and pursued by IBM.

Regards,
Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                21-Sep-99 14:52:09
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (rj friedman)

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 02:23:29, [e-mail] wrote:

εWhat many of us are fuming about is the way IBM has abandoned home users,
εand our investment of time and money in OS/2 software...

I don't feel that IBM has abandoned me at all. Over the last
couple of years in which IBM has supposedly abandoned me, I
have gotten fixpacks/updates to the OS on a regular basis;
driver updates on a regular basis; the best in business
productivity apps; browser updates on a regular basis; java
updates on a regular basis; etc. And all of it - basically
for FREE. If that's being abandoned, they can keep on
abandoning me forever.





________________________________________________________

[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]                               21-Sep-99 09:23:05
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Bennie Nelson wrote:

> Apparently, you aren't reading my posts.  I have asked you
> to provide the evidence to support your claim.  Now you're
> trying to say I won't provide you with evidence to support
> your claim.  I'm not going to do that.  You've made a bold
> claim, and I've called you on it.  You've made some general
> statements below, but none can be rightly labeled as
> evidence.
>

Here's the main point Bennie.  The evidence is before
you.  You've seen other posters writing here in these
newsgroups of their desertion from OS/2.  If I listed a
hundred you'd say it was enough.

I won't play that kind of game with you.  I don't work
for you and you can ignore or fall into the "you're a
liar" category others use when they can't win the game.

> Perhaps my meaning in using the word evidence has not been
> clear.   From Webster's:
>
> evidence: something that furnishes proof; testimony

As stated above, the evidence lies in Deja News.  You
refuse to go and get it.  You insist I go and get it for
you.  I don't work for you.  You get it.  You read it.

> You have made a claim: Brad Wardell has caused people to stop
> using OS/2.  What proof do you offer other than hearsay and
> anecdotal stories?  Neither of those constitutes proof.  You
> have not supplied one link that substantiates even one user's
> decision.

None is needed because those posters have already made
their public statements here in these newsgroups.  The evidence
is there.  You simply refuse to look for it.

> Furthermore, you have stated that B.W. "has single handedly
> chased hundreds if not thousands of OS/2 users away from OS/2."

Then don't believe it.  Time will tell.  Ignore it.  Call it a falsehood.
Call it bravado opinion.  I do not claim to be a leader of the
community just an OS/2 advocate who lives in the world of OS/2.
I report what I see and hear.

> Frankly, I believe your statement is an exaggeration of the
> truth, at best.  The reports surrounding the "decision" may
> have caused some to drop OS/2,

Now you've got a problem.  If it caused even ONE person
to drop OS/2 that was unnecessary.  Had Brad Wardell
simply kept his mouth shut, kept his negotions private
and out of the newsgroups and made no public statement
in which he purports to speak for IBM and declares, in
essence, that OS/2 is dead then that one person would
still be using OS/2.  But thousands of people read these
newsgroups all around the world  And thousands more
read the public OS/2 web sites.  Yet they don't post here,
they don't let their names be known.  It is those thousands
who will take Brad's false message to heart and walk
quietly away from OS/2.  And they do it because they
read a message from a man who heads a software company
that purports to be the number one OS/2 software developer.

> but not because of B.W. alone.
> IBM's track record has far more to do with decisions against
> OS/2 than this one isolated event, which, to some, may be the
> last straw.

Yet IBM has made no decision regarding ever releasing a
Warp 5 client - unless you believe Brad Wardell.  And that's
exactly what Brad Wardell wants people to believe.  For
two reasons (in my opinion).  (1) To strike out against IBM
in the most venditive way possible because he didn't get
his way and (2) to help shift his OS/2 customers over to
Microsoft operating systems where he makes his money.

(1)  Brad has demonstrated his childish vendictive attitude
time and again in these newsgroups and he's been called
on it.  He has stooped to calling me, a proven OS/2 advocate,
every vile name in the book.  He has publicly threated to sue
me if I speak out about his unethical activities.

(2)  Stardock has in every sense of the word, dropped OS/2.
The staff don't use it on their own work stations (as evidenced
here by their postings), they have publicly stated there is little
to no reason for them to develop OS/2 software because there
is no market for it (yet I have over 6,000 registered OS/2 users
and I'm a private site who limits the number of members
for God's sake) and Stardock spends the largest proportion
of the R&D dollars to develop applications for the Microsoft
operating system yet they are a 'nobody' in the world of
Microsoft software developers.  Converted OS/2 users
(to MS systems) give them at least some semblence of
being a Microsoft player.  Stardock's forte has always been
marketing, not quality product.

> Tim, it seems to me that you'll do better in this newsgroup
> if you stay away from hyperbole and exaggeration.

What seems to you is irrelevant.  I do quite well in these
newsgroups thank you.  I am but one of the few true OS/2
advocates who is willing to step to the edge and point
out the the fox in sheep's clothing.   I love OS/2 and I won't
give it up until they pry it out of my dead cold hands.  And
I'll be damned if I'm going to let some little weasle who
runs a Windows software development company pull the
wool over the eyes of unsuspecting or naive OS/2 users
and chase them away to be eaten up by Microsoft.

I've spent many months in these newsgroups pointing
out time and again Stardock's "Warp 5" campaign was
folly and vaporware.  I was called every name in the book
by those who believe they've been left behind by IBM
and Stardock was our only hope. Threatened by Wardell
himself time and again for calling a spade a spade - for
claiming smoke when there was no fire.

Yet here we are today.  There is no Stardock Warp 5
product and there is a public statement from Brad
Wardell which purports to speak on behalf of IBM.
That statement says falsely that OS/2 has no future.

What has no future is the Stardock Warp 5 ripoff.
IBM was wise.  I applaud their decision.  I hope another
more respected OS/2 entity steps forward and is given
the green light to provide a serious Warp 5 product.

>
> Regards,
> Bennie Nelson

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                 21-Sep-99 19:18:16
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Klaus Kulbarsch)

Von Tim Martin <[e-mail]> am Tue, 21 Sep 1999 05:50:48:

> Esther Schindler wrote:
>
> > Tim,
> >
> > YOU are the one claiming that OS/2 users are being chased away from
> > OS/2. Not me. I haven't seen a single OS/2 user walk away from the
> > platform.
> >
>
> Esther - stop.

   [..rest deleted, because too well-known grist on your mill..]

> "Brad Wardell"  "Stardock"

Found your trigger again?

Ever heard of 'Pavlovs Dog'?


This OS/2 WARP 4 system uptime is 3d 7h 32m 57s 559ms (en).
--
ProNews/2  Klaus Kulbarsch
FIDO preferred ;-)
2:2426/1205 33.6  2:2426/1206 X75


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

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

From: [e-mail]                         21-Sep-99 16:31:09
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Jason Bowen writes:

>>>>>>> I have never had a probelm with Windows anything not supporting
hardware.

>>>>>> I've read about people complaining about how Microsoft refused to help
>>>>>> out with an NT problem because the hardware they were using wasn't on
>>>>>> the HCL.

>>>>> I've heard that OS/2 users have to patch their install disks to install
>>>>> Warp on new hardware.

>>>> I didn't have to.  What you've heard doesn't change the fact that Windows
>>>> isn't a panacea to hardware support problems.

>>> Why are you making that statement?  I didn't make any claim about Windows.

>> Incorrect:
>>
>> JB] I have never had a probelm with Windows anything not supporting
hardware.
>>
>> It's right at the top of the article, Jason.
>>
>> See Message-ID: <7s5qf7$[e-mail]> for the original.

> I didn't claim it was a panacea.

You did say that you never had a problem.

> I said I didn't have problems with it.

It?  What is "it"?  Could it be the "it" you didn't make any claim about?
I see you didn't bother to address the evidence for you being wrong.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         21-Sep-99 16:36:27
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

[e-mail] writes:

>>> OS/2 out of the box can't install on EIDE hard drive over 8.4 gigs
>>> unless it is patched.

>> Evidence, please.  I've read several responses to you from people who have
>> installed on larger drives without needing a patch.

> What kind of evidence to you WANT?

Something besides his words.

> Or are you being cute about how you define "patch?"

Obviously not, given that those people haven't needed one.

> Or maybe you're being cute about what it meant to install on a large
> drive?

Obviously not, given that I used the word "larger", not "large".

> Warp 4 from my CD will not access large drives without fixpacks or new
> drivers.

"Or maybe you're being cute about what it meant to install on a large
drive?"

> Yes, you can install OS/2 on a large drive as it comes out of the
> package, but it won't access all of that drive.

That wasn't the issue.

> For IBM to leave it that way is - if nothing else - REALLY silly.

You're presupposing that it is that way.

> Like buying gas and having to mix in your own octane additive.

Gasoline additives sell rather well.

> Or do you have a different CD?

Given that I haven't seen yours, I can't say.

> Did they put out a later CD with the new driver on it?

Given that I haven't seen yours, I can't say.

> If so, why don't they make it known?

The key word here is "if".

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 21-Sep-99 16:56:19
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Judgement Day ... Stardock and OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Mooo)

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

>As someone said: If a German Bank called Lou and said I want to send you an
>order for upgrading xxx seats and there is more coming in new orders, that
would
>be declined?

Yes, that was me.  I really think that this is the point.  The guy
from OS/2 HQ says it well in that IBM is so huge that they cannot (and
do not want  to) see the trees for the forest.

What we need to do is to stop being a bunch of trees, and turn the
community into a forest.  In so doing we become 'visible' to IBM.
Remember, IBM is not one man, it has no soul.  I doubt emotion even
enters discussions on OS/2.  If a product is making enough money to be
'visible' it will continue to get support.  No matter how big a user
based corporate entity becomes (OS/2 Corporation as I have spoken of
before) it in itself will not guarentee a future for OS/2.  But what
it would do, IMHO, is to inject some 'feeling with muscle' into the
OS/2 world.  The muscle would be the combined spending dollar of 10's
of thousands of small OS/2 users, the feeling would be the enthusiasm
of the individuals.

Currently, we lone OS/2 users 'feed' off the crumbs provided by big
OS/2 customers like the often mentioned banking corporates.  If OS/2
users come together, and due to combined resources actually fund 3rd
party development, its possible, even likely, that some very large
corporates would be interested in such product.  This in turn keeps
their financial interest in OS/2 and because of their huge cash
resources keep OS/2 alive from IBM's perspective.

Its a very symbiotic thing you see :)


>Beginning this year there was a (number from memory) 30.000 copies
>interest conveyed to IBM as pre-orders. If it would be an order, would it be
sent back?

No, it would not, once again in my humble opinion.  However, this
would not gain the OS/2 community anything aside from Warp5 client.
The future (Warp 6?) would be no more secure than it is today.

What we need, and have needed for many years, in fact, we've always
needed it, is lively, active application and driver development.

How much faster can applications be put into the marketplace (or user
space) when their is money involved rather than waiting for some good
hearted souls to use their spare time.

Need a PM version of GIMP?  Fine, bankroll it.  A corporate umbrella
looking after the needs of OS/2 users would work very effectively.
Need the applications and want to have a vote in what gets developed?
Buy a subscription to 'OS/2 Corporation' (sort of like Software Choice
realy)


>OK, let's assume the worst. IBM turns down the order for 10-20.000 copies.
>That would at least give a clear view of IBM's intended directions and
strategy.

In the end, what we need is a roadmap.  We need to know, with
certainty whats going on.  Doom and gloom becomes a self fulfilling
prophecy all too easily.

If IBM was to be up front and say, 'right people, its like this...as
of Jan 1 2002 all OS/2 development will cease' thats fine.  I will be
upset of course, but its the honest thing to do and I know where I
stand.

I disagree with the optimistic viewpoint that as long as IBM stays
quiet OS/2 is safe.  My view is that as long as IBM is staying quiet,
it means they themselves could move in either direction.

Craig

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Nothing I say is my own opinion (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                          21-Sep-99 17:58:15
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>Ian Tholen
>Except I haven't engaged in libel the way Jeff did recently.

Except that I haven't engaged in libel the way you erroneously claim
that I did.

>>You really need to be careful what you post here.

>Yes, he should.

On the other hand, Tholen need not be careful with his lies since
people already know that he lies

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          21-Sep-99 17:57:01
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>Bennie Nelson
>You've taken to using Ian Tholen's words to convey your meaning.

No, I use Tholen's brand of "logic" to point out the "errors" in the
logic of those kooks who think that he makes a lot of sense -- people
like you. (ie, Don't forget that you're the one who believes that he
relies upon logic and his detractors are "emotionally blocked" people
who are "unskilled at logic").

Of course, being that OS/2 kooks are notorious hypocrites (and not too
mentally swift either), they typically fail to see their own hypocrisy
in putting forth arguments that their christ-like beacon of "logic"
himself has already condemned as "illogical" when used by people whose
opinions he doesn't happen to like.

>That's risky, don't you think?

Not at all. It has been my experience that the OS/2 kooks in this
newsgroup are no more "intelligent" than their "hero" Tholen, and that
qualifies as exceedingly low intellect, rife with mindless
inconsistencies, dumb contradictions, a lack of common sense, immature
naivete, an inability to be anything but plodding and pedantic, etc.
(See my digest of Tholen's inane nonsense for a plethora of examples
of his astounding stupidity).

I have nothing to fear from these people.

>People might actually say that because you're
>using his words, that means you're just like him. In fact, that's the
>kind of thing you've done in the past.

But of course, there already exists a "logical" Tholen Cliche to
dismiss such an accusation as foolish.

The extent of Tholen's idiocy has been so comprehensive that there are
now plenty of contradictions, inconsistencies, hypocrisy, etc, from
which to draw upon and address just about any point that an OS/2 kook
raises.

That's the legacy of fanaticism. It destroys itself. Tholen's idiocy
has helped destroy that which it ineptly attempts to promote, and made
anything that an OS/2 fanatic could utter susceptible to being shot
down with Tholen's own brand of "logic".

>You really need to be careful what you post here.

You're presupposing that I'm not being careful with what I post here.

Sound familiar? It should. It's the sound of OS/2 fanaticism coming
home to roost. It's a sound that other, overzealous niche product
advocates, such as Amiga True Believers, heard. I suggest that you
study up some history when you go back to the library and read up on
what the Bill of Rights really guarantees.

>>If a person has problems installing an operating system, and he knows
>>what he's doing, he usually can troubleshoot what is causing the
>>problem and solve the problem. I do that all of the time.

>So, do I.

And yet you claim that you couldn't install Windows operating systems
because of problems.

>>You likely don't have the skills to do that.

>I gave you an example of troubleshooting a Windows 95 install problem.

Then it's no longer a problem.

Apparently, you have no problems with Windows now.

Neither do I. Welcome to the reality that many others experience.

>>>How about Windows 95's notoriously bad support for modems (well
>>>documented on MS' Knowledgebase website)?

>>How about OS/2's notoriously bad support for sound cards? Even the
>>latest Creative Labs' cards aren't supported in OS/2, and those are
>>the biggest selling sound cards.

>I question your equating the two circumstances.

You can question it all you like, but it doesn't change the fact that
both statements talk about problems with hardware support.

>Bad support does not equal scanty support.

True. No support is even worse than some support.

>OS/2 has scanty support for newer sound cards.

That was my point above. It has problems with support.

>That is, there are not many newer soundcards that are supported in
>OS/2.  Windows 95 support for modems is bad in that the support is
>quite buggy.

Just like Tholen responds to such criticisms with a personal anecdote
that he has never personally experienced a given situation cited by
someone whose opinions he doesn't like, I'll just note that I've never
experienced "buggy" modem support in any of the Windows 9x systems
which I've put together.

Needless to say, you must find this a very logical rebuttal. After
all, Tholen uses it quite often, and you don't seem to feel the need
to respond to that (much less use it as an opportunity to trumpet the
oddball views of one of those extremist social/political affiliations
you love to promote).

>> >How about the fact that
>> >at least one version of Windows 95 cannot find a requested device
>> >driver on a diskette if the *.INF file has the name in a different
>> >case from the way the file is stored on the diskette?
>> >I had
>> >to edit the *.INF file and change the filename's case before Windows
>> >could find the driver.

>You've glossed over the fact that I had to figure out what was wrong
>and fix it. Which I did without finding the situation documented
>anywhere.

Illogical. You just claimed earlier that the situation is documented
in Microsoft's Knowledge Base.

Do make up your mind, Bennie.

>> How about the fact that OS/2 users have to edit the files on their
>> install disks in order to install upon >8.4 gig IDE hard drives?

>Using a copy command to replace a file on a diskette is not usually
>referred to as "editing" files. The process of replacing the files
>on the installation diskette is well documented and supported by IBM.

Just like your modem solution is documented on Microsoft's Knowledge
Base.

>This is more akin to having to set up the Windows 95 installation
>diskette to provide CDROM support (Windows 95 OSR B will not install
>as provided on the installation diskette).

Again, I just installed Windows upon a number of machines, and had no
such problems with it.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                21-Sep-99 13:38:18
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail]

[e-mail] said:

>Those who think OS/2 is too difficult to deal with, all those
>free fixpacks & feature upgrades that need to be installed,
>should try Linux for more than a few hours!

Let's see now.  My car has transmission trouble, but since it doesn't have a
bad
engine there's nothing wrong with it.

Jim L
Remove XX from address to Email
More gun laws will cure the nations ills - just like drug laws do.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                         21-Sep-99 16:27:18
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Fred Emmerich writes:

>>> I can't prove that it is true.

>> So, you admit to spreading FUD?

> Just like you can't prove your OS/2 software program sells.

Yes I can.  What makes you think I can't?

> So, you admit to spreading FUD?

What alleged FUD are you referring to?

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         21-Sep-99 16:25:14
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Jason Bowen writes:

>>> Jason wrote:

>>>>> From what I have read there will be no more free downloads soon,
software
>>>>> choice is going to all paid subscription.

>>>> Can you site any proof to add credability to that statement?

>>> I was just reprinting hearsay that I saw other OS/2 users type, unhappy
>>> OS/2 users.

>> Who are these other users, and how do you know they use OS/2?

> usenet users.

USENET users are not necessarily OS/2 users.

>>> I can't prove that it is true.

>> So, you admit to spreading FUD?

> You admit to spreading fud?

I'm not the one reprinting hearsay.

> You have reproduced others claims without knowing if they are factual.

Such as?

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         21-Sep-99 16:29:23
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Fred Emmerich writes:

>>> P.S. So how many sales _have_ you had in the last twelve months?

>> That's proprietary information.

> aka zero

Prove it, if you think you can.

>>> How do they compare to the previous twelve months?

>> That's proprietary information.

> aka zero

Prove it, if you think you can.

>>> Are you able to support yourself wholly from sales of OS/2 products?

>> That's proprietary information.

> aka zero

Prove it, if you think you can.

Of course, I know you can't, but that's par for the course for
somebody who still thinks the Fortran 90 standard contains the
RECORD statement.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                21-Sep-99 13:34:29
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Judgement Day ... Stardock and OS/2

From: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Mooo) said:

>The muscle would be the combined spending dollar of 10's
>of thousands of small OS/2 users,

Let's be a little more specific.  Does anyone even know how many non-big biz
OS/2 users are out there?

Jim L
Remove XX from address to Email
More gun laws will cure the nations ills - just like drug laws do.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                          21-Sep-99 18:01:05
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>Karel Jansens
>Idiots shouldn't install or run OS/2.

That doesn't explain why Tholen has installed and run OS/2.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                21-Sep-99 13:43:13
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Dave Tholen) said:

>> Yes, you can install OS/2 on a large drive as it comes out of the
>> package, but it won't access all of that drive.

>That wasn't the issue.

(Ah, so you are being cute - it all depends on what the definition of "is"
is.)

There is no "the issue" per se, because there are many issues.  But if you lay
that point aside, it IS "the issue."  IBM has left OS/2 on the market as a
jigsaw puzzle.

Jim L
Remove XX from address to Email
More gun laws will cure the nations ills - just like drug laws do.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 16:59:26
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 15:17:15, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:

| I chose to speak out about it, to let OS/2 users
| know and to not sweep it under the rug or protect the guilty.

So you say.

You haven't even backed up your claims that harm was done to the OS/2
community.

When someone gives me information in confidence, I keep that
confidence.

--Esther


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 13:02:12
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: It doesn't bother people that a new client won't be confirmed?

From: Brad BARCLAY <[e-mail]>

Jason Bowen wrote:
>
> Warp 4 out of the box has to be patched to be installed on new hardware.

    I'm tired of seeing this piece of misinformation being passed around
time and time again, so I'm going to put an end to it.

    First off, IBM's typical customer tends to be large corporations, who
might be installing the client onto hundreds of machines.  In instances
like this, if a product does need to be patched, what usually happens is
that ONE copy is patched and installed, and then that one patched
install is cloned to the rest of the boxes (either via a drive image, or
perhaps via CID installation over the network).

    This assumes that the OS needs to be patched for some reason in the
first place.  For those large customers buying OS/2 directly from IBM,
they can get it in a pre-patched format.  IIRC, the newer OS/2 WARP v4
CD burns have many of the fixpak updates built in.

    Those people who have an old CD and want to reinstall or install to new
hardware will need to patch the disketes prior to install if they have a
large EIDE based hard drive (SCSI hard drives don't need any special
patches).  But any large custmer who buys OS/2 today can get everything
pre-patched from IBM.

    So let's dispense with the "you can't install it on modern hardware"
rubbish the same two or three people here keep mimicking.  It's false,
and only shows that those making the claim don't know what they're
talking about.

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]                                 21-Sep-99 17:44:26
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Mooo)

[e-mail] (Jeff Glatt) wrote:

>How about OS/2's notoriously bad support for sound cards? Even the
>latest Creative Labs' cards aren't supported in OS/2, and those are
>the biggest selling sound cards.

What?  Surely this is a creative labs problem?  Is it MS's problem
that OS/2 software cant be run on Windows 95?

Craig

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Nothing I say is my own opinion (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                    21-Sep-99 18:08:07
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <7s8bhp$4ov$[e-mail]>,
Dave Tholen <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Jason Bowen writes:
>
>>>> Jason wrote:
>
>>>>>> From what I have read there will be no more free downloads soon,
software
>>>>>> choice is going to all paid subscription.
>
>>>>> Can you site any proof to add credability to that statement?
>
>>>> I was just reprinting hearsay that I saw other OS/2 users type, unhappy
>>>> OS/2 users.
>
>>> Who are these other users, and how do you know they use OS/2?
>
>> usenet users.
>
>USENET users are not necessarily OS/2 users.

USENET users are not necessarily out to fud OS/2.

>
>>>> I can't prove that it is true.
>
>>> So, you admit to spreading FUD?
>
>> You admit to spreading fud?
>
>I'm not the one reprinting hearsay.

You have verified every claim that you have reprinted?

>
>> You have reproduced others claims without knowing if they are factual.
>
>Such as?
>

The posts in here where you cite people talking about problems installing
Windows and how it isn't a hardware panacea.  Have you verified the
problems?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 18:19:00
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
Subj: Re: what's worth writing about?

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 14:53:02, "David T. Johnson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

| IBM knows
| it lost the battle for the consumer desktop and, in my opinion, is glad
| that it did.  IBM provides "business machines."

But that's not what they were providing when they marketed OS/2 Warp
3, and did that rollout. They sold it with ads that had an
earring-sprouting GenXer saying, "It's liquid, man" and the corporate
"nuns" ad wasn't geared towards corporations.

IBM also sells software for end-users and distinctly non-business
users. ViaVoice isn't a corporate product, for instance. It's marketed
as a consumer application.

--Esther


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

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

From: [e-mail]                           21-Sep-99 17:55:17
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

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

In <[e-mail]>, on 09/21/99
   at 12:41 PM, [e-mail] (Esther Schindler) said:

>| > The apparency is that there was a
>| >major miscommunication between several parties, all of whom have/had
>| >the best interests of the OS/2 community in mind. I'm trying to figure
>| >out where the hairball came from, so it can be hacked up and dealt
>| >with.)
>|
>| Esther, does this mean that your were privy to inside information
>| BEFORE the fateful announcement, and that your inside information
>| pointed to something OTHER than the real outcome?

>Let's just say that I know more than is/was publicly available.

And it is now apparent that Stardock was not the only company
approaching IBM with OEM contract plan concerning Warp 4.5 client.
According to Warpcast, Serenity Systems also made (or is in the process
of preparing) a similar proposal (see
http://www.os2ss.com/warpcast/wc4111.html) and although the phrasing
used in the above statement is extremely careful and as unclear as
possible ;-), it looks like IBM was not as definite with their proposal
yet as with Stardock's. Which IMHO makes sense because Serenity Systems
is specializing on exactly this kind of solutions (packaging of custom
OS/2 client installations).

Cheers,
Ivan

--
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Ivan Adzhubei" <[e-mail]>
-----------------------------------------------------------

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 14:15:06
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 13:56:17, "Nick Danger"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

| That's because it's a common lawyer thing to sue them
| unless their predictions of the future are 100% accurate.

Yup.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 08:17:07
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Esther Schindler wrote:

> |
> | Esther, does this mean that your were privy to inside information
> | BEFORE the fateful announcement, and that your inside information
> | pointed to something OTHER than the real outcome?
>
> Let's just say that I know more than is/was publicly available.
>

As do I Esther.  I chose to speak out about it, to let OS/2 users
know and to not sweep it under the rug or protect the guilty.
Sad that you can't do the same but par for the Esther course.

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                          21-Sep-99 11:20:17
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Jeff Glatt wrote:
>
> >>>Bennie Nelson
> >>>OS/2 works with hardware that is current.  I have built brand new systems
> >>>with recently released off-the-shelf components, this year.  No problems.
>
> >>>jglatt
> >>>Windows 95, on the other hand, did not fare so well.
>
> >>Only because you're obviously not competent enough to do what many,
> >>many other people (including myself) do routinely -- install Windows.
> >>In fact, just this week I put together 3 various systems and installed
> >>Windows 9x from scratch. No problems. But then, unlike you, I know
> >>what I'm doing and have the skills to do it
>
> >Are you saying that no one who is competent has ever had problems
> >installing Windows 95?
>
> To paraphrase a kook whom you think exhibits great logic:

Jeff,
You've taken to using Dave Tholen's words to convey your meaning.  That's
risky, don't you think?  People might actually say that because you're
using his words, that means you're just like him.  In fact, that's the
kind of thing you've done in the past.

You really need to be careful what you post here.


>
> Reading comprehension problems, Bennie? I didn't say anything of the
> sort. I merely pointed out that you don't appear to be competent
> enough to do what many, many other people (including myself) do
> routinely -- install Windows without problems upon a variety of
> hardware.
>
> >if a person has problems installing
> >Windows 95, then that is conclusive proof that the person doing the
> >install is incompetent?
>
> If a person has problems installing an operating system, and he knows
> what he's doing, he usually can troubleshoot what is causing the
> problem and solve the problem. I do that all of the time.

So, do I.

>
> You likely don't have the skills to do that.

I gave you an example of troubleshooting a Windows 95 install problem.
You're ignoring the facts to suit your predetermined conclusion.

>
> Nevertheless, that's not to say that I often have trouble installing
> Windows. Typically, I do not. Nor do I have more problems with one
> operating system versus another. After all, I know what I'm doing, and
> so I'm able to install operating systems with reasonably little
> trouble,
>
> It appears that a number of the OS/2 users posting in this newsgroup
> are not qualified likewise.
>
> >How about Windows 95's notoriously bad support for modems (well
> >documented on MS' Knowledgebase website)?
>
> How about OS/2's notoriously bad support for sound cards? Even the
> latest Creative Labs' cards aren't supported in OS/2, and those are
> the biggest selling sound cards.

I question your equating the two circumstances.  Bad support does not
equal scanty support.  OS/2 has scanty support for newer sound cards.
That is, there are not many newer soundcards that are supported in
OS/2.  Windows 95 support for modems is bad in that the support is
quite buggy.

>
> >How about the fact that
> >at least one version of Windows 95 cannot find a requested device
> >driver on a diskette if the *.INF file has the name in a different
> >case from the way the file is stored on the diskette?
> >I had
> >to edit the *.INF file and change the filename's case before Windows
> >could find the driver.

You've glossed over the fact that I had to figure out what was wrong
and fix it.  Which I did without finding the situation documented
anywhere.

>
> How about the fact that OS/2 users have to edit the files on their
> install disks in order to install upon >8.4 gig IDE hard drives?

Using a copy command to replace a file on a diskette is not usually
referred to as "editing" files.  The process of replacing the files
on the installation diskette is well documented and supported by IBM.

This is more akin to having to set up the Windows 95 installation
diskette to provide CDROM support (Windows 95 OSR B will not install
as provided on the  installation diskette).

Regards,
Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                      21-Sep-99 10:22:15
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

From: [e-mail]

In <7s6ueg$29n$[e-mail]>, on 09/21/99
   at 03:35 AM, [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)
said:

>> P.S. So how many sales _have_ you had in the last twelve months?
>That's proprietary information.

aka zero

>> How do they compare to the previous twelve months?
>That's proprietary information.

aka zero

>> Are you able to support yourself wholly from sales of OS/2 products?
>That's proprietary information.

aka zero



=====================
Fred Emmerich
[e-mail]
=====================




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

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 12:33:09
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Tim Martin wrote:
>
> Esther Schindler wrote:
>
> > |
> > | Esther, does this mean that your were privy to inside information
> > | BEFORE the fateful announcement, and that your inside information
> > | pointed to something OTHER than the real outcome?
> >
> > Let's just say that I know more than is/was publicly available.
> >
>
> As do I Esther.  I chose to speak out about it, to let OS/2 users
> know and to not sweep it under the rug or protect the guilty.
> Sad that you can't do the same but par for the Esther course.

Sad that you have no concept of legal obligations or protecting your
sources to keep their confidence.  But then again, it's not likely that
anyone grants you their confidence.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                          21-Sep-99 18:35:18
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>[e-mail]
>What kind of evidence to you WANT?  Or are you being cute...

If you've seen Tholen's picture, then you'd realize that it's
impossible for him to "be cute"

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

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

From: [e-mail]               21-Sep-99 10:47:12
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: New OS/2 client not to be

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

On 21 Sep 1999 13:20:12 GMT, M.P. van Dobben de Bruijn wrote:

>But the point is they (eh .... <g> Brad says that they) claim it is
>not in their strategic plans for now to release a new client. Be it
>by IBM or another party.

That wasn't the message.   The key message here is "at this time".

>If that is true (if I may advise Serenity that
>is the first thing they should establish at a high corporate level before
>spending time on a whole round of negotations), it is time we get some
>insight in what we may expect as a result from those strategic decisions.

Their strategic decisions had been quite clear for a long time.   It would be
wishful thinking to think that any 4th or 5th level management can change
that.    There's good reason why the name of Aurora get set to "e-Business
server".   Anything that has nothing to do with e-Business is not going to be
a "pet project"  - AT THIS TIME.

Can you think of a reason why a Warp 5 fat-client would benefit IBM's
e-Business?   If you can answer that - you would have a better chance to open
some doors.


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

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

From: [e-mail]               21-Sep-99 10:42:03
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: Who to believe?  Brad or Tim

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

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 15:22:55 +1000, nospam wrote:

>> Tim Martin has a long long history of fabricating things, I consider his
>> latest barrage of nonsense to be more of the same.
>>
>> Bear in mind that our statement thanked specifically by name some of the
>IBM
>> people who were involved.  And as I have stated, IBM is always free to
>> change their mind.  You'll note that Tim went with his usual "unnamed
>> sources" to back his claims.
>>

Both are correct this time.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                          21-Sep-99 18:58:22
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>Bennie Nelson
>I noticed you conveniently deleted the portion of my post

I noticed you conveniently deleted and/or failed to respond to the
relevant points of my posts. Perhaps if you weren't so "unskilled at
logic", nor perhaps "emotionally blocked" about some people in
Franklin, you could actually address the issues raised. But obviously,
you are so, and can't.

>that
>referenced the poor folks a few miles from here in Franklin.

What do the poor folks in Franklin have to do with OS/2 Advocacy?
You're the one who dragged them into this newsgroup. I'm the one
saying that they have no relevancy to why you're behaving like a
hypocrite who is "unskilled at logic" and apparently "emotionally
blocked".

>It is nice to selectively quote someone for you own purposes.

Is that why you do that?

>Here's a portion of your post, selectively quoted:

Typical hypocrisy from Bennie. He does exactly what he criticizes
others for doing.

>So, since you've chosen to not reply to what I have written,

How ironic coming from someone who has chosen not to reply to the
points that I wrote in preceding messages.

>I will repost the paragraph you altered:

How ironic that the following paragraph was your way of evading the
issues/points that I raised in the post to which you responded.

Typical hypocrisy from Bennie.

Maybe you should actually go back and respond to that post before you
claim that others aren't responding to your own posts. Then, you
wouldn't appear to be such a hypocrite who is "unskilled at logic".

>It is really a pity that you went to all of the effort to post such
>a lengthy article that is so completely full of mistakes, misquotes,
>and misguided opinions.  You even laughed when I told you that my
>schedule in the last week has been altered because of a hurricane
>and associated flooding.  I suppose you would have really enjoyed
>it if I was one of the people who live a few miles south in Franklin.
>Their whole town is still under water, and it's supposed to rain
>tonight.  Oh, and they are under a flash flood warning.  Gee haw!
>
>Isn't freedom wonderful?
>
>Regards,
>Bennie Nelson

>Jeff Glatt wrote:
>>
>> >Bennie Nelson
>> >It is really a pity that you went to all of the effort to post such
>> >a lengthy article that is so completely full of mistakes, misquotes,
>> >and misguided opinions.
>>
>> It's a pity that you foolishly shove your foot in your mouth to defend
>> kooks such as Tholen, even maintaining that his detractors are
>> "emotionally blocked" people who are "unskilled at logic". It's a pity
>> you did this because you have a misguided fanaticism regarding a brand
>> name product.
>>
>> But, that's the way that it is.
>>
>> >You even laughed when I told you that my
>> >schedule in the last week has been altered because of a hurricane
>> >and associated flooding.
>>
>> I laughed at you using it as a response to my contention that you OS/2
>> kooks always manage to cite some "calamity" that prevents you from
>> ever exhibiting anything even remotely resembling the sense of
>> perspective, fair play, and "lack of kookiness" that you claim to
>> have, but never manage to have the time and opportunity to
>> demonstrate. Something always comes up to prevent you from holding
>> OS/2 kooks to the same standards that you whine for everyone else to
>> uphold.
>>
>> My, you OS/2 kooks sure are a sorry, hapless lot.
>>
>> And again, I'll paraphrase your "logical", "christ-like" buddy Tholen,
>> and note that you have no response to any of the points I raised. I'm
>> not surprised. That's always the case with OS/2 fanatics.
>>
>> Maybe if you weren't so unskilled at logic...

NOTE: No response from Bennie to the points that I raised above about
his own hypocrisy in this newsgroup. And this, after he complains that
someone is doing likewise to his own posts.

This is what I've come to expect from hypocritical OS/2 kooks who are
"unskilled at logic" and apparently "emotionally blocked"

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                21-Sep-99 13:37:15
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail]

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

>Where is Netscape 4.61 for your beloved OS?  Why, nowhere to be seen!

Wake up and smell the coffee.

Jim L
Remove XX from address to Email
More gun laws will cure the nations ills - just like drug laws do.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                          21-Sep-99 18:04:25
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>>Karel Jansens
>>Idiots shouldn't install or run OS/2. That's why Windows was invented  (this
is
>>really true!).

>[e-mail]
>I knew this was boiling down to elitism.

That's because a false sense of elitism is *all* that OS/2 kooks have
left. They have nothing more to offer anyone.

It happened to Amiga True Believers too when they endorsed the same
kind of fanaticism.

Apparently, there are OS/2 "advocates" who want to kill OS/2.

>One self styled paragon said he hoped OS/2 stayed hard to use so the general
>public wouldn't spoil the OS/2 community with inferior intelligence. Sad.

Yes, OS/2 Advocacy has been espousing some very unpalatable views for
years. That's what helped put OS/2 where it is today, and *that* is
the epitome of "sad"

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

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

From: [e-mail]                    21-Sep-99 17:58:06
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <7s8bsn$4ov$[e-mail]>,
Dave Tholen <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Jason Bowen writes:
>
>>>>>>>> I have never had a probelm with Windows anything not supporting
hardware.
>
>>>>>>> I've read about people complaining about how Microsoft refused to help
>>>>>>> out with an NT problem because the hardware they were using wasn't on
>>>>>>> the HCL.
>
>>>>>> I've heard that OS/2 users have to patch their install disks to install
>>>>>> Warp on new hardware.
>
>>>>> I didn't have to.  What you've heard doesn't change the fact that
Windows
>>>>> isn't a panacea to hardware support problems.
>
>>>> Why are you making that statement?  I didn't make any claim about
Windows.
>
>>> Incorrect:
>>>
>>> JB] I have never had a probelm with Windows anything not supporting
hardware.
>>>
>>> It's right at the top of the article, Jason.
>>>
>>> See Message-ID: <7s5qf7$[e-mail]> for the original.
>
>> I didn't claim it was a panacea.
>
>You did say that you never had a problem.

I didn't claim it was a panacea for others, you brought up the panacea
issue.  Why did you bring it up?  It seems irrelevant to bring it up
seeing as I wasn't calling windows a panacea, just relating my
experiences.  I do know that your experience doesn't change the fact that
OS/2 isn't a panacea to hardware support problems problems.

>
>> I said I didn't have problems with it.
>
>It?  What is "it"?  Could it be the "it" you didn't make any claim about?
>I see you didn't bother to address the evidence for you being wrong.
>

I talked about my experiences with it.  I didn't make a claim for others
or for it being a panacea for others.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 17:07:15
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 16:23:10, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:

| Had Brad Wardell
| simply kept his mouth shut, kept his negotions private
| and out of the newsgroups and made no public statement
| in which he purports to speak for IBM and declares, in
| essence, that OS/2 is dead then that one person would
| still be using OS/2.  But thousands of people read these
| newsgroups all around the world  And thousands more
| read the public OS/2 web sites.  Yet they don't post here,
| they don't let their names be known.  It is those thousands
| who will take Brad's false message to heart and walk
| quietly away from OS/2.

Oh but Tim... Brad Wardell _didn't_ make a statement on the public
newsgroups. He posted his message on Stardock's own newsgroups,
reporting on a conversation he had with IBM employees regarding a
business relationship that had been proposed. (FWIW, I haven't been
able to get to the Stardock newsgroup; my ISP doesn't seem to make it
available.)

YOU, on the other hand, are the one making a big deal about it in the
newsgroups. YOU are the one spreading the poison, but claiming that
the poison was manufactured elsewhere.

Who's the one disseminating chaos and doubt about OS/2? It isn't Brad;
he hasn't said anything publicly about the subject at all.

--Esther

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                  21-Sep-99 20:25:10
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: Tony Wright <[e-mail]>

Esther Schindler wrote:

> On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 15:17:15, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> | I chose to speak out about it, to let OS/2 users
> | know and to not sweep it under the rug or protect the guilty.
>
> So you say.
>
> You haven't even backed up your claims that harm was done to the OS/2
> community.
>
> When someone gives me information in confidence, I keep that
> confidence.
>
> --Esther

Ah but now you allude and possibly are about to embark on that
philosphical debate regarding moral ethics (let alone the obvious NDA
legal ones<g>).
I fear that it is most "unchristian" and intolerant  of me to suggest it
but I suspect you may be wasting your time again trying to
politely and patiently attempt to educate someone that cannot (or
refuses to) comprehend or rationally discuss even basic business (and
regrettably some technical ) concepts, let alone more abstract  matters
of integrity that are totally alien to his own point of view.  ...
:-(

....but as they say YMMV - so LOL..... (I do detest these
acronyms / abbreviations it's such a lazy way to write!.... yuk).

Incidentally, why are we cross posting this on so many NG's(not
obviously personally directed at your goodself naturally)?
I'm sure programmers have more worthwhile things to do than circumvent
our mutual friends psychotic vendetta/remarks if not those readers on
c.o.o.apps that are just trying to mutually leverage their use of OS/2's
remaining (perceived<vbg>) lifespan?

Responsibly reporting a balanced,unemotive,cogent and factually based
opinion to "appropriate" newsgroups is one thing but inciting a divisive
and hysterical knee jerk "witch hunt" is quite another...  :-(

....but regrettably predictable....given the "track record" of the
individual to date...

--
Rgds Tony W   Email: [e-mail]

"humanum est errare: To err is human
.... and to fail is to be a Project Manager...
...but to foul things up completely needs a computer!"

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          21-Sep-99 18:44:24
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: Tell us about your sofware Dave

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>>>jglatt
>>> I'll leave it up to you to decide whether this "product" and "company"
>>> even merits any note beyond the above. Frankly, I think not.

>>Ian Tholen
>>Jeff, you just engaged in libel.

>Joe Malloy
>Oh boy, Tholen's going to call his mythical and totally ineffective "lawyer"
>on Jeff, I guess.  Go to it, Tholen, you Kook of the Month!

I'm shaking in my boots, Joe. No wait, I'm cowering in disgust
actually -- I just saw Tholen's picture on his web page!

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          21-Sep-99 14:07:28
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Jeff,
Your response has gotten trite.  You're starting to reuse many
of your tired phrases.  It didn't take long for you to introduce
Dave Tholen into the thread and try to make him the issue.  So
predictable.

You've changed my words so many times, which makes them your words.
Thus, you are attacking your own words.  Surely you can do better
than that.

Some examples of changes:

Item (you substituted Ian)
> >You've taken to using Ian Tholen's words to convey your meaning.


Item (you substituted couldn't)
> And yet you claim that you couldn't install Windows operating systems
> because of problems.

I said that the Windows install was not without problems.  That is
not the same as saying I could not get it to install.


Item (you replied this to my statement *.INF files)

> Illogical. You just claimed earlier that the situation is documented
> in Microsoft's Knowledge Base.

This is what I said about modems.  Nowhere did I indicate that the
*.INF problem was documented in the MS Knowledgebase.

> >>>How about Windows 95's notoriously bad support for modems (well
> >>>documented on MS' Knowledgebase website)?


Really, Jeff.  You can come up with something new.  Be creative.
Think, man!  There must be something you can add to spice up this
thread.  These retread diatribes of yours are getting quite worn
out.

Regards,
Bennie Nelson



Jeff Glatt wrote:
>
> >Bennie Nelson
> >You've taken to using Ian Tholen's words to convey your meaning.
>
> No, I use Tholen's brand of "logic" to point out the "errors" in the
> logic of those kooks who think that he makes a lot of sense -- people
> like you. (ie, Don't forget that you're the one who believes that he
> relies upon logic and his detractors are "emotionally blocked" people
> who are "unskilled at logic").
>
> Of course, being that OS/2 kooks are notorious hypocrites (and not too
> mentally swift either), they typically fail to see their own hypocrisy
> in putting forth arguments that their christ-like beacon of "logic"
> himself has already condemned as "illogical" when used by people whose
> opinions he doesn't happen to like.
>
> >That's risky, don't you think?
>
> Not at all. It has been my experience that the OS/2 kooks in this
> newsgroup are no more "intelligent" than their "hero" Tholen, and that
> qualifies as exceedingly low intellect, rife with mindless
> inconsistencies, dumb contradictions, a lack of common sense, immature
> naivete, an inability to be anything but plodding and pedantic, etc.
> (See my digest of Tholen's inane nonsense for a plethora of examples
> of his astounding stupidity).
>
> I have nothing to fear from these people.
>
> >People might actually say that because you're
> >using his words, that means you're just like him. In fact, that's the
> >kind of thing you've done in the past.
>
> But of course, there already exists a "logical" Tholen Cliche to
> dismiss such an accusation as foolish.
>
> The extent of Tholen's idiocy has been so comprehensive that there are
> now plenty of contradictions, inconsistencies, hypocrisy, etc, from
> which to draw upon and address just about any point that an OS/2 kook
> raises.
>
> That's the legacy of fanaticism. It destroys itself. Tholen's idiocy
> has helped destroy that which it ineptly attempts to promote, and made
> anything that an OS/2 fanatic could utter susceptible to being shot
> down with Tholen's own brand of "logic".
>
> >You really need to be careful what you post here.
>
> You're presupposing that I'm not being careful with what I post here.
>
> Sound familiar? It should. It's the sound of OS/2 fanaticism coming
> home to roost. It's a sound that other, overzealous niche product
> advocates, such as Amiga True Believers, heard. I suggest that you
> study up some history when you go back to the library and read up on
> what the Bill of Rights really guarantees.
>
> >>If a person has problems installing an operating system, and he knows
> >>what he's doing, he usually can troubleshoot what is causing the
> >>problem and solve the problem. I do that all of the time.
>
> >So, do I.
>
> And yet you claim that you couldn't install Windows operating systems
> because of problems.
>
> >>You likely don't have the skills to do that.
>
> >I gave you an example of troubleshooting a Windows 95 install problem.
>
> Then it's no longer a problem.
>
> Apparently, you have no problems with Windows now.
>
> Neither do I. Welcome to the reality that many others experience.
>
> >>>How about Windows 95's notoriously bad support for modems (well
> >>>documented on MS' Knowledgebase website)?
>
> >>How about OS/2's notoriously bad support for sound cards? Even the
> >>latest Creative Labs' cards aren't supported in OS/2, and those are
> >>the biggest selling sound cards.
>
> >I question your equating the two circumstances.
>
> You can question it all you like, but it doesn't change the fact that
> both statements talk about problems with hardware support.
>
> >Bad support does not equal scanty support.
>
> True. No support is even worse than some support.
>
> >OS/2 has scanty support for newer sound cards.
>
> That was my point above. It has problems with support.
>
> >That is, there are not many newer soundcards that are supported in
> >OS/2.  Windows 95 support for modems is bad in that the support is
> >quite buggy.
>
> Just like Tholen responds to such criticisms with a personal anecdote
> that he has never personally experienced a given situation cited by
> someone whose opinions he doesn't like, I'll just note that I've never
> experienced "buggy" modem support in any of the Windows 9x systems
> which I've put together.
>
> Needless to say, you must find this a very logical rebuttal. After
> all, Tholen uses it quite often, and you don't seem to feel the need
> to respond to that (much less use it as an opportunity to trumpet the
> oddball views of one of those extremist social/political affiliations
> you love to promote).
>
> >> >How about the fact that
> >> >at least one version of Windows 95 cannot find a requested device
> >> >driver on a diskette if the *.INF file has the name in a different
> >> >case from the way the file is stored on the diskette?
> >> >I had
> >> >to edit the *.INF file and change the filename's case before Windows
> >> >could find the driver.
>
> >You've glossed over the fact that I had to figure out what was wrong
> >and fix it. Which I did without finding the situation documented
> >anywhere.
>
> Illogical. You just claimed earlier that the situation is documented
> in Microsoft's Knowledge Base.
>
> Do make up your mind, Bennie.
>
> >> How about the fact that OS/2 users have to edit the files on their
> >> install disks in order to install upon >8.4 gig IDE hard drives?
>
> >Using a copy command to replace a file on a diskette is not usually
> >referred to as "editing" files. The process of replacing the files
> >on the installation diskette is well documented and supported by IBM.
>
> Just like your modem solution is documented on Microsoft's Knowledge
> Base.
>
> >This is more akin to having to set up the Windows 95 installation
> >diskette to provide CDROM support (Windows 95 OSR B will not install
> >as provided on the installation diskette).
>
> Again, I just installed Windows upon a number of machines, and had no
> such problems with it.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 17:24:21
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: what's worth writing about?

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

Do the national pubs truly fail to mention that OS/2 is a supported
platform? I don't think that's the case; in every article mentioning
cross-platform _anything_ (about, say, Sun's StarOffice purchase) I've
seen OS/2 mentioned.

As you say, few writers know about OS/2 well enough to spell it
correctly, and that makes it harder to get a good review (simply for
an OS/2 app). But it doesn't get _better_ by the lack of a new client,
as OS/2 expertise is less-and-less relevant when there isn't much to
write about. If a new client is announced, and then released, then
there's once again reason to fire up the OS/2 system and learn what's
going on with it.

Releasing a new client doesn't mean "dump the shrinkwrap box on the
doorstep and walk away," David, although IBM (like a surprising number
of other companies) seems to adopt that as its public relations
policy. A real product release encompasses a number of activities, one
of which includes interacting with business partners ahead of time,
helping them to take advantage of the new features and enabling them
to stand with you on stage on the release day.

If you want a healthy example of this, watch the rollout of the
Macintosh G4 at Seybold (the QuickTime movie is at Apple's Web site,
though you'll need a Mac or Windows to see it). Not only did Jobs use
a G4-exploitive copy of PhotoShop to demonstrate the G4's advantages
(i.e. smokin' performance) but it got across the message that
applications were available _today_ to take advantage of the new
equipment. (And, I must admit, it made me want one!)

One of the many marketing/PR mistakes that IBM made with regards to
OS/2 is that it _never used the friends it had_. I recall when John
Soyring visited the ZDNet Executives Online forum (of which I was
sysop) right after Warp 3's release. John was very proud of the
release event... until Dennis Fowler, then a contributing editor at
Computer Shopper (as well as an OS/2 user) pointed out several
weaknesses. While IBM had a small exhibit floor with 10 or 15 ISVs
demonstrating products, the floor wasn't open when the media could get
to it; it conflicted with the press conference. Moreover, implying "we
have 15 apps" didn't address the real concern about a lack of OS/2
applications.

Dennis suggested that IBM _could_ have asked the hundreds of ISVs to
each provide an empty product box, and build the entrance to the
rollout out of those boxes. Then they could have put up a sign saying,
"Entering the world of OS/2" or something like that -- and, without a
word or a penny being spent, confronted the "no apps" issue head-on.
They could have provided a list of press contacts for each of the OS/2
applications currently shipping, and included it in the press kit.
They could have asked each press person to fill out a form identifying
which OS/2 products he was interested in reviewing, and arranging for
the ISVs to send their applications to the right people.

It was a great suggestion then, and it would have worked equally well
for the Warp 4 rollout. (They didn't take a single suggestion.) It
would work today... if IBM bothered to recall that in business, the
best solutions are found when _everyone_ makes money together.

Another problem is that IBM _doesn't_ know its customers. But that's
another discussion entirely, and I wrote a long article about it
already in extended attributes.

--Esther

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 12:10:50, "David T. Johnson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:
| Esther, listen to yourself.  You say there aren't any new apps to write
| about and I listed some.  Now, you are switching gears and saying that
| you don't want to write about OS/2 because the user base is too small
| and IBM doesn't want to talk about OS/2.  I don't disagree that the user
| base makes reviews in large-circulation pubs unlikely.  But, even in
| cross-platform stuff like DB2, Netscape 4.61, Star Office 5.1a, or
| Visual Age for Java, the national pubs never seem to mention that OS/2
| is a supported platform or that additional features and functionality
| might be available in the OS/2 version that are not available in the
| other versions.  Why is this?  Well, the answer, of course, is that most
| of the writers know next to nothing about OS/2.  And that's why IBM
| doesn't want to talk about OS/2.  They know their market and their
| customers and the media computer pubs are not going to be worth any of
| their time, right?
|
| Your original point was that a new OS/2 client would generate new press
| and increase visibility for OS/2.  I think it would generate a small
| amount of new press, most of it inaccurate and unflattering, and would
| undoubtedly conclude by pointing out that there was no software for the
| platform and wasn't it amazing that it was even still alive after all of
| these years.  I could write the review right now without even booting
| the client!  I think IBM is exactly right-on with their current OS/2
| program.  They know their product, they know their customers, they know
| its uses and limitations, and they are developing and distributing it in
| a very professional and business-like way.  OS/2 is not a platform that
| would benefit from being mass-marketed to the general public right
| now.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                              21-Sep-99 19:00:04
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

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


Esther Schindler <[e-mail]> wrote in article
<[e-mail]>...
> On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 16:23:10, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
> business relationship that had been proposed. (FWIW, I haven't been
> able to get to the Stardock newsgroup; my ISP doesn't seem to make it
> available.)

Esther,
  That's becasue the groups are not publically accessible.  Point your
browser to news://news.stardock.com/stardock.os2

j.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                          21-Sep-99 19:49:19
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>Bennie Nelson
>Your response has gotten trite.

How ironic, coming from someone whose hypocrisy has gotten trite.

>You're starting to reuse many of your tired phrases.

Illogical. You claim that I'm repeating Tholen's words, and yet you
don't seem to find those phrases "tired" when Tholen reuses them. In
fact, you cite them as examples of logic, Bennie.

Typical hypocrisy from an OS/2 kook.

>It didn't take long for you to introduce
>Dave Tholen into the thread and try to make him the issue.

How ironic, coming from someone who made Tholen an issue, and even
declared his detractors to be "emotionally blocked" people who are
"unskilled at logic".

Typical hypocrisy from an OS/2 kook.

>So predictable.

How ironic, coming from someone whose hypocrisy is predictable, and
easily exposed.

>You've changed my words so many times, which makes them your words.

Nonsense, Bennie. Your words are above.

And they still are hypocritical and illogical.

>Thus, you are attacking your own words.

Nonsense. Can you not read attribution lines, Bennie?

>Surely you can do better than that.

I have done better than what you posted above.

Can *you* do better, Bennie?

>Some examples of changes:

>Item (you substituted Ian)
>>>You've taken to using Ian Tholen's words to convey your meaning.

Ian is the person to which we're referring, Bennie. Do try to keep up.

>Item (you substituted couldn't)
>>And yet you claim that you couldn't install Windows operating systems
>>because of problems.

>I said that the Windows install was not without problems. That is
>not the same as saying I could not get it to install.

In fact, you claim such things as:

"The subsequent completion of the installs met with mixed success."

If you haven't had a successful completion of the install, then you
haven't had a successful install.

I, on the other hand, am competent enough to successfully complete
Windows installations upon various computers. You apparently haven't
been able to cite any such track record. That's my point.

>Nowhere did I indicate that the
>*.INF problem was documented in the MS Knowledgebase.

Illogical, Bennie. Why did you then claim that MS' Knowledge base is
"well documented" concerning "buggy modem support"?

>You can come up with something new.  Be creative.
>Think, man!  There must be something you can add to spice up this
>thread.  These retread diatribes of yours are getting quite worn
>out.

How ironic, coming from someone whose hypocrisy in praising Tholen's
worn out, repeated cliches as "logic", and then dismissing those same
phrases as uncreative and worn out when used by someone whose opinions
he doesn't like, is obvious.

You're just a kook whose opinions are based upon brand name
allegiance. Maybe if you weren't so unskilled at logic and emotionally
blocked, you could come up with something more creative than your
tired, worn out hypocrisy and promotion of kooky, oddball factions

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         21-Sep-99 18:51:15
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Richard R. Klemmer)

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 17:07:30, [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)
wrote:

> business relationship that had been proposed. (FWIW, I haven't been
> able to get to the Stardock newsgroup; my ISP doesn't seem to make it
> available.)

You have to go to Stardock's private news server to access the
newsgroup.  The server address is news.stardock.com.  Since you're
using Pronews 1.0, you can't set up multiple news servers.  You can do
this with the 1.5 beta, or with Netscape Communicator.

-----------------------------
Richard R. Klemmer
[e-mail]
http://www.webtrek.com
-----------------------------

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          21-Sep-99 15:05:01
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: WinNT 4/Windows 2000 compatibility

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Jeff Glatt wrote:
>
> >Bennie Nelson
> >I noticed you conveniently deleted the portion of my post

I chose to respond to the points that I wished to address.  Your
retreads are getting quite thin.  There's no point in dealing
with those.  They'll wear completely out, eventually.

>
> I noticed you conveniently deleted and/or failed to respond to the
> relevant points of my posts. Perhaps if you weren't so "unskilled at
> logic", nor perhaps "emotionally blocked" about some people in
> Franklin, you could actually address the issues raised. But obviously,
> you are so, and can't.
>
> >that
> >referenced the poor folks a few miles from here in Franklin.
>
> What do the poor folks in Franklin have to do with OS/2 Advocacy?
> You're the one who dragged them into this newsgroup. I'm the one
> saying that they have no relevancy to why you're behaving like a
> hypocrite who is "unskilled at logic" and apparently "emotionally
> blocked".

Actually, you introduced calamities into the thread.  I merely
responded that I have been dealing with the aftermath of two
hurricanes.  You seemed to find that amusing.  So, for your
further enjoyment, I added the point about a community near
to my home that is still under water.

>
> >It is nice to selectively quote someone for you own purposes.
>
> Is that why you do that?

I did it only to highlight your tactic.  If you wish to infer other
motives, you are free to do so.  However, I had no other motives
in doing so.  If you don't like looking in the mirror, that's your
problem.

I've already responded at great lengths in other posts to the rest
of your retreads that are included in your post.  If you have something
new, please submit it.

Regards,
Bennie Nelson

>
> >Here's a portion of your post, selectively quoted:
>
> Typical hypocrisy from Bennie. He does exactly what he criticizes
> others for doing.
>
> >So, since you've chosen to not reply to what I have written,
>
> How ironic coming from someone who has chosen not to reply to the
> points that I wrote in preceding messages.
>
> >I will repost the paragraph you altered:
>
> How ironic that the following paragraph was your way of evading the
> issues/points that I raised in the post to which you responded.
>
> Typical hypocrisy from Bennie.
>
> Maybe you should actually go back and respond to that post before you
> claim that others aren't responding to your own posts. Then, you
> wouldn't appear to be such a hypocrite who is "unskilled at logic".
>
> >It is really a pity that you went to all of the effort to post such
> >a lengthy article that is so completely full of mistakes, misquotes,
> >and misguided opinions.  You even laughed when I told you that my
> >schedule in the last week has been altered because of a hurricane
> >and associated flooding.  I suppose you would have really enjoyed
> >it if I was one of the people who live a few miles south in Franklin.
> >Their whole town is still under water, and it's supposed to rain
> >tonight.  Oh, and they are under a flash flood warning.  Gee haw!
> >
> >Isn't freedom wonderful?
> >
> >Regards,
> >Bennie Nelson
>
> >Jeff Glatt wrote:
> >>
> >> >Bennie Nelson
> >> >It is really a pity that you went to all of the effort to post such
> >> >a lengthy article that is so completely full of mistakes, misquotes,
> >> >and misguided opinions.
> >>
> >> It's a pity that you foolishly shove your foot in your mouth to defend
> >> kooks such as Tholen, even maintaining that his detractors are
> >> "emotionally blocked" people who are "unskilled at logic". It's a pity
> >> you did this because you have a misguided fanaticism regarding a brand
> >> name product.
> >>
> >> But, that's the way that it is.
> >>
> >> >You even laughed when I told you that my
> >> >schedule in the last week has been altered because of a hurricane
> >> >and associated flooding.
> >>
> >> I laughed at you using it as a response to my contention that you OS/2
> >> kooks always manage to cite some "calamity" that prevents you from
> >> ever exhibiting anything even remotely resembling the sense of
> >> perspective, fair play, and "lack of kookiness" that you claim to
> >> have, but never manage to have the time and opportunity to
> >> demonstrate. Something always comes up to prevent you from holding
> >> OS/2 kooks to the same standards that you whine for everyone else to
> >> uphold.
> >>
> >> My, you OS/2 kooks sure are a sorry, hapless lot.
> >>
> >> And again, I'll paraphrase your "logical", "christ-like" buddy Tholen,
> >> and note that you have no response to any of the points I raised. I'm
> >> not surprised. That's always the case with OS/2 fanatics.
> >>
> >> Maybe if you weren't so unskilled at logic...
>
> NOTE: No response from Bennie to the points that I raised above about
> his own hypocrisy in this newsgroup. And this, after he complains that
> someone is doing likewise to his own posts.
>
> This is what I've come to expect from hypocritical OS/2 kooks who are
> "unskilled at logic" and apparently "emotionally blocked"

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          21-Sep-99 19:04:14
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>>>> Jason
>>>> I was just reprinting hearsay that I saw other OS/2 users type, unhappy
>>>> OS/2 users.

>>>Ian Tholen
>>> Who are these other users, and how do you know they use OS/2?

>> usenet users.

>USENET users are not necessarily OS/2 users.

>>>> I can't prove that it is true.

>>>So, you admit to spreading FUD?

>>You admit to spreading fud?

>I'm not the one reprinting hearsay.

Sure you are. And here it is:

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Why blame IBM?
Date: 21 Sep 1999 00:11:38 GMT
Message-ID: <7s6ifq$lg4$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: charon.ifa.hawaii.edu

I've read about people complaining about how Microsoft refused to help
out with an NT problem because the hardware they were using wasn't on
the HCL.

====================================================

Folks,

The simple fact of the matter is that Tholen is an idiot who is
clearly too stupid to be able to not indulge in the most mindless
hypocrisy ever seen on Usenet. In the course of a mere few sentences,
he can't help but ineptly trip over his own, dim-witted and foolish
inconsistencies and contradictions.

This is a hallmark of stupidity, and Tholen exhibits it in spades.

And there is a LOT more evidence of Tholen's idiocy. I'll refer people
to my digest of his nonsense.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         21-Sep-99 19:28:07
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Richard R. Klemmer)

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 19:17:26, "Joe Malloy" <[e-mail]> wrote:

> > > Where is Netscape 4.61 for your beloved OS?  Why, nowhere to be seen!
> >
> > It was released yesterday.  Go to IBM's Software Choice web site.
>
> Not when I was there it wasn't.
>

Just to clear this up, Netscape 4.61 is on the Software Choice site,
include a 128bit encryption version.  There have been two beta's out
for a while now, which were both very stable.

Just to clear up this issue.

-----------------------------
Richard R. Klemmer
[e-mail]
http://www.webtrek.com
-----------------------------

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                  21-Sep-99 15:17:13
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

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

Something claiming to be a <[e-mail]> boneheadedly
tholened:

> > Where is Netscape 4.61 for your beloved OS?  Why, nowhere to be seen!
>
> It was released yesterday.  Go to IBM's Software Choice web site.

Not when I was there it wasn't.

> Chalk up another bonehead posting by Joe Malloy.

IBM posts his Netscape 4.61 just in the nick of time (at least according to
him).  It figures Tholen is a bonehead about it -- once a Kook-of-the-Month,
always a Kook.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                  21-Sep-99 15:18:23
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: This too shall pass

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

"Celestech" tholened:

> >>> P.S. So how many sales _have_ you had in the last twelve months?
>
> >> That's proprietary information.
>
> > aka zero
>
> Prove it, if you think you can.

Simple: if you had had sales worthy of mention, you'd have mentioned it.
Ergo, it's been a failure.



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

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 16:51:15
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 21:23:02
Subj: Re: Stardock & Brad

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Wayne Johnson wrote:

> I have to admit, Stardock has made the <forced> trasnition from OS/2 to
WIN9X
> MUCH better.  I still miss OS/2 but Object Desktop makes it a little less
> painfull.
>
> Wayne

That's been Stardock's plan for quite sometime.  Move
their OS/2 users to Microsoft operating systems and
give Stardock a built-in customer base.  Brad can then
market Stardock as a 'player' in the world of competing
Microsoft software developers.

People think I'm crazy when I say this publicly but it
has been the Brad Wardell/Stardock strategy ever
since they themselves gave up OS/2 and started
developing of Microsoft only systems.

Brad will not release his present OS/2 applications to
the OS/2 community for free download.  As long as
he can keep selling them to OS/2 users he's got that
chance to convert them to his Microsoft way of thinking.

Most see this as the Microsoft Fox disguised in the
OS/2 Sheep skin.

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 17:07:07
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 21:23:03
Subj: OS2NetLabs Head: "OS/2 is Dead"

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Brad Wardell has opened his mouth at last and given
his first public statements to Mary Lisbeth D'Amico,
of the Munich Bureau (Germany) of the IDG News Service.

According to Wardell, "the deal fell through after IBM
decided it was not in its interest to license any current OS/2
technology on an OEM (original equipment manufacturer)  basis."

Well, the deal fell through after IBM took a look at Stardock's
proposal and said 'no way Jose'.

Other 'no I'm not mad at IBM' quotes include:

"OS/2's chances of surviving as a desktop system
are very dim..." (and apparently he's going to make
sure that happens).

"How long can OS/2 go without being updated before
it is no longer a viable desktop alternative?"  (Updated
of course exclusively by Stardock of course.)

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

Any comment on this Adrian?

The complete interview will appear soon on a familiar
multi-operating system news web site near you.  Hang
tough, you'll get the url soon enough.

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 16:37:26
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 21:23:03
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Kevin Salisbury wrote:

> Tim Martin wrote:
>
> > >>Esther Schindler wrote:
>
> > >> Let's just say that I know more than is/was publicly available.
> > >>
> > >As do I Esther.  I chose to speak out about it, to let OS/2 users
> > >know and to not sweep it under the rug or protect the guilty.
> > >Sad that you can't do the same but par for the Esther course.
> >
> > Tim Martin
>
> Tim,
>
> I think your intentions are good - but is this post really constructive?
> No one wants to read constant bickering, especially about a topic as
> important as this one. If everything that you have posted in these
> newsgroups is correct - we will all know it soon enough. Please don't
> feel like your being attacked here, I just think that you should let the
> issue drop until everything that can be known, is. Why stir up the bee
> hive any more than you have too?
>
> Kevin Salisbury

So don't point this directly at me.  Point to Esther as well.
Esther continually plays this "you're a bad person Tim" routine
despite the fact that I am an OS/2 web master while she is a
Ziff Davis reporter.

Tim...



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

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

From: [e-mail]                           21-Sep-99 18:39:25
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 21:23:03
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: Kevin Salisbury <[e-mail]>


Tim Martin wrote:

> >>Esther Schindler wrote:

> >> Let's just say that I know more than is/was publicly available.
> >>
> >As do I Esther.  I chose to speak out about it, to let OS/2 users
> >know and to not sweep it under the rug or protect the guilty.
> >Sad that you can't do the same but par for the Esther course.
>
> Tim Martin

Tim,

I think your intentions are good - but is this post really constructive?
No one wants to read constant bickering, especially about a topic as
important as this one. If everything that you have posted in these
newsgroups is correct - we will all know it soon enough. Please don't
feel like your being attacked here, I just think that you should let the
issue drop until everything that can be known, is. Why stir up the bee
hive any more than you have too?

Kevin Salisbury

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                   21-Sep-99 20:14:18
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:00
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (David Kunz)

Karel Jansens (jansens_at_ibm_dot_net) wrote:

: Maybe, but it should now have become painfully clear that you are
: talking about things you know absolutely nothing about: OS/2 *will*
: install on +8.4GB drives (there's not enough room to install it on
: 8.4 MB drives). It just needs a little tweaking.

Just did it.  OS/2 boot partition's first, then a "small", 10gig HPFS
data partition :).  Try that with M$...

--
David Kunz
Operator error.  Replace operator and strike any key to continue...

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

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

From: [e-mail]                      21-Sep-99 23:00:00
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:00
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: Martin Nisshagen <[e-mail]>

Joe Malloy [] -> comp.os.os2.misc:

[ FT -> comp.os.os2.misc ]

» > I'm a home user, and IBM is providing me with Netscape 4.61, which isn't
» > what I call abandonment.
»
» Where is Netscape 4.61 for your beloved OS?  Why, nowhere to be seen!

Wrong actually (even if it might not look like that at first).

It's not found in the normal place at the Netscape download site as it's IBM
themselves who both develops and (as relevant in this case) also distributes
the Navigator (2) and Communicator (4.x) versions for OS/2 at their own site.

Best regards,

m a r t i n | n

--
Martin Nisshagen                 PGP 6.0: 0x45D423AC      K R A F T W E R K
:-)
CS/CE, Chalmers, Sweden          ICQ UIN: 689662          2 x 300A @ 450 MHz
d4nisse-at-dtek-chalmers-se      home2.sbbs2.com/mn
home2.sbbs2.com/mn/kw

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                21-Sep-99 15:59:26
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:00
Subj: Re: Judgement Day ... Stardock and OS/2

From: Dale Erwin <[e-mail]>

> Oh sure, I wouldnt argue this for a moment.  But lets be clear.  The
> one thing IBM has been very upfront about is the fact that they do not
> want, and are not interested in what they call 'the kitchentop
> market'.

The phrase 'kitchentop market' conjures up an image into my mind, but
that image does not include the small business operator.  I find it
sad that IBM sees fit to relegate them to that group.
--
Dale Erwin
3624 Coral Gables Drive
Dallas, Texas 75229-2619
[phone]

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

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

From: [e-mail]                    21-Sep-99 21:48:04
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:00
Subj: Re: Judgement Day ... Stardock and OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <[e-mail]>, Mooo <[e-mail]>
wrote:
>[e-mail] (Jason Bowen) wrote:
>
>>Tell me about Warp 4 out of the box on a 10 gig hard drive.
>
>Well, to be fair, tell me of your good experiences with installing NT
>on a HDD > 8GB out of the box?

To be fair I am not discussing NT, nor do I use it.  Linux installed just
fine for me though in case you are wondering.

>
>You have to patch the boot diskettes on OS/2 - its really no biggy.

So this is a selling point to grow the market?  An updated client with
more hardware supported out of the box would seem to be more of a vote of
confidence in the product by IBM.

>
>
>>>In fact, I'd go the other way and say that its never been easier to
>>>install OS/2.  You should have seen me frothing at the mouth with
>>>frustration back in '95 trying to get Warp 3 Red Spine to install!
>>
>>I just couldn't get 1024x768 at 75 hz, only 43 interlaced on a S3 Trio64v+
>>based card.  That was the last straw for me.
>
>Surely this is an S3 issue?  I've run this card, a 2MB version at
>1024x768 and 70Hz, I won't quibble over 5Hz, and never tried 75Hz or
>greater as my monitor won't support it.

Actually Windows and Linux did it find.  Look up posts on deja.com about
diamond stealth s3 based adapters.

>
>That particular card is really cheap, and does a great job for the
>money.  You want 1600x1200 in true colour at 85Hz?  Buy a Matrox, or
>another quality, higher end card.

I do have a matrox milleninum, which wasn't cheap at the time.  Why can't
I just choose my hardware based on what I want rather than what they tell
me to buy?  Having limited choices isn't a good argument.

>
>
>>>A lot depends on hardware choice.  If you choose carefully, and buy
>>>quality kit, it nearly always works.
>>
>>Why should you have to do this?  You are letting IBM dictate to you what
>>you should and shouldn't own hardware wise?
>
>The PC component market is very diverse, and an aweful lot of the
>clone parts are complete rubbish.  Why would IBM bother to provide
>drivers for hardware thats so flakey it will crash you're machine
>anyway?

Diamond is a big manufacturer.  I wasn't the only one with problems.

>
>A big generalisation I know, but I stand by my first remark - get
>quality kit, that is supported and you will have no problems.  You
>have to do this with BeOS, SCO Unix, Netware, Solaris x86 etc etc why
>not OS/2

Because it is declining in userbase and app availibility?

>
>
>Craig


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            21-Sep-99 21:23:27
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:00
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 15:05:24, [e-mail] wrote:

> jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) said:
>
> >Idiots shouldn't install or run OS/2. That's why Windows was invented
(this is
> >really true!).
>
> I knew this was boiling down to elitism.
>
> One self styled paragon said he hoped OS/2 stayed hard to use so the general
> public wouldn't spoil the OS/2 community with inferior intelligence.  Sad.
>
If it's elitism, it's coming from His Gatesness himself. Windows 3.0
was made mainly because OS/2 was considered to be too complex for the
ordinary user.

Oh yeah, and it required too expensive hardware. Kinda funny, if you
compare nowadays hardware requirements of OS/2 and Windows.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net
=======================================================
If we could have our cake _and_ eat it,
people would start whining about seconds.
=======================================================

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 21-Sep-99 21:50:04
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: Judgement Day ... Stardock and OS/2

From: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]>, Dale
Erwin <[e-mail]> writes:
>> Oh sure, I wouldnt argue this for a moment.  But lets be clear.  The
>> one thing IBM has been very upfront about is the fact that they do not
>> want, and are not interested in what they call 'the kitchentop
>> market'.
>
>The phrase 'kitchentop market' conjures up an image into my mind, but
>that image does not include the small business operator.  I find it
>sad that IBM sees fit to relegate them to that group.

amid all the talk of IBM and Big Business, it's easy to forget that not
so long ago IBM sold Selectric typewriters, sold them to any size
business, supported them well, and made money at it. There's just
more to this OS/2 thing than meets the eye,


>--
>Dale Erwin
>3624 Coral Gables Drive
>Dallas, Texas 75229-2619
>[phone]


skål !

----------------------------------------------------------
Härad Ængravvård
-----------------------------------------------------------

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 19:19:15
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Karel Jansens wrote:
>
> On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 15:03:36, Marty <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> > Karel Jansens wrote:
> > > Yes I do (marginally, because I don't have a Matrox card and I didn't
> > > use Linux at the time). I also remember the argument always was that
> > > writing drivers was too expensive... until someone in the know pointed
> > > out that writing a driver for a graphics card is essentially trivial
> > > work for a manufacturer. The tricle seemed to become a gentle stream
> > > after that.
> > >
> > > > The only reason things are changing now is because more companies are
> > > > finding Linux a viable platform.  Also, the "invention" of compiled
modules
> > > > a while back has helped the situation a bit, where drivers can be
> > > > distributed <without> source.  Open source is definitely not something
that
> > > > encourages hardware support for sure.
> > >
> > > I've heard that plenty times but I still don't get that argument. What
> > > in the name of seven hells would someone *do* with the source code for
> > > a hardware thingie if he didn't buy the hardware gizmo in the first
> > > place? Like I said above: it's not like video drivers are rocket
> > > science or something, so what would a manufacturer gain by keeping
> > > them locked away? "Gain" less customers?
> >
> > It's not want <someone> would do with the information.  The drivers for
> > the video card often have proprietary interfaces and details on how to
> > access them.  Possibly enough information to sufficiently be able to
> > reverse engineer some features or at least figure out which features are
> > present.  This information getting out could be devastating for a
> > company that just implemented a new feature if another competetor gets
> > their hands on it.  Businesses have to look out for their own
> > interests.  There's no gain from keeping the information locked away,
> > but it also prevents a possibly catastrophic loss of a technological
> > "edge."
> >
> But if you see how swiftly the open community manages to
> reverse-engineer those precious drivers, doesn't that hyper-protective
> attitude of the manufacturers strike you as a bit - ehrmm - stoopid?

How many drivers do you know of are the product of reverse engineering?
Name a few.  Reverse engineering entails having minimal to no
specifications and figuring out how something works.  I don't think I've
ever seen this happen in hardware drivers.  Perhaps Scitech comes close,
but even they can't get by without a bit of assistance from the video card
manufacturers.

> Besides, I'd really love to see someone copying a video board from the
> software drivers. A genius like that should be making
> quantum-computers, not gameblasters <G>.

It's not about copying a video card.  It's about seeing, "Hey... Matrox has
some 3D functionality in their 2D board designs.  Maybe we should do that
too."  It's about not giving new ideas a time period in which the inventing
company can profit from them by having a technical edge.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                             21-Sep-99 17:11:05
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: Who to believe?  [follow-up]

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>


"David T. Johnson" wrote:
>
> Did the meeting happen where IBM nixed the "Stardocker 2000" OS/2
> client?  AFAIK, Brad has offered no proof.  No names of IBM officials
> who were present.  No location where the meeting was held or its time.
> Brad offers only his statement which is apparently supported by a couple
> of Stardock employees who were not actually present at the meeting but
> who heard details of it from Brad.
>
> People who maintain that the meeting did not happen claim that Stephen
> King, an IBM official who attended Warp Expo West, stated informally to
> them that the planned monthly meeting was not held due to weather
> problems created by Hurricane Floyd.  This is hearsay, of course but
> still interesting.  Brad has not addressed this...

I found another 9/19/99 post by Brad Wardell that DOES address an
earlier meeting.  Brad says:

> The bottom
> line is that the decision on the OS/2 client *was* made last week.  Whether
> that decision was made at the IPMT meeting or some meeting that took place
> earlier in the week that we are unaware of is kind of irrelevant wouldn't
> you agree?  The bottom line is that IBM did make a decision last week.

The reference by Brad here to the earlier meeting is pretty vague.  Brad
says it occurred 'earlier in the week' and implies that he was unaware
of it.  This sounds like Brad was not actually involved in the IBM
decision-making process but was only notified after the fact.  And since
the big decision apparently occurred several days BEFORE the meeting
where Brad was expecting it, it suggests that Brad was not very close to
the IBM process.  And it is hard to see here where Brad would have done
the 'pleading' to the IBM team that he talks about.  Maybe the pleading
happened at a meeting prior to the pre-meeting meeting.  And it sounds
like after the big decision was made, someone at IBM dropped a dime and
rang up Brad to give him the bad news without telling him that the
decision was actually made days earlier.  Again, it doesn't sound like
Brad is privy to any inside information at IBM, certainly not their
strategic plans.  Finally, who was the IBM person(s) who called up Brad
and gave him this bad news?  Why can't he tell us?

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          21-Sep-99 23:18:14
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Timothy J. Bogart)

In article <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-CJQm6ZzJZtpd@localhost>,
Karel Jansens <jansens_at_ibm_dot_net> wrote:
>On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 15:05:24, [e-mail] wrote:
>
>> jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) said:
>>
>> >Idiots shouldn't install or run OS/2. That's why Windows was invented
(this is
>> >really true!).
>>
>> I knew this was boiling down to elitism.
>>
>> One self styled paragon said he hoped OS/2 stayed hard to use so the
general
>> public wouldn't spoil the OS/2 community with inferior intelligence.  Sad.
>>
>If it's elitism, it's coming from His Gatesness himself. Windows 3.0
>was made mainly because OS/2 was considered to be too complex for the
>ordinary user.
>
>Oh yeah, and it required too expensive hardware. Kinda funny, if you
>compare nowadays hardware requirements of OS/2 and Windows.
>
>Karel Jansens
>jansens_at_ibm_dot_net
>=======================================================
>If we could have our cake _and_ eat it,
>people would start whining about seconds.
>=======================================================

For some reason this reminds me of the days when I forced a group
into using OS/2 rather than win.30/3.1 (right about GA, as I recall).
One of the loudest screamers about hanging on to her "pretty windows"
almost stumped me.

"You will be able to do more than one thing at a time with more
reliability".

" I don't do more than one thing at a time".

Elitism, or experience?   8-)

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

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

From: [e-mail]                     22-Sep-99 00:13:06
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

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

On 21 Sep 1999 06:50:42 GMT, Mirage Media wrote:

>> I can buy a CD that has "NT 4, SP3" on it.  Is there such a CD as "OS/2
>Warp
>> 4, FP5"?
>> ---
>
>Actually, yes, you can. I just got mione from Mensys:

Nope - not what I was referring to.  I'm talking about a CD where I do *one*
install, and get OS/2 Warp 4, FP5 installed.  One step.  Preferably with Java
1.1.7+, etc.  All latest level.  (TCP/IP 4.0 with latest fixes, etc. - not
TCP/IP 4.1 which is a separate product.)

---
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]                       22-Sep-99 01:28:09
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: Stardock & Brad

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

Tim,

Have you considered that they may be wanting to convert windows users into
OS/2 users without them knowing! LOL

Listen chump, as a company Stardock HAS THE RIGHT to survive in a capitalist
society, and if that means branching into other OS's then fine... it means
by doing so that they can still sell OS/2 software.

Would you prefer them to remain OS/2 totally and then go belly up? And then
you will have one less vendor.

Please embrace REALITY not IDEOLOGY..


Chris


Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
> Wayne Johnson wrote:
>
> > I have to admit, Stardock has made the <forced> trasnition from OS/2 to
WIN9X
> > MUCH better.  I still miss OS/2 but Object Desktop makes it a little
less
> > painfull.
> >
> > Wayne
>
> That's been Stardock's plan for quite sometime.  Move
> their OS/2 users to Microsoft operating systems and
> give Stardock a built-in customer base.  Brad can then
> market Stardock as a 'player' in the world of competing
> Microsoft software developers.
>
> People think I'm crazy when I say this publicly but it
> has been the Brad Wardell/Stardock strategy ever
> since they themselves gave up OS/2 and started
> developing of Microsoft only systems.
>
> Brad will not release his present OS/2 applications to
> the OS/2 community for free download.  As long as
> he can keep selling them to OS/2 users he's got that
> chance to convert them to his Microsoft way of thinking.
>
> Most see this as the Microsoft Fox disguised in the
> OS/2 Sheep skin.
>
> 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: Usenet: Customer of Planet Online (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                       22-Sep-99 01:34:10
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: The Madness of King Tim

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

Time Martin.

Poor chap.

He sees conspiracies in all actions he encounters. It must be torture to go
out to the shop to buy food (assuming he does venture outside and not stuck
in his little bubble of hate).
He must see the onions 'looking' at him, and the way the check out beeps,
surely that must be a signal to THEM and how can he go past the electronics
shop when there are video cameras in the window... TAPING HIM...LOOKING AT
HIM...ARGH

He imagines that Brad Wardell is the devil and Stardock has 666 in the
company logo.

Poor chap.



Chris


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

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

From: [e-mail]                       22-Sep-99 01:40:24
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: The Madness of King Tim

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

> Time Martin.

LOL

Freaudian slip... in a way Tim is stuck in a time warp, where the golden
days of OS/2 is lived over and over - he does not willingly embrace the
harsh economic reality of the contemporary software scene.



Chris


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

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

From: [e-mail]                      21-Sep-99 20:06:22
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: It doesn't bother people that a new client won't be confirmed?

From: Jason <[e-mail]>

Brad BARCLAY <[e-mail]> wrote:
: Jason wrote:
:> But OS/2 may be needed to be patched for the common customers, and that's
:> who we are talking about.  How many of us in this newsgroup own large
:> corporations?  I don't.  My business currently runs on one local computer
:> and IBM ain't going to patch didly for me.  I have to patch the OS/2 Warp
:> 4 install disks on my own in order for it to use my SCSI card, which in
:> turns controls my CD-ROM and Hard Drive.

:     And when did you buy your CD?  And was it bought form an old stock from
: some reseller?

I imagine idelible blue doesn't get too many moldy copies of warp 4
laying around.

:     If you're using a WARP v4 CD from its initial release, then I don't
: think you have any reason to complain:  even the original Windows 95
: users need patches to their install diskettes to install on modern
: hardware (and often even that isn't good enough - ever try installing
: FAT16 onto an 8.4Gb hard drive???  That's why MS invented FAT32, wihch
: isn't part of Win95).

I bought my second OS/2 Warp 4 OEM in January 1999 with a new computer.  The
version that came with it was incompatible with the hardware on the
computer without patching the install disks.

:     If you ordered your CD form IBM within the last couple of months, then
: you should be okay (according to the info I have).  But don't complain
: that you need to patch a CD and diskette set that's nearl 4 years old
: now.

I would be quite suprised if even the copy of Warp 4 I bought when it was
first released was four years old ;-)

-Jason

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

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

From: [e-mail]                              22-Sep-99 00:20:07
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Dan Casey post

From: [e-mail]

Dan,

I find myself scanning the newsgroups for a post from you.
Hopefully, you can find the truth out of the recent
flury of activity here.

Keith Cotroneo
[e-mail]

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 17:26:08
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Esther Schindler wrote:

> On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 16:23:10, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> | Had Brad Wardell
> | simply kept his mouth shut, kept his negotions private
> | and out of the newsgroups and made no public statement
> | in which he purports to speak for IBM and declares, in
> | essence, that OS/2 is dead then that one person would
> | still be using OS/2.  But thousands of people read these
> | newsgroups all around the world  And thousands more
> | read the public OS/2 web sites.  Yet they don't post here,
> | they don't let their names be known.  It is those thousands
> | who will take Brad's false message to heart and walk
> | quietly away from OS/2.
>
> Oh but Tim... Brad Wardell _didn't_ make a statement on the public
> newsgroups. He posted his message on Stardock's own newsgroups,

You poor thing, you are deprived aren't you?  Unlike Warp City,
which is private and open only to members, Stardock's own
newsserver is open to the public, thus that makes them publicly
accessible in every sense of the word.  You're certainly not now
(backpeddling on behalf of Brad) and claiming his message was
private and not meant for public publication - are you?  If so,
thank God Warp City didn't run with it.  Brad would be suing me
as we speak!  Gee, should WarpCast, OS2.ORG, MACarlo and all
the other public OS/2 web sites be consulting with their legal
staff?

> reporting on a conversation he had with IBM employees regarding a
> business relationship that had been proposed. (FWIW, I haven't been
> able to get to the Stardock newsgroup; my ISP doesn't seem to make it
> available.)

It is public Esther.  Everyone has access to it - even me.

> YOU, on the other hand, are the one making a big deal about it in the
> newsgroups. YOU are the one spreading the poison, but claiming that
> the poison was manufactured elsewhere.

I am not the one who issued a public statement which is carried
on every OS/2 public web site which purports to speak for IBM
and says, in essence, OS/2 is dead.  Brad Wardell of Stardock
did that.  And you are here trying as hard as you can to cover
up for him, to wash it away, claim it means nothing, and attacking
those who bring it to the forefront.  Ziff Davis writers are known
for such tactics when it comes to protecting/covering up for
Microsoft.

> Who's the one disseminating chaos and doubt about OS/2? It isn't Brad;
> he hasn't said anything publicly about the subject at all.

Word Up Esther.  It is called "hit and run".  I've never owned
a car but I hear about road rage all the time and I think your
seeing the results of a petty pea shooter pinging those driving
OS/2 down the information highway from behind a public bush.

It goes like this:  Place a sure to inflame the world of OS/2 users
statement signed by the self-proclaimed Number One OS/2
Software Developer in an inconspicuous  -but very public- place
and ping away!  That will show IBM!

Tim...


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

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 21:50:25
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Tim Martin wrote:
>
> You poor thing, you are deprived aren't you?  Unlike Warp City,
> which is private and open only to members,

Does he pay for this advertising space?  Someone should write to
abuse@tims_real_provider.com.  I bet he'd be on a short leash if someone
did.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            21-Sep-99 21:06:25
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: (1/2) Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: [e-mail] (David H. McCoy)

In article <7s6ub5$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
David H. McCoy ([e-mail]) wrote:
: >Older hardware, certainly.  There is no sense getting stuck in the upgrade
: >cycle when all that it is for is to make money for software developers.

: With you guys is always an upgrade cycle. You ever stop to consider that
: people buy what they think they need? It seems to me that the only people
who
: shout "upgrade cycle" are those without software.

>No, I am serious about the upgrade cycle.  Though I you are probably correct
>about my learning to hate the upgrade cycle because of the lack of popular
>applications for OS/2.  I also learned about it because I am cheap.  I also
>learned about it when I picked up an 8MHz, 16-bit Macintosh SE and figured
>out that it fulfill most of my needs just as easily as a bleeding edge
>machine.  So there are lots of contributing factors.

That's good for you. My needs are a bit more advanced. I work on my box as
well
as play and an 8mhz machine is far below my needs.

>Then again, you are the one who suggested that people should buy what they
>need.

Indeed. Why is why I don't accuse you of upgrade-phobia.

>: >With regards to the faults of Windows NT, I will only list responsiveness
>: >(or the lack thereof).  Otherwise, I have not used it enough to comment.
>: >Well, I shouldn't even say that.  I did have some time to play with one NT
>: >system.  But that was 3 years ago, and on version 3.5 or so (my memory is
>: >failing me).  Outside of speed, I don't recall having any problems with
>: >that machine.  In fact, it was a great deal better than using the plain
>: >DOS box.  (Or had they installed 95 by that point?  I forget.)

>: Don't you think that a couple of uses 3 years ago is a bit much on which to

>: draw such a conclusion. You are woefully out of date. I used OS/2 from 2.1
to
>: Warp 4, and I once had the same opinion as you. Three years ago. IMO, when
I

>Sorry, but my wordiness got in the way of my clarity.  I have used recent
>versions of NT (yes, version 4).  Those are the versions which I have used
>rather infrequently.  Probably about a few dozen time.  And if you think
>that NT is so much more stable, well consider this: OS stability isn't worth
>a damn when the applications are so flakey that they are terminated by NT.
>I rarely had this problem under NT.  (In particular, my problems were with
>Guide 6.  It was next to impossible to chart the star cluster which I wanted
>to observe or reduce data for.)

I would rather have an OS that shutdown flakey apps, than have flakey apps
that
run and crash or hang my machine. Besides, most apps don't have that problem.

>It was with version 3.5 for which I had the most experience.  In particular,
>programming experience.  But you are correct: such knowledge is woefully
>out of date.  (Unless, of course, you are a person who is satisfied with
>an older version of NT.  Well, I'm not.  :-)

Neither am I!

>: tried NT 4 on my OS/2 box, a P166 with 64 megs of ram, they are at similar
>: speeds in terms of program launching, downloading, and multitasking.

>Congratulations.  But my processor was one generation and 116MHz slower.
>It also had half the RAM and 2/3 the memory bus speed.  Oh, and it was
>about as responsive (subjective term) as NT on these blazingly fast and
>astoundingly expensive machines I see every day.  Mind you, I was using
>older software.  Mind you, I find that when you are in the upgrade cycle
>you are in it good!  (Ie. latest OS *and* applications.)

You find because you'd rather make inaccurate comments than assume I know what

my needs better than you. That is a failing shared by most of your OS/2 using
fellows.

Why do you supposed that is? Clearly, whatever it is that you do can be
acheived using a 3 year old operating system with poor application and
hardware
support. Why do you supposed that others must have the same static, stagnant
needs?

>: my hardware worked better. For example, my then SB16 PnP under OS/2, could
>: not be shared between Win-OS/2 sessions and OS/2. In fact, if one Win-OS/2
>: session grabbed the soundcard, nothing else could use it.

>If you don't mind my bothering, Creative Labs support for OS/2 was pathetic.
>That thought will never leave my mind after picking up an el-cheapo Crystal
>sound card, and seeing the performance of my machine go through the roof for
>audio applications.  Applications which consumed virtually all of the CPU
>cycles with my SBPro (and with lousy output at that) were down to 20% of the
>CPU cycles with that el-cheapo sound card.

I never had any apps under OS/2 consume so much CPU win utilizing sound.
However, I won't condemn Creative Labs, for they were hardly alone with
respect
to poor OS/2 support. Their Windows support is excellent. Timely drivers, they

are stable, fast, and they even add new features. They are still adding
features to their Voodoo2 card. And look at their Unified driver work for
running Glide under the TnT.

They have great support.

>When you work on an OS/2 system, you buy your hardware for OS/2.

That is what separates you from me. I buy hardware for me, not an operating
system. I prefer to have my needs(or desires for that matter) dictate what I
use.

>You most certainly do not buy hardware and simply expect it to work.

Again, you are completely out of touch. I buy hardware and expect it to work.
Simple as that. My time is to valuble to spend fighting my computer to get
some
component to work. That is ridculous.

>You learn to
>live with that and, you know what, it doesn't matter when you care more
>about functionality than whiz-bang features.

Lower functionality you mean. 9.9 times out of 10, if the hardware has OS/2
support it does less than the OS/2 version. I've read of people in this group
who purchased a Diamond TNT2 card, just like the one I have and are running
that card with Gradd drivers at 640x480 and 60mhz. You may consider 1240x1024
at 85mhz whiz-bang, but I consider that a necessity on a 20' monitor. It is
ludicrous to spend so much and get so little in return.

It seems to me that if you truly cared about functionality, you would use a
system that all but guarantees it, and that OS, increasingly, is not OS/2.


>: NT(and now Win2k), play MP3s using RealJukebox, listen to SpinnerPlus, and
>: still get system alerts. Also, things like my Ziptools existed for NT

>MP3's and RealAudio and SpinnerPlus (what?) are non-issues.

For you.

>If I want to
>listen to audio, I listen to the radio.  Radio's tend not to crash, after
>all.  I can allso take my radio everywhere.  (My computer with an Internet
>connection, not.)  Perhaps this is because I care more about getting content
>from my computer.  (The sound card stuff was only playing with module files.)

Fine. I do both. I paid for my computer, so why not exploit it for everything
it can do. Radios lose signals, stations play annoying commericals. I neither
lose signals, nor have to endure commericals when I listen to MP3. And whem
MP3s are loaded on a Rio, it can go anywhere, play music in the order I wish
and doesn't skip or degrade.  I care about getting as much use out of my
computer as I can.

You care more about catering to the limitations of system, than expanding it.
Personally, music relaxes me.


>As for ZipTools, if you are refering to the software for the Iomega Zip
>drive, who really cares.

People who have zipdrives, like I do, care.

>The Zip drive works fine on most platforms which
>support removable hard drives.  This ranges from the Apple II, to Macintosh,
>to OS/2, and yes, to Windows.  (And Linux, NetBSD, etc..)

It works better under Windows than OS/2. Try telling that philosophy to people

currently struggling to get the Win3.1 ziptools to work. Under OS/2, you can
use it. Under Windows, you can write protect your disks, password protect, and

with no problems whatsoever, use NTFS which has file level security and
compression, as well as a more robust file system to your disk.

Functionality, remember?

>: like my generic PCI soundcard and my Diamond TNT2 Ultra videocard. And
unlike
>: OS/2 it seems, it can recognized drives greater than 8 gig.

>I lost respect for Diamond products when I discovered that the $100 dollar
>VGA card that I bought was really a $50 Cirrus Logic based card.  OTOH, it
>made life really easy when it came to OS/2 and Linux driver support.  ;-)

Sure. Since I have more current dealings, with my TnT2 Ultra, I've found
Diamond does a great job. Fast card and great driver support.

>8Gb drives have never been an issue on my end.  My desires don't consume
>more than 1Gb on all of my machines.

Fine. I needs and desires consume more. As I've said in the past, if your
needs
are small, OS/2 isn't all that bad, but it doesn't change as your needs do.

>: >Windows 95 is another story altogether.  There my experiences go from
so=so
>: >to just plain sour.  It ranges from loosing the system while programming

>: Why is it that most people don't have such problems. When I worked at AT&T,

>: hundreds of people used Win95. Dozens were around me and none, to my
>: knowledge, complained of such widespread problems.

>Humph.  Don't try telling that to somebody who has supported these machines.
>I was involved with the Win95 rollout at a ScotiaBank call center.  (Guess
>what, I was selected for my knowledge of Win95.  Must have been spending
>too much time in OS-DEBATE.)  Installation was hellish on most machines,
>the network had a lot of fun freezing from time to time (we learned that
>Win95 and Win 3.x would not co-operate on the same controller); and
>certain machines would fail at unexpected times, for unexpected reasons
>and for unknown durations.  Most of these problems were solved in time,
>but many simply became parts of the support regiment.

YMMV


>Even if they were simply install issues, I have said this before and I will
>say this again: there is too little time in my life to waste on the tedium
>of getting something which should work to work.  The only issue that I have
>ever run into with OS/2 was finding the appropriate drivers, then installing.
>Not so for Win95.  (Debating over OSes is, OTOH, fun.  So I choose to do
>this.  ;-)

Huh? This is your statement "You most certainly do not buy hardware and simply

expect it to work." Sounds to me like you enjoy the tedium. Sorry, but if you
find installing hardware harder under OS/2 than Windows 95 harder when
practically every piece of hardware made has Win9x support in the box, and
OS/2
is practically its opposite WRT support, well, you think that you are the
extreme exception.

>: Heck, my mother-in-law is almost
>: totally computer illiterate and has called me about problems like my mouse
>: doesn't work. A problem caused by the fact that it was 4 years old, BTW.

>Hum, I use decade old ADB keyboards and mice (on M*cs and my IIgs) every
>day.  Just shows that PC quality is job #1.  This probably has a lot to do
>with why my PC is on the shelf, and I am telneting into servers with a M*c
>right now.  (Curse co-operative multitasking!  It wastes my time.)

>: >But it is sure a devil to maintain.  As I said before, I do not have that
>: >much time to devote to one computer.  If you do, have your fun maintaining
>: >your system.  I like having my system available for work when there is
>: >work to do, and available for tinkering when there is time to spare.

>: I don't agree. Every company I've ever worked at has some kind of Unix box
>: and for the most part, you left them alone. You cannot find a more reliable

>: system.  For the most part, you just leave them alone.

>Once it is running, maybe.  Perhaps I am confusing installation with
>maintenance.  So let me rephrase that: setting up UNIX and its associated
>applications is a devil.

That depends of the app.

>And servers are a different matter anyway.  Web servers and FTP servers
>use a fixed set of software.  Servers which involve some form of user
>interaction my be very maintenace intensive.  Security, application support,
>account support, etc..  Not an issue for home users though.  But getting
>the thing running properly is still a lot of work for users which have to
>figure out how to use the software in the first place.

Which is why, generally speaking, Windows is a better choice than any other
system out there, IMO.

>: >As for the reliability of UNIX over OS/2: from my meager accomplishments
>: >with Linux and NetBSD, it seems to me that OS/2 is more reliable from the
>: >users point of view.  For example: running DeScribe simply requires that
>: >the OS and progam are installed properly.  For something like LaTeX you
>: >really need the OS, a text editor, LaTeX, ghostview, (ghostscript?), and
>: >lpd to be installed properly.  Never mind the need of the user to know
>: >how to use all of those programs properly.

>: Please. No offense, but you don't know what you are talking about. You keep

>: making claims of reliability and response for systems on which you
obviously
>: have little experience. Unix boxes can run hundreds of concurrent users.
OS/2
>: cannot come close to touching it.

>OS/2 and UNIX boxes also have very different levels of user interaction,
>and of output quality.  But honestly, I have hundreds or even thousands of
>hours of experience with most of the platforms which I discuss.  In the
>case of OS/2, it is from actually maintaining my own system.  Same with
>Windows 3.x, MacOS, and NetBSD.  Let's not forget that I also supported a
>Win95 network professionally.  (Not administered, thank god.)  NT is the
>big exception here.


I've got similar experience(developer) in many Unix flavors(HPUX,Clix, AIX,
Aux, SunOS, Solaris,Sco) as well as my own OS/2 box and now one Win2k box with

an NT Server box at home. IMO, comparing OS/2 and Windows NT(2k), NT is more
reliable, and more easily maintainable.

>On big systems, most of my reflections are from the user end.  The system
>that I am writing this on is running an uncounted number of processes in
>about 100 logins.  But I do not ask my computers to do that.  The fastest
>computer which I ever owned was 50MHz.  Not very realisting for supporing
>hundreds of concurrent logins.

But good for about 20. When I was at one company, we had a C++ training class.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                            21-Sep-99 21:06:25
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: (2/2) Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

The instructor had 18 of us on a 16 meg 486DX50 running Linux.

>No offense taken.

>: It sound like you are talking about ease of use, and Windows has it over
OS/2
>: there. Better hardware support, no-brainer software purchases, and
>: installshield make for the best user experience.

>Ease of use is slightly different from maintaining your own system.  M*c
>can probably rip the heart out of Win95 and OS/2 when it comes to that,
>though OS/2 is certainly easier to maintain that Win95.  Hardware support
>is also a non-issue if you try to stick with what you have, and buy for
>the operating system.  Cuts back on the options, sure.  But it does not
>cut back on the options enough to discount OS/2.

Clearly for most of the computing world, that is not the case.  My needs are
dynamic. They change. If yours(not yours personally, but in the general sense)

do not, then with 3-5 year old equipment, OS/2, heck, most OSses are good
choices. However, I do not like being constrained or having my options
limited.
I selected OS/2 over Win31 because it gave me more options. Better
multitasking, stability, long filenames, WPS, and pretty good hardware
support.
I left OS/2 for NT because NT offered similar benefits over OS/2 and even
better support.

Again, I don't buy for an OS, I buy for me.

>(For one, I do not care
>about 3D accelerators, 3D audio, AGP, or other stuff which is clearly
>intended for the gaming market -- and a few professionals.)  No brainer
>software purchases also leave you with quite brainless software.

Wrong. No-brainer means you can buy what you need or what you like and it will

work. As for 3d, fine. I have many hobbies, v-ball, b-ball, reading, drawing,
biking, coding, and I play some games. Windows gives me the opportunity to do
what I like.


>I have
>seen some of the junk passed off as software (just check the latest version
>of Microsoft Office), and all it does is push you into buying a new machine.

Heh. That inlaw I mentioned is running Win95 and Office 97 on my old 486DX/50.

No new machine needed.

>Installshield is also pretty unfriendly when compared to M*c install
>software and even some of the installers that I have used in OS/2.

Like what? Most OS/2 programs barely have what can qualify as an install
program. Sun liked installshield so much that they asked the makers to create
one for Solaris. Installshield is the very definion of friendly. It gives you
a
working default, but allows you to put what you want, where you want. It
allows
people who can barely comprehend computers, install drivers and software with
only several mouse-clicks.

OS/2 needs such a program.

>About the only advantage of using Win95 (from the perspective of most
>of the people I know), is seeing Byron tuck his tail between his legs,
>cowering and submitting an answer to your support question.

>And my support is not all that bad.  I can even handle it over the
>telephone after not touching a Win95 system for four months.   (Though I
>have come into contact with several NT machines in that period, humm.)

--
Stopped (SIGTTOU)         byron.
$

If you say so...

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 21:57:21
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: OS2NetLabs Head: "OS/2 is Dead"

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Tim Martin wrote:
>
> The most disappointing quote of the entire interview comes
> from the chief banana over at OS/2 NetLabs.  He is quoted
> as saying ""OS/2 is dead. Once again. Definitely this time,"
> said Adrian Geschwind, "
>
> Any comment on this Adrian?

Good idea Tim... let's encourage people to flame OS/2 Netlabs, home of OS/2
freeware projects like Project Odin.  Excellent idea.  Which operating
system do you advocate again?  You never cease to confound my common sense.

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 22-Sep-99 00:59:26
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: Did Brad make me drop OS/2? was: Re: Netlabs statement about the

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Jason wrote:
>
> In comp.os.os2.advocacy Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> : I do not accept anecdotal stories from strangers as found in
> : USENET as proof.  Why?  Because email addresses are so easy
> : to counterfeit.  That may be arbitrary on my part, but I
> : believe it is quite reasonable.  Now, if there is incontrovertible
> : evidence from a source other than USENET, then I will consider
> : the USENET data in light of the other information.  But, to
> : solely rely upon USENET is not, in my estimation, sufficient
> : for establishing your position.
>
> I'm one of the people who posted that I was going to "drop" OS/2.  You
> can email me to prove my address is not fake.  If you check the Stardock
> news server you'll find many people who are or now are considering to
> drop OS/2.  These have been people who have been pro-OS/2.

The following paragraphs completely back up my claim that the SD decision
was a part of the decision to move on from OS/2, BUT the SD decision and
Brad Wardell in particular are not the SOLE reason for leaving OS/2.

>
> But this does not tell the whole story.  I had previously decided that I
> was going to start migrating to a Linux envirement.  But when Stardock
> announced the "Stardock OS/2" proposal, I then dropped my Linux plans to
> foucs on OS/2 once again, and was thinking about what products and
> services I could produce to coincide with "Stardock OS/2" and took the
> position that this was going to happen.
>
> Now that Brad has announced that "Stardock OS/2" is not going to come
> out, I fall back to my previous beleif which was that IBM is not going to
> do a Warp 5 client.
>
> Has Brad Wardell caused me to "drop" OS/2?  No, IBM has caused me to "drop"
> OS/2 by the lack of information and by the information that it has
> released.  Brad Wardell only caused me to hold onto OS/2 for several
> months longer.
>
> By "drop" I mean that I'm going to make Linux my primary OS, while
> OS/2 and Windows become secondary OS's.
>
> -Jason
>
> : It is too easy for Microsofties to mount an anti-OS2 FUD
> : campaign on USENET referencing the SD decision.  That tactic
> : has been used before by Microsofties.  Do you see why I won't
> : accept USENET alone?


Thanks for the post.

Bennie Nelson

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

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

From: [e-mail]                      22-Sep-99 01:50:14
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
  "Joe Malloy" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> Something vaporous like a <[e-mail]> tholened:
>
> > I'm a home user, and IBM is providing me with Netscape 4.61, which
> > isn't what I call abandonment.
>
> Where is Netscape 4.61 for your beloved OS?  Why, nowhere to be seen!

Try here:
ftp://service5.boulder.ibm.com/software/asd/ns40/en_us/comm461.exe

Went GA on the 20th... Shesh, you could at least *try* and stay
current...

--
-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/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you do
(1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                 21-Sep-99 20:59:26
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

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

On 20 Sep 1999 14:12:37 GMT, rj friedman wrote:

> Has it not occurred to anyone that the reason Stardock was turned down was
because they were
>not able to come up with a sufficiently convincing business plan that would
persuade IBM it was worth
>their while to entrust OS/2 to Stardock?

Yes.

OTOH, it is also possible that folks at IBM have bought and installed some of
the Stardock supplied
software *already* available.

Steve



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: ExecPC Internet - Milwaukee, WI (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                     22-Sep-99 01:56:21
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: [e-mail] (Byron Desnoyers Winmill)

David H. McCoy ([e-mail]) wrote:

On the SIQ problem:
: >Ah, now that is a problem with OS/2.  There was a fix, albeit an
: >unsatisfying one, in the later Warp 3 fixpaks.

: That wasn't much of fix. I noticed no difference before fixpack 17 or after
: Warp 4.

There was a clear difference, after a second or so of waiting.  The lack
of responsiveness is what I meant by dissatisfying, not that the solution
did not work.

: >To my knowledge, it did not have any impact upon the background processes
: >(outside of intercepting input).  And it could also be attributed to poor
: >programming on the applications end.  (Remember, the applications are
: >supposed to check the Queue regularly!)

: Are you serious? Not locking up the OS sounds good in a debate, but does no
: good when you are locked out of the operating system. Who cares if I could
: still print in the background when I can't print, can't launch applications,

: basically, can't use the system. Also, the OS should protect itself from
: errant apps. That is foolishness to blame the application because the OS
: isn't robus enough to do the job.

Ah, now there is a line that I loved to use in the old days.  (Ie. Before
NT caught on.)  But running processes in the background is sufficent to get
complete automated jobs.  It is also sufficent for third party software to
handle the problem.  WatchCat seemed to be a good way to kill errant
applications.

: Sure there are easy work arounds. Reboot, but that is hardly an optimal
: solution.

There are other solutions.  The application of FixPak 16 (I believe) is one,
and third party software is another.  You are only fooling yourself when you
say that rebooting was the only way . . .

--
Stopped (SIGTTOU)         byron.
$

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         22-Sep-99 03:12:14
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Bennie Nelson writes:

>> Bennie Nelson writes [to Jeff Glatt]:

>>> You've taken to using Dave Tholen's words to convey your meaning.  That's
>>> risky, don't you think?  People might actually say that because you're
>>> using his words, that means you're just like him.  In fact, that's the
>>> kind of thing you've done in the past.

>> Except I haven't engaged in libel the way Jeff did recently.

> I guess I could have put <g> at the end of that paragraph.

You could have.

> I wasn't trying to imply the reverse situation: that you are like Jeff.

I still don't agree with the non-reverse situation.

> I was simply pointing out to Jeff a ramification of a tactic he'd used
> earlier.  I'd cited the fact that some people believe that playing cards
> is immoral.  He used that to assert that I was allied with those people
> as an active supporter, and moreover, that I was just like those people.
>
> Given his train of thought: since he'd cited your words, that makes
> him a Tholen supporter, and furthermore, it means he's just like you.

There are significant differences between me and Jeff.

>>> You really need to be careful what you post here.

>> Yes, he should.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         22-Sep-99 03:17:13
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Jason Bowen writes:

>>>>>>>>> I have never had a probelm with Windows anything not supporting
hardware.

>>>>>>>> I've read about people complaining about how Microsoft refused to
help
>>>>>>>> out with an NT problem because the hardware they were using wasn't on
>>>>>>>> the HCL.

>>>>>>> I've heard that OS/2 users have to patch their install disks to
install
>>>>>>> Warp on new hardware.

>>>>>> I didn't have to.  What you've heard doesn't change the fact that
Windows
>>>>>> isn't a panacea to hardware support problems.

>>>>> Why are you making that statement?  I didn't make any claim about
Windows.

>>>> Incorrect:
>>>>
>>>> JB] I have never had a probelm with Windows anything not supporting
hardware.
>>>>
>>>> It's right at the top of the article, Jason.
>>>>
>>>> See Message-ID: <7s5qf7$[e-mail]> for the original.

>>> I didn't claim it was a panacea.

>> You did say that you never had a problem.

> I didn't claim it was a panacea for others,

Nor did I claim that you did make such a claim for others.

> you brought up the panacea issue.

You brought up the "never had a problem...supporting hardware" issue.

> Why did you bring it up?

Because you brought up the "never had a problem...supporting hardware" issue.

> It seems irrelevant to bring it up seeing as I wasn't calling windows a
> panacea,

What seems to you is irrelevant.  Never having a problem sure makes it
sound like a panacea to you.

> just relating my experiences.

Which don't necessarily apply to anyone else.

> I do know that your experience doesn't change the fact that
> OS/2 isn't a panacea to hardware support problems problems.

What are "problems problems"?

>>> I said I didn't have problems with it.

>> It?  What is "it"?  Could it be the "it" you didn't make any claim about?
>> I see you didn't bother to address the evidence for you being wrong.

> I talked about my experiences with it.

It?  What is "it"?  Could it be the "it" you didn't make any claim about?
I see you didn't bother to address the evidence for you being wrong.

> I didn't make a claim for others or for it being a panacea for others.

Doesn't change the fact that you did make a claim about Windows, contrary
to your more recent claim.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                         22-Sep-99 03:13:27
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

[e-mail] writes:

>>> Yes, you can install OS/2 on a large drive as it comes out of the
>>> package, but it won't access all of that drive.

>> That wasn't the issue.

> (Ah, so you are being cute

Incorrect.

> - it all depends on what the definition of "is" is.)

Incorrect.

> There is no "the issue" per se, because there are many issues.

I was addressing one particular issue.

> But if you lay that point aside, it IS "the issue."

What is "it"?

> IBM has left OS/2 on the market as a jigsaw puzzle.

Non sequitur.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                21-Sep-99 22:01:23
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: Judgement Day ... Stardock and OS/2

From: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Mooo) said:

>I won't argue the point that OS/2 is a PnP OS, as in, you plug in the CD and
>ten minutes later you're playing quake :)

Come now.  Let's not say that anybody who is not deep into computers is a game
freak.  Let me just make this point.  I had my day.  I've written software
from
BASIC to assembler - even ML.  I had my fun.  But this kind of background
should
not be required to run a good OS.

>Not many of these 'average' users will be able to produce a useful Linux
>desktop, or SCO, or most of the other OS's out there either.

Precisely why I blame IBM.  They have it in their power to make a major
contribution to the field, which now offers either junk or complication or
both
- and hardly have to turn a finger to do so.  It would make hardly a ripple in
their bottom line, up or down.  But they won't, because it won't bloat their
bottom line.

Okay, so that's a common attitude.

Jim L
Remove XX from address to Email
Crooks and kooks will get guns regardless of laws.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                     22-Sep-99 03:26:12
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: [e-mail] (Byron Desnoyers Winmill)

David H. McCoy ([e-mail]) wrote:

: >No, I am serious about the upgrade cycle. ...  I also learned
: >about it when I picked up an 8MHz, 16-bit Macintosh SE and figured
: >out that it fulfill most of my needs just as easily as a bleeding edge
: >machine.

: That's good for you. My needs are a bit more advanced. I work on my box as
: well as play and an 8mhz machine is far below my needs.

It was meerly meant as an illustration.  I can't live on 8MHz either, but
those who are doing basic things can live with basic computer.  In fact, I
have a 3MHz Apple IIgs which turns out wounderful audio (on par with my
486).  Just goes to show that even thirteen year old technology can give a
more recent (say three years old) Windows box a run for the money.

: Indeed. Why is why I don't accuse you of upgrade-phobia.

Upgrade-phobic would probably be a good way to describe me.  :-)

: I would rather have an OS that shutdown flakey apps, than have flakey apps
: that run and crash or hang my machine.

I have never seen a flakey application crash OS/2.

: You find because you'd rather make inaccurate comments than assume I know
: what my needs better than you.

I would like to know what those inaccurate comments are, so that I can
correct them -- or correct you.  But you are correct, applying my needs to
others is a fallicy which I often comment.  Then again, people often
confuse needs with wants, so it is a fallicy which I do not mind commiting.

: Why do you supposed that others must have the same static, stagnant
: needs?

Because word processing, number crunching and data retrieval can often be
completed on less expensive computers than the marketeers would have you
think.  And you may also be confusing needs with wants.  For example:
sticking a clumsy GUI on a library catalogue system is a want.  (Note, I
said nothing about improving usability.)  Making the search engine, to
provide more accurate results, is a need.

: I never had any apps under OS/2 consume so much CPU win utilizing sound.

Rendering module files on a 486 with the SBPro drivers could drive the CPU
to 90% or 100% CPU cycle consumption.  Ironically, this is something that
the 3MHz Apple IIgs can handle.

On Creative Labs:
: They have great support.

As long as you are in their target market.  OS/2 users are not.  Target
markets have little to do with the quality of the supporting products
either, just profitability.

: >When you work on an OS/2 system, you buy your hardware for OS/2.

: That is what separates you from me. I buy hardware for me, not an operating
: system. I prefer to have my needs(or desires for that matter) dictate what I

: use.

If most of the hardware does what you want, it is not very challenging to
find something which will run on your OS.  Besides, it is not the OS but
it is the *hardware manufacturer* which defines which OSes are supported.
Bloody capitalists!

BTW - you also learn how to make informed buying decisions in the process.
You are not some branded lemming (oh, does that word bring back memories!)
who will buy that latest sound card from some manufacturer because it is
the best.  (Uh, does it do what you need?)

For example: I would never buy a 3D video card, because I do not do any
work which requires 3D acceleration.  Not to mention that I am perfectly
satisfied with 800x600x16-bit colour on a fifteen inch monitor.  It leaves
my options wide open to buy OS/2 supported hardware.

Actually, since you are so concerned about what OS/2 can not do, let's
choose something which I have never seen on Windows (or OS/2 for that
matter).  Now the portrait display which is hooked up to this system is
absolutely wonderful for web browsing and word processing, and using
this telnet client on.  Show me Windows NT with a portrait display.
After all, if the OS can't do everything that any computer can do, it
is simply no good.  (This is an extension of your argument.)

: Lower functionality you mean. 9.9 times out of 10, if the hardware has OS/2
: support it does less than the OS/2 version. I've read of people in this
group

Lower functionality does not mean anything to me, if I do not need the
feature.  3D acceleration is one thing that I quote repeatedly.  And I
will grant you that people who need this feature probably should not be
using OS/2.  But, game players aside, most of them should be using more
advanced systems than Windows anyway.  If they *need* it.

: who purchased a Diamond TNT2 card, just like the one I have and are running
: that card with Gradd drivers at 640x480 and 60mhz. You may consider
1240x1024
: at 85mhz whiz-bang, but I consider that a necessity on a 20' monitor. It is
: ludicrous to spend so much and get so little in return.

I have run across many OS/2 users which I would testify to their intelligence.
The user which buys the TNT2, then complains that it does not do everything
the expected to, would be one of those users.  Companies have histories for
support.  Diamond is not considered to be good on the end of OS/2 support.
AVOID THEM!  (The only reason that my Diamond card was so well supported
under OS/2 is because I went to the chipset manufaturer to get the proper
drivers -- and was lucky.)

: Fine. I do both. I paid for my computer, so why not exploit it for
everything
: it can do. Radios lose signals, stations play annoying commericals. I
neither
: lose signals, nor have to endure commericals when I listen to MP3. And whem
: MP3s are loaded on a Rio, it can go anywhere, play music in the order I wish

: and doesn't skip or degrade.  I care about getting as much use out of my
: computer as I can.

A few years back there was a comment on the Computer Chronicles (a PBS
computer programme).  In short, it said this: in order to turn your 2000
dollar computer into a 200 dollar stereo, you go out and buy a 300 dollar
pair of speakers.  Enough said.

: Personally, music relaxes me.

Then, if you live in Canada, I suggest CBC Radio 2.  It is commercial free,
it plays relaxing music (which won't pull your concentration away from
work), and you never have to worry about copyrights and such (which often
tag along with MP3s).

: People who have zipdrives, like I do, care [about Ziptools].

I have used both Zip drives and SyQuest drives on my computers.  Personally,
I think software controlled write protection is stupid, and password
protection may be useless as well.  (It depends on whether the drive or
the software checks the password.)

Also, a removable SCSI drive can be carried anywhere.  ZipTools can not.

: It works better under Windows than OS/2.

As a drive, or because of the Ziptools.  I challenge you to tell me which.

As per filesystems, IBM offers new drivers for removable media.  This will
allow you to use HPFS, or several other filesystems.  I can also format my
Syquest for HFS on my IIgs or M*c, or the file system used for NetBSD on
my M*c, or whatever.  The hardware does not check to see if you are using
Windows first, then deny you the ability to use anything but FAT.

Remember HPFS is robust.

: Functionality, remember?

The only functionality which was lost was software write protection.  This
is almost a contradiction of terms.

On problems with Win95:
: >Humph.  Don't try telling that to somebody who has supported these
machines.

: YMMV

Were you not suggesting that Win95 is relativly problem free.  I just gave
you a whole call centre where there were installation issues.

: This is your statement "You most certainly do not buy hardware and simply
: expect it to work." Sounds to me like you enjoy the tedium. Sorry, but if
you
: find installing hardware harder under OS/2 than Windows 95 harder when
: practically every piece of hardware made has Win9x support in the box, and
: OS/2 is practically its opposite WRT support, well, you think that you are
: the extreme exception.

From my experience, a product which supports OS/2 will work without problem
under OS/2.  OTOH, a product which supports Windows (and you said that that
is pretty much every product) does not always run on the first try.  I have
seen Windows machines loose all knowledge of their network controllers,
and video cards -- not because the drivers were missing, but because there
was something wrong with the autodetect process during the boot sequence.

All that you do is your product research *first*.  And product research
goes well beyond: how fast does this run?  And, how many features does this
have?  It includes questions about quality, reliability and support!

: >Once it is running, maybe.  Perhaps I am confusing installation with
: >maintenance.  So let me rephrase that: setting up UNIX and its associated
: >applications is a devil.

: That depends of the app.

I have dealt with traditional UNIX applications, nothing like Gimp or
StarOffice or WordPerfect.  These usually require configuration files to
define defaults, and those are not friendly to setup.

: >And servers are a different matter anyway.  Web servers and FTP servers
: >use a fixed set of software.  Servers which involve some form of user
: >interaction my be very maintenace intensive.  Security, application
support,
: >account support, etc..  Not an issue for home users though.  But getting
: >the thing running properly is still a lot of work for users which have to
: >figure out how to use the software in the first place.

: Which is why, generally speaking, Windows is a better choice than any other
: system out there, IMO.

Some issues are of minor importance to the user, such as security.  Between
outright attacks on unprotected systems and virii and trojan horses going
through e-mail, they live in a scary world.

Funny, I have never run into a virus or TH for OS/2 or Macintosh or the
Apple II or the Atari ST or Linux or NetBSD . . . I guess one of the
advantages of using a system that few people currently develop for, is
that nobody is interested in attacking these systems either.   :-)

: >On big systems, most of my reflections are from the user end.  The system
: >that I am writing this on is running an uncounted number of processes in
: >about 100 logins.  But I do not ask my computers to do that.  The fastest
: >computer which I ever owned was 50MHz.  Not very realisting for supporing
: >hundreds of concurrent logins.

: But good for about 20. When I was at one company, we had a C++ training
: class.  The instructor had 18 of us on a 16 meg 486DX50 running Linux.

About four years ago I recall some people complaining that a Pentium 90 was
being relegated to server duties, for some 26 computers.  These people
were quite annoyed because this machine would be better used for the purpose
of programming.  But they had decided upon NT for a server, instead of more
efficent and more established technologies.  Sort of goes back to the
difference between what you need and what you want.

: Again, I don't buy for an OS, I buy for me.

I think that we have different interpretations of how the computer
controls use.  For you, it is how some platforms control you buying
decisions (thus your use) of the machine.  For myself, it is being
caught in (what I call) the upgrade cycle.  The endless cycle of buying
something which better suits our needs or desires.

: Wrong. No-brainer means you can buy what you need or what you like and it
: will work.

Sometimes yes, sometimes no.  Remember to make sure your product research
is complete.  (Boy, can I drive sales people mad!)

: >Installshield is also pretty unfriendly when compared to M*c install
: >software and even some of the installers that I have used in OS/2.

: Like what? Most OS/2 programs barely have what can qualify as an install
: program. Sun liked installshield so much that they asked the makers to
create

My main comparison was with Macintosh.  Some OS/2 programs have decent
install utilities too.  The package which was originally used with the
BonusPak was quite popular for a time.  It was okay.

My main problem with InstallShield is that it asks far too many questions.
The typical Macintosh install program is double click on the installer
icon, hit AGREE for the licence agreement (IFF you agree), then hit okay
to do the default think.  Then it is *DONE*.  Custom Installs let you
specify which components to install, and which drive and directory to
install it on.  Then you are *DONE*.  InstallShield tends to ask about
your name, company, licence number, directory for this, that and whatever,
which packages and subpackages, maybe even your e-mail address, and other
things.

What I want is a simple install, not the Installation Experience!

: OS/2 needs such a program.

It exists, but I don't know what limitations IBM places upon its use.

: >About the only advantage of using Win95 (from the perspective of most
: >of the people I know), is seeing Byron tuck his tail between his legs,
: >cowering and submitting an answer to your support question.

: If you say so...

It was sarcasm.  (Albeit, true sarcasm.)


--
Stopped (SIGTTOU)         byron.
$

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

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

From: [e-mail]                     22-Sep-99 02:42:29
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

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

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 16:37:53 -0700, Tim Martin wrote:

>So don't point this directly at me.  Point to Esther as well.
>Esther continually plays this "you're a bad person Tim" routine
>despite the fact that I am an OS/2 web master while she is a
>Ziff Davis reporter.

Nononono.  You're a *BSD* web master.  Let's keep that straight.

---
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]                               21-Sep-99 22:47:15
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: OS2NetLabs Head: "OS/2 is Dead"

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Jason wrote:
>
> Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote that Adrian said:
>
> -OS/2 is dead. Once again. Definitely this time.

... but he stopped there.

That is beyond despicable Tim, even for you.  What is your interest in
tearing down Netlabs???  Of all the hack-jobs I've seen Tholen participate
in, this one wins out in it's pure despisability.  I think the true
conspirator of this story is becoming plainly obvious.

Here's the rest of what Tim conveniently "forgot" to quote, courtesy of
Jason:

> -Many thanks to IBM, once
> -again they showed us that we never know what happens next to OS/2.
> -
> -But OS/2 is not dead, in fact it is just running on my machine and on the
> -webserver you are browsing at the moment. As the only operating system on
> -this computer. And I will for sure continue using it, even if we heard
> -the latest message about OS/2. I really feel bad tonight, I thought it
> -could be a wonderful day for OS/2 because we get another message. The
> -message that Stardock is allowed to release a new client based on great
> -OS/2 code. For sure they would have to use another name, but noone cares
> -about that.
> -But instead of this good message there was a posting in the Stardock
> -newsgroup, the posting from Brad Wardell with the content, that they are
> -not allowed to do that. This sucks, really!
>
> For the full IDG article:
>
> http://www.idg.net/idgns/1999/09/21/DesktopUsersSeeMurkyFutureFor.shtml
>
> For adrian's full statement:
>
> http://www.netlabs.org/tobeornot.html
>
> Personally I don't think Adrian got a fair representation in the
> article.  Your only quote from a person, shouldn't be text that was
> italicised.

Thank you Jason for bringing this despicable act to our attention.

Care to comment Tim???

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          22-Sep-99 03:26:14
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: OS/2ezine??

From: [e-mail] (Annie K.)

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 18:19:55, "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>
wrote:

:> Does anyone know it's status? Is it ever coming back?
:>
:My guess is that it's belly up...the postage costs became too great.

 What postage costs?

--
Anthropomorphic Hamburger

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            21-Sep-99 22:41:29
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: [e-mail] (David H. McCoy)

In article <7s9d0r$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
>David H. McCoy ([e-mail]) wrote:
>
>On the SIQ problem:
>: >Ah, now that is a problem with OS/2.  There was a fix, albeit an
>: >unsatisfying one, in the later Warp 3 fixpaks.
>
>: That wasn't much of fix. I noticed no difference before fixpack 17 or after

>: Warp 4.
>
>There was a clear difference, after a second or so of waiting.  The lack
>of responsiveness is what I meant by dissatisfying, not that the solution
>did not work.

There was a clear difference for you. I waiting far longer than a "second or
so" and the machine was locked.

The solution did not work.

>: >To my knowledge, it did not have any impact upon the background processes
>: >(outside of intercepting input).  And it could also be attributed to poor
>: >programming on the applications end.  (Remember, the applications are
>: >supposed to check the Queue regularly!)
>
>: Are you serious? Not locking up the OS sounds good in a debate, but does no

>: good when you are locked out of the operating system. Who cares if I could
>: still print in the background when I can't print, can't launch
applications,
>: basically, can't use the system. Also, the OS should protect itself from
>: errant apps. That is foolishness to blame the application because the OS
>: isn't robus enough to do the job.
>
>Ah, now there is a line that I loved to use in the old days.  (Ie. Before
>NT caught on.)  But running processes in the background is sufficent to get
>complete automated jobs.  It is also sufficent for third party software to
>handle the problem.  WatchCat seemed to be a good way to kill errant
>applications.

Which may be find if you are running only automated jobs. Most people,
including myself don't. We run programs that require interaction, interaction
that is impossible because of SIQ lock-ups. Also, Watchcat didn't always work.

C-A-D Commander didn't always work. Process Commander didn't always work.

>: Sure there are easy work arounds. Reboot, but that is hardly an optimal
>: solution.
>
>There are other solutions.  The application of FixPak 16 (I believe) is one,
>and third party software is another.  You are only fooling yourself when you
>say that rebooting was the only way . . .

Please. Why do you insist on living in this fantasy world? The problem has
been
there and is *STILL* there today. I guess when one buys for and uses a
computer
for one's OS, one eventually blinds himself to his OSses many shortcomings,
and
in fact, learns to appreciate them.

>--
>Stopped (SIGTTOU)         byron.
>$
>

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

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

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

From: [e-mail]               21-Sep-99 19:49:19
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: Who to believe?  [follow-up]

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

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 17:11:11 -0400, David T. Johnson wrote:

>>

David,

I admire your die-heart support of OS/2 but please don't flame Brad.   He did
everything in his power to push this.   There is no inconsistency with what
he said because it was based on what he was told or lead to believe.

The battle is far from over.

If you truly support OS/2 and want to see a client - please lay low for a
moment.



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

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 23:45:02
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: OS2NetLabs Head: "OS/2 is Dead"

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Jason wrote:
>
> Marty <[e-mail]> wrote:
> : Jason wrote:
> :>
> :> Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote that Adrian said:
> :>
> :> -OS/2 is dead. Once again. Definitely this time.
>
> : ... but he stopped there.
>
> : That is beyond despicable Tim, even for you.  What is your interest in
> : tearing down Netlabs???  Of all the hack-jobs I've seen Tholen participate
> : in, this one wins out in it's pure despisability.  I think the true
> : conspirator of this story is becoming plainly obvious.
>
> : Here's the rest of what Tim conveniently "forgot" to quote, courtesy of
> : Jason:
>
> The hack job was done by IDG.  Tim only fell for IDG's tricks.  Although
> I'm suprised as someone who boasts as being one of the most informed
> people about OS/2, that he wouldn't have remembered Adrian's original
> message to the OS/2 community, but hey we all make mistakes.

If this is true, then I owe Tim an apology.  I'm sorry for the false
accusation Tim.  (not that he even reads my posts)

- Marty

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 21:02:10
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:01
Subj: Re: OS2NetLabs Head: "OS/2 is Dead"

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Jason wrote:

> Marty <[e-mail]> wrote:
> : Jason wrote:
> :>
> :> Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote that Adrian said:
> :>
> :> -OS/2 is dead. Once again. Definitely this time.
>
> : ... but he stopped there.
>
> : That is beyond despicable Tim, even for you.  What is your interest in
> : tearing down Netlabs???  Of all the hack-jobs I've seen Tholen participate
> : in, this one wins out in it's pure despisability.  I think the true
> : conspirator of this story is becoming plainly obvious.
>
> : Here's the rest of what Tim conveniently "forgot" to quote, courtesy of
> : Jason:
>
> The hack job was done by IDG.  Tim only fell for IDG's tricks.  Although
> I'm suprised as someone who boasts as being one of the most informed
> people about OS/2, that he wouldn't have remembered Adrian's original
> message to the OS/2 community, but hey we all make mistakes.
>
> -Jason

It was not forgetful but on purpose to prove a point.

I showed exactly what Brad Wardell has wrought with his
misstatement.  OS/2 web sites will be more kind but web
sites that hate OS/2, that work against OS/2 and have an
axe to grind against IBM, Stardock or anyone else are
going to slant their articles just as the article is slanted
above.  Just as Brad slants his answers.  Remember,
this was not a voice interview it was an email interview so
the interviewer decided to cut and snip the same way Ziff
Davis writers have done on many an OS/2 article.

They purposely 'short' quoted Adrian because his statement
fit their agenda.  That's what I mean about OS/2 people
stepping forward and writing flip lines and then going on
to explain the real meaning behind them.  The real meaning
will not be printed because it doesn't fit the agenda of the
writer.  What will be printed - just as in this case- will be
the flip lines.

Now those reading the article are going to come away
saying "Poor Brad and Stardock, those poor hard working
OS/2 devoted folks.  They only wanted the best for OS/2
and they were kicked in the butt by IBM.  Why even the one
web site filled with OS/2 programmers writing free OS/2
applications says OS/2 is dead.  That means I've wasted
my OS/2 money all these years.  I guess I'd be stupid to
keep OS/2 on my system.  I'll bit the bullet and remove it
and install a Microsoft operating system."

Now that's what Brad's public announcement has wrought.
He will single handily push more people away from OS/2
than anyone single person has every done.

Expect to read the same kind of thing at Ziff Davis, Wired,
CNET, TechWire, InfoWorld, The Register, SJ Mercury News,
MSNBC News, USANews, etc.  Because they'll pick up the
IDG story and site the quotes from that story verbatim.
Adrian will be dancing like a crazy man trying to explain
he was misquoted.  Brad will be dancing with glee because
his OS/2 customers will be moving to Microsoft and buying
his Microsoft software.

And that's how the game is played.

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                         22-Sep-99 03:08:12
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:02
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Dave Tholen)

Jason Bowen writes:

>>>>> Jason wrote:

>>>>>>> From what I have read there will be no more free downloads soon,
software
>>>>>>> choice is going to all paid subscription.

>>>>>> Can you site any proof to add credability to that statement?

>>>>> I was just reprinting hearsay that I saw other OS/2 users type, unhappy
>>>>> OS/2 users.

>>>> Who are these other users, and how do you know they use OS/2?

>>> usenet users.

>> USENET users are not necessarily OS/2 users.

> USENET users are not necessarily out to fud OS/2.

Then explain the unsubstantiated claim about no more free Netscape
downloads.

>>>>> I can't prove that it is true.

>>>> So, you admit to spreading FUD?

>>> You admit to spreading fud?

>> I'm not the one reprinting hearsay.

> You have verified every claim that you have reprinted?

What claim are you referring to?

>>> You have reproduced others claims without knowing if they are factual.

>> Such as?

> The posts in here where you cite people talking about problems installing
> Windows and how it isn't a hardware panacea.  Have you verified the
> problems?

But I do know that Microsoft doesn't support hardware that isn't on the
HCL.

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          22-Sep-99 03:14:21
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:02
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Buddy Donnelly)

On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 02:59:53, "Steve McCrystal" <[e-mail]> a ┌crit
dans un message:

> On 20 Sep 1999 14:12:37 GMT, rj friedman wrote:
>
> > Has it not occurred to anyone that the reason Stardock was turned down was
because they were
> >not able to come up with a sufficiently convincing business plan that would
persuade IBM it was worth
> >their while to entrust OS/2 to Stardock?
>
> Yes.
>
> OTOH, it is also possible that folks at IBM have bought and installed some
of the Stardock supplied
> software *already* available.

Ye shall know a man by the way he walks, not the way he talks.



Good luck,

Buddy

Buddy Donnelly
[e-mail]


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

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                      21-Sep-99 23:17:17
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:02
Subj: Re: OS2NetLabs Head: "OS/2 is Dead"

From: Jason <[e-mail]>

Marty <[e-mail]> wrote:
: Jason wrote:
:>
:> Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote that Adrian said:
:>
:> -OS/2 is dead. Once again. Definitely this time.

: ... but he stopped there.

: That is beyond despicable Tim, even for you.  What is your interest in
: tearing down Netlabs???  Of all the hack-jobs I've seen Tholen participate
: in, this one wins out in it's pure despisability.  I think the true
: conspirator of this story is becoming plainly obvious.

: Here's the rest of what Tim conveniently "forgot" to quote, courtesy of
: Jason:

The hack job was done by IDG.  Tim only fell for IDG's tricks.  Although
I'm suprised as someone who boasts as being one of the most informed
people about OS/2, that he wouldn't have remembered Adrian's original
message to the OS/2 community, but hey we all make mistakes.

-Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 23:23:20
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:02
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail]

>> Has it not occurred to anyone that the reason Stardock was turned down was
because they were
>>not able to come up with a sufficiently convincing business plan that would
persuade IBM it was worth
>>their while to entrust OS/2 to Stardock?

>Yes.
>
>OTOH, it is also possible that folks at IBM have bought and installed
>some of the Stardock supplied  software *already* available.

My thoughts exactly.




_____________
Ed Letourneau <[e-mail]>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               22-Sep-99 00:47:09
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:02
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Tim Martin wrote:
>
> Marty wrote:
>
> > Tim Martin wrote:
> > >
> > > You poor thing, you are deprived aren't you?  Unlike Warp City,
> > > which is private and open only to members,
> >
> > Does he pay for this advertising space?  Someone should write to
> > abuse@tims_real_provider.com.  I bet he'd be on a short leash if someone
> > did.
> >
> > - Marty
>
> Sorry.  No one pays for ad space at Warp City.  Warp
> City is ad free.  It is sponsorship free.  We won't take
> up the screen space of any member with any paid
> advertising.

[remainder of WarpCity spam removed.]

Was this crossposted to comp.os.os2.spam by some chance, or maybe
comp.os.bsd.spam?

Well Tim, I'm flattered you even read my post.  Now how about responding to
a few of the real issues raised, such as evidence for your own flailing
libellous allegations against Stardock?  Perhaps providing a viable motive
for Brad's alleged behavior would also help.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 20:49:17
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:02
Subj: Re: OS2NetLabs Head: "OS/2 is Dead"

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Jason wrote:

> Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> : The complete interview will appear soon on a familiar
> : multi-operating system news web site near you.  Hang
> : tough, you'll get the url soon enough.
>
> http://www.idg.net/idgns/1999/09/21/DesktopUsersSeeMurkyFutureFor.shtml
>
> -Jason

See.  I told you.

Tim...


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               22-Sep-99 01:16:08
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:02
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> Now, while word processing can be done on lesser machines, like my
mother-in-
> laws 486/Word 97 combo, number crunching needs the faster hardware possible.
> For example, I ran SETI@home on my P166 and overclocked(366->550) Celeron.
It
> took 9.24 hours to complete on the Celeron. 18 hours later, the P166 was
almost
> 20% done. That is sheer number crunching. How exactly can this be done on
less
> expensive hardware than the marketeers would have one think?

Just a little aside here FWIW.  On my same given system, I run Warp 4, and
used to run NT 4.0.  With the same hardware configuration, I benchmarked
the latest versions (at the time) of the RC5-64 clients in OS/2 and NT.  On
the same hardware, the OS/2 client got 15K keys/sec higher than the NT one
did (for my machine, that's about a 5% speed difference).  The OS/2 client
version was older than the NT client by about a week.  I realize this is
not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison, as the RC5 client software was
"different," but I think it's as close as you can get for pure
number-crunching benchmark comparison.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               21-Sep-99 21:17:18
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:02
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Marty wrote:

> Tim Martin wrote:
> >
> > You poor thing, you are deprived aren't you?  Unlike Warp City,
> > which is private and open only to members,
>
> Does he pay for this advertising space?  Someone should write to
> abuse@tims_real_provider.com.  I bet he'd be on a short leash if someone
> did.
>
> - Marty

Sorry.  No one pays for ad space at Warp City.  Warp
City is ad free.  It is sponsorship free.  We won't take
up the screen space of any member with any paid
advertising.

We don't allow it because we like to voice our opinion
about anything OS/2 -including poor OS/2 software-
without having to kiss-butt to a wayward Windows
vendor who just happens to sell buggy faded OS/2
software.

Don't get me wrong.  If there's a good piece of OS/2
software out there we'll make sure every member
who visits Warp City knows about it.  At the moment
we like the GA release of Communicator for OS/2,
Daniela Engert's (of Germany with assitance from such
fine folk like Helen Terbizan and Mark Dodel) DaniS506.add
driver, SmartSuite/2 v1.1, the newly updated (100% Java)
J Street Mailer, the updated text adventure game "Dungeon
of Doom" , the free release of Photo>Graphics v2.02s,
DrawIt!  and Lame, Sun's StarOffice 5.1, and, of course,
the best OS/2 utilities from a fine OS/2 programmer, Jim
Lewis (http://www.chauvet.com/jim.lewis).

And this is just the top of the list for September!

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                            22-Sep-99 01:14:28
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:02
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <7s9i91$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...

>: >No, I am serious about the upgrade cycle. ...  I also learned
>: >about it when I picked up an 8MHz, 16-bit Macintosh SE and figured
>: >out that it fulfill most of my needs just as easily as a bleeding edge
>: >machine.

>: That's good for you. My needs are a bit more advanced. I work on my box as
>: well as play and an 8mhz machine is far below my needs.

>It was meerly meant as an illustration.  I can't live on 8MHz either, but
>those who are doing basic things can live with basic computer.  In fact, I
>have a 3MHz Apple IIgs which turns out wounderful audio (on par with my
>486).  Just goes to show that even thirteen year old technology can give a
>more recent (say three years old) Windows box a run for the money.

I suspect that this has more more to do with your antiquated hardware and your

ear for sound, that any weakness in Windows. I suspect that decoding an MP3
file would be beyond the range of your Apple IIgs, and perhaps the 486.


>: Indeed. Why is why I don't accuse you of upgrade-phobia.

>Upgrade-phobic would probably be a good way to describe me.  :-)

>: I would rather have an OS that shutdown flakey apps, than have flakey apps
>: that run and crash or hang my machine.

>I have never seen a flakey application crash OS/2.

Then I would say that either you haven't run many applications or you may be
forgeting something.

>: You find because you'd rather make inaccurate comments than assume I know
>: what my needs better than you.

>I would like to know what those inaccurate comments are, so that I can
>correct them -- or correct you.  But you are correct, applying my needs to
>others is a fallicy which I often comment.  Then again, people often
>confuse needs with wants, so it is a fallicy which I do not mind commiting.

Actually, that would be my mistake. I misunderstood something your wrote.
Sorry. However, as far as confusing needs and wants, I believe that only an
individual can properly say if they so such a thing. No one else is qualified
to make that judgement.

>: Why do you supposed that others must have the same static, stagnant
>: needs?

>Because word processing, number crunching and data retrieval can often be
>completed on less expensive computers than the marketeers would have you
>think.  And you may also be confusing needs with wants.  For example:
>sticking a clumsy GUI on a library catalogue system is a want.  (Note, I
>said nothing about improving usability.)  Making the search engine, to
>provide more accurate results, is a need.

Sticking a more usable GUI on such a system can be both want and NEED.
Improving usability can be both want and need. You can have the most accurate
search engine in existence, but if your interface lacks a place to display the

results, it is useless.

Now, while word processing can be done on lesser machines, like my mother-in-
laws 486/Word 97 combo, number crunching needs the faster hardware possible.
For example, I ran SETI@home on my P166 and overclocked(366->550) Celeron. It
took 9.24 hours to complete on the Celeron. 18 hours later, the P166 was
almost
20% done. That is sheer number crunching. How exactly can this be done on less

expensive hardware than the marketeers would have one think?

Seems to me that if your time is not valuble, you can wait an infinitely long
amount of time. Or you can through hardware that is less expensive than
perhaps
you think, and move on to another task.

>: I never had any apps under OS/2 consume so much CPU win utilizing sound.

>Rendering module files on a 486 with the SBPro drivers could drive the CPU
>to 90% or 100% CPU cycle consumption.  Ironically, this is something that
>the 3MHz Apple IIgs can handle.

Sounds like a problem with the OS.

>On Creative Labs:
>: They have great support.

>As long as you are in their target market.  OS/2 users are not.  Target
>markets have little to do with the quality of the supporting products
>either, just profitability.

Strangely enough, profitability is a goal most business seek to achieve.
Further, all business fail to adequately support markets outside their
targets.
IBM has yet to create a good steak sauce, or 100,000 mile tire, but I don't
see
you complaining about their support.

Creative Labs have excellent support. If you are not in their target market,
heck, if you are not a customer, you have no right to complain.

>: >When you work on an OS/2 system, you buy your hardware for OS/2.

>: That is what separates you from me. I buy hardware for me, not an operating

>: system. I prefer to have my needs(or desires for that matter) dictate what
I
>: use.

>If most of the hardware does what you want, it is not very challenging to
>find something which will run on your OS.  Besides, it is not the OS but

For me, life has more than enough challenges to keep me busy and entertained.
I
don't look for challenges when buying a car battery or gas, and I don't look
for one when buying software are hardware. I want it to work so I can use it.

>it is the *hardware manufacturer* which defines which OSes are supported.
>Bloody capitalists!

Nope. It is market forces, but that is capitalist-driven.

>BTW - you also learn how to make informed buying decisions in the process.
>You are not some branded lemming (oh, does that word bring back memories!)

Again, we differ. To me, informed buying is basing a purchase on the feature
set, price, and performance. The OS should be a given.

>who will buy that latest sound card from some manufacturer because it is
>the best.  (Uh, does it do what you need?)

But see, as you've said, you cannot do this. You have to first determine if it

is supported under OS/2, and only from that increasingly dryer well, can you
consider the other points.

>For example: I would never buy a 3D video card, because I do not do any
>work which requires 3D acceleration.  Not to mention that I am perfectly
>satisfied with 800x600x16-bit colour on a fifteen inch monitor.  It leaves
>my options wide open to buy OS/2 supported hardware.

That's fine. However, for those of use with 17in or better, 800x600 is
depressing. If your needs are small, as yours clearly, are, and your hardware,

not challenge, OS/2, like many other OSses is a good choice. However, I need
more screen real estate for the work I do. I am not perfectly satisfied with a

15in monitor and 800x600 is not an option for my 20in monitor.
OS/2 would only allow, really, one good card, the Matrox G400. Windows gives
me
easily many more choices, so I can fine tune my purchase tailor-made for my
needs.

>Actually, since you are so concerned about what OS/2 can not do, let's
>choose something which I have never seen on Windows (or OS/2 for that
>matter).  Now the portrait display which is hooked up to this system is
>absolutely wonderful for web browsing and word processing, and using
>this telnet client on.  Show me Windows NT with a portrait display.
>After all, if the OS can't do everything that any computer can do, it
>is simply no good.  (This is an extension of your argument.)

That is a incorrect conclusion caused by your misinterpretation of my
arguement. I said that I use my computers for many things. I also said that I
want to exploit my computer to the fullest. I never said that any OS should do

anything that any computer can do.

>: Lower functionality you mean. 9.9 times out of 10, if the hardware has OS/2

>: support it does less than the OS/2 version. I've read of people in this
group

>Lower functionality does not mean anything to me,

That is evident.

>if I do not need the
>feature.  3D acceleration is one thing that I quote repeatedly.  And I
>will grant you that people who need this feature probably should not be
>using OS/2.  But, game players aside, most of them should be using more
>advanced systems than Windows anyway.  If they *need* it.

This has nothing to do with 3d acceleration since OS/2 HAS NO 3D
FUNCTIONALITY.
We are talking about lower. Two people purchase a TNT2 card. A Windows user
and
OS/2 user. Both pay the same amount, but the Windows person gets to run his
card had a higher resolution and faster refresh rate. Again, the windows
person
and OS/2 person purchase a Zipdrive. The Windows person can set
read/write/password protection. The OS/2 person cannot.  That is story of the
OS/2 person's computer life.

That is but one weakness of OS/2. And it is getting worse, unless you stick to

using 6 year old equipment, and last I checked, those components are getting
harder to find.

>: who purchased a Diamond TNT2 card, just like the one I have and are running

>: that card with Gradd drivers at 640x480 and 60mhz. You may consider
1240x1024
>: at 85mhz whiz-bang, but I consider that a necessity on a 20' monitor. It is

>: ludicrous to spend so much and get so little in return.

>I have run across many OS/2 users which I would testify to their
intelligence.
>The user which buys the TNT2, then complains that it does not do everything
>the expected to, would be one of those users.  Companies have histories for
>support.  Diamond is not considered to be good on the end of OS/2 support.
>AVOID THEM!  (The only reason that my Diamond card was so well supported
>under OS/2 is because I went to the chipset manufaturer to get the proper
>drivers -- and was lucky.)

Indeed. Avoid them all. I agree. The problem is that the number of companies
to
avoid becomes grows. Eventually, OS/2 users will be forced to move away or
continue on with their increasingly outdate machines delighting all around
with
stories of how they're machines are match for any of today's current hardware.
The body shudders at such a thought!

>: Fine. I do both. I paid for my computer, so why not exploit it for
everything
>: it can do. Radios lose signals, stations play annoying commericals. I
neither
>: lose signals, nor have to endure commericals when I listen to MP3. And whem

>: MP3s are loaded on a Rio, it can go anywhere, play music in the order I
wish
>: and doesn't skip or degrade.  I care about getting as much use out of my
>: computer as I can.

>A few years back there was a comment on the Computer Chronicles (a PBS
>computer programme).  In short, it said this: in order to turn your 2000
>dollar computer into a 200 dollar stereo, you go out and buy a 300 dollar
>pair of speakers.  Enough said.

More than enough, for again, you make the mistake of relying on sorely out of
date material. Do you ever get out? :-). Computers are selling for $500
dollars. You can get excellent speakers with subwoofers for $30. Personally, I

would hestitate to cite any information that is 3 years old and apply it to
today's computer market.

It just doesn't apply. While ram, for example, has shot up in the past month,
1.5 months ago a 128meg SDRAM PC100 dimm was selling for $70. Did your program

mention that? Did your program foresee sub-$600 machines? How about 13 gig
drives selling for $166?

Well?

>: Personally, music relaxes me.

>Then, if you live in Canada, I suggest CBC Radio 2.  It is commercial free,

And choice free. Unless they can offer Miles Davis, Jodeci, Sade, R. Kelly,
Jessica Williams, BBD, EnVogue, Kenny G, Gerald Albright, etc, in that order,
I'll stick to my MP3s that I can burn on CDs or download to my Rio player.

And take anywhere.
--
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             21-Sep-99 22:47:09
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:02
Subj: Re: Who to believe?  [follow-up]

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>

Kim Cheung wrote:
>
> On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 17:11:11 -0400, David T. Johnson wrote:
>
> >>
>
> David,
>
> I admire your die-heart support of OS/2 but please don't flame Brad.

It wasn't my intent to flame.  I do feel that it is important to
question some of the apparent inconsistencies in the Judgment Day story
until it is a little clearer as to what actually happened.  I also think
it is time for Brad to step forward and tell us exactly what has
happened rather than lead us on with his vague ('trust me, it's true!)
stories of the death of OS/2.  Brad Wardell has convinced a large number
of OS/2 users that he has their interests at heart and is now busy going
around pronouncing OS/2 to be dead based on his personal account of this
'Judgment Day' meeting.  After repeated challenges, he seems to agree
that the Judgment Day meeting did not actually happen but OS/2 died
anyway at another meeting 'several days earlier.'  If he does not have
personal knowledge of the judgment day (whatever day it was) meeting, he
shouldn't go around suggesting that he does.  If he was told this stuff
by someone else, he should identify the source.  And I find it hard to
believe that if he is bound by a nondisclosure agreement that prevents
him from talking, that such an agreement would still allow him to
provide the information that he has posted in his various statements.
So YES, I have a LOT of questions and I think OS/2 users deserve some
answers from Mr. Wardell.   And no, I don't think these questions are
"flames."

>  He did
> everything in his power to push this.   There is no inconsistency with what
> he said because it was based on what he was told or lead to believe.

Excuse me but Brad Wardell is claiming that IBM told him at a 'Judgment
Day' meeting (as Brad refers to it) that they were not going to develop
another OS/2 client and that they also would not give a license to
Brad's company, Stardock, to do it.  Now, Brad is posting that this is
the "Death of OS/2" as revealed to him by IBM.

I personally do not believe that IBM knows what they will do with the
OS/2 client but I WAS willing to believe that this corporate committee
at IBM had told him this (we all seem to want to believe this, don't we)
until it turned out that this Judgment Day meeting did not actually even
happen.  THEN, Brad's story about the Death of OS/2 started sounding
pretty shaky.  NOW, I have a LOT of questions as I posted earlier.

And I have another question that I did not mention earlier.  Based on my
experience, I am very skeptical that a decision on a relatively minor
IBM product like the OS/2 client would be decided by some high-level
corporate committee.  The product is currently owned by the Network
Computing Software Division and THEY would have ultimate profit-and-loss
responsibility for their division and its products.  Corporate
management might establish strategic directions for divisions but I
don't think they could or would reach down into a division and make
decisions about any one product such as a relatively low-cost (to IBM,
anyway) update to the OS/2 client.  The more I think about it, the more
ridiculous this sounds.  So how about it Brad, WHO at IBM Corporate do
you say was making these decisions?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                22-Sep-99 05:54:27
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:02
Subj: Re: OS/2ezine??

From: [e-mail] (Ronny Ko)

David T. Johnson ([e-mail]) wrote:


: Mirage Media wrote:
: >
: > Does anyone know it's status? Is it ever coming back?
: >
: My guess is that it's belly up...the postage costs became too great.

As far as I can see, even their last writer, Bob St. John has moved to
32BitsOnline after a failed attempt by now dead e-Zine to kidnap Timmy.

It all back fired badly; then again desparate people call for desparate
measures and certainly that measured back fired royally.

Check out Bob and Timmy at 32BitsOnline.com.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C.,
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             21-Sep-99 22:57:21
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 04:29:02
Subj: Re: OS/2ezine??

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>

Annie K. wrote:
>
> On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 18:19:55, "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
> :> Does anyone know it's status? Is it ever coming back?
> :>
> :My guess is that it's belly up...the postage costs became too great.
>
>  What postage costs?

Sorry.  I was trying to be funny.  I don't know what's happened to OS/2
ezine.  Maybe they can't find anything to write about OS/2.  Heh, heh,
heh.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                 22-Sep-99 04:50:20
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 05:19:18
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]>, "Darin
McBride" <[e-mail]> writes:
>On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 16:37:53 -0700, Tim Martin wrote:
snip
>>despite the fact that I am an OS/2 web master while she is a
>>Ziff Davis reporter.
>
>Nononono.  You're a *BSD* web master.  Let's keep that straight.

do web masters have to work in dungeons, wear the funny black
hood, carry a whip ?  warped city is in san francisco,  isn't it ?
" *I* am a Web Master . . ."

hmm.

>
skål !

----------------------------------------------------------
Härad Ængravvård
-----------------------------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: SBC Internet Services (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                      22-Sep-99 07:06:18
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 05:19:18
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
  "Joe Malloy" <[e-mail]> wrote:

<snip>

> > It was released yesterday.  Go to IBM's Software Choice web site.
>
> Not when I was there it wasn't.

Oh I see; you're the ultimate judge of what is fact and not... If you
don't see it, it can't possibly be true.

> > Chalk up another bonehead posting by Joe Malloy.
>
> IBM posts his Netscape 4.61 just in the nick of time (at least
> according to him).  It figures Tholen is a bonehead about it -- once
> a Kook-of-the-Month, always a Kook.

Why can't you just admit you were wrong?

--
-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/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you do
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               22-Sep-99 00:03:05
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 10:37:22
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:

> In <[e-mail]>, "Darin
McBride" <[e-mail]> writes:
> >On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 16:37:53 -0700, Tim Martin wrote:
> snip
> >>despite the fact that I am an OS/2 web master while she is a
> >>Ziff Davis reporter.
> >
> >Nononono.  You're a *BSD* web master.  Let's keep that straight.
>
> do web masters have to work in dungeons, wear the funny black
> hood, carry a whip ?  warped city is in san francisco,  isn't it ?
> " *I* am a Web Master . . ."
>
> hmm.
>
> >
> sk?l !
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> H?rad ?ngravv?rd
> -----------------------------------------------------------

Actually we've got several servers in several locations.
Warp City is *framed* because web pages are constantly
updated or created and simply imported from various
server locations.   Members reading them don't know
exactly where they are coming from they just know
they are at Warp City.

The public site (the brick wall entry point) is located in
San Francisco.  It is the site most members never
go to but considered our public site.  It consists of one
primary web page (although we do provide several
publicly accessible web pages on that server like
John *Aloha* Twelker's OS/2-Aptiva Install guide).
That particular server uses FreeBSD because quite
frankly, its free and a fine server software and it is the
only server we use in San Francisco.

We have only one staffer who actually lives in SF and
she also runs a Coffee House.  Other staffers live in
Sausalito, Santa Barbara, Craig Colorado, Mississippi,
and Florida.  We have part-time reporters or writers in
other various states (Los Angeles, Boston, Chicago,
Nevada, Kentucky, New York, Hawaii).  All staff members
have installed and use OS/2 as their operating system.
Windows (including WinOS2) is banned by company policy.
None of us has WinOS2 or DOS installed on our systems.
The company provides each staffer with their own individual
machines preloaded with OS/2 usually from such dealers
as Indelible Blue, Diamond Flower or other familiar hardware
vendors who preload OS/2.  We can access the servers from
a company 800 number or through individual dialup ISP
accounts (paid for by the company).

I have never owned or used a Windows application (but
I have seen them).

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            22-Sep-99 09:24:00
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 10:37:23
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 18:01:11, [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)
wrote:

> >Karel Jansens
> >Idiots shouldn't install or run OS/2.
>
> That doesn't explain why Tholen has installed and run OS/2.

On the contrary.
BTW, do you install or run OS/2?
(Only asking, I'm sure I know the answer)

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net
=======================================================
If we could have our cake _and_ eat it,
people would start whining about seconds.
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                            22-Sep-99 10:56:18
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 10:37:23
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Tim Timmins <[e-mail]>

err... This bullshit is your opinion masquerading as facts.


Kind regards,
Tim

Esther Schindler wrote:

> On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 03:01:47, [e-mail] wrote:
>
> | In a nutshell, that's my beef with IBM. How about a little open and honest
> | dissemination of intentions from the ONLY people who know their plans -
> | IBM ? We all bought the product, we all have time and effort and money
> | invested, whatever they want to do is their business, just TELL US ! then
> | we can get on with our lives, decide what is best for us individually, not
> | have to sift rumours and innuendo for scraps of insight.  Or does IBM
shelter
> | under the CIA umbrella now ? If anyone can be said to be responsible for
the
> | OS/2 FUD campaign, it'd be IBM for never being upfront with us. And YES,
> | we deserve it - we bought the product, now come out and tell the truth,
> | get it over with !
>
> I'm afraid that the chances of this happening are rather low.
>
> Even if IBM has no intention of coming out with a new client, if they
> believe a new client is an utter and complete impossibility, they
> won't say so, straight out. They never want to put themselves in the
> position of being wrong. If they say, "We'll never do it" and then
> later they _do_ find themselves in the position of doing it (for
> whatever reason, because situations change) then someone can say, "you
> lied!" So they say, "...not at this time..." which is purposefully
> vague.
>
> I'm not saying that this is the right thing to do, but it's a common
> corporate thing to do. <sigh>
>
> --Esther

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                            22-Sep-99 11:03:23
  To: All                                               22-Sep-99 10:37:23
Subj: Re: No decision regarding OS/2 client was made???

From: Tim Timmins <[e-mail]>

Jeff Glatt wrote:

> This is real entertainment. Apparently, COOA is the place where they
> keep the village idiots

Such as yourself.

Regards,
Tim

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: Paul Doyle                                        22-Sep-99 14:11:26
  To: [e-mail]                               22-Sep-99 14:11:26
Subj: Horka-hoagie, JoeView

Kewel.  Let's try this.


--- Maximus/2 2.02
 * Origin: OS/2 Shareware BBS, telnet://bbs.os2bbs.com (1:109/347)


+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                      22-Sep-99 02:16:12
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:24
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail]      (John Thompson)

In <[e-mail]>, Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]> writes:

>Jeff Glatt wrote:
>
>> Only because you're obviously not competent enough to do what many,
>> many other people (including myself) do routinely -- install Windows.

        [clip]

>Are you saying that no one who is competent has ever had problems
>installing Windows 95?  Or, that if a person has problems installing
>Windows 95, then that is conclusive proof that the person doing the
>install is incompetent?  Surely, you are not guilty of asserting
>that?

No no no.  I think what Jeff must be saying is that people who
use Windows "routinely install Windows."  That is, they get a
great deal of experience in installing Windows, and then
re-installing, and re-installing such that it becomes a rote
procedure and thus is no longer intimidating.

I will confess that I was a bit intimidated when I first
installed OS/2, but that was many years ago now and I've never
had to do it since...

But I think I prefer it that way, really...

-John ([e-mail])

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Crimson Permanent Assurance (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                  22-Sep-99 11:03:08
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:24
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: [e-mail] (Stan Goodman)

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 22:39:51, Kevin Salisbury <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Tim Martin wrote:
>
> > >>Esther Schindler wrote:
>
> > >> Let's just say that I know more than is/was publicly available.
> > >>
> > >As do I Esther.  I chose to speak out about it, to let OS/2 users
> > >know and to not sweep it under the rug or protect the guilty.
> > >Sad that you can't do the same but par for the Esther course.
> >
> > Tim Martin
>
> Tim,
>
> I think your intentions are good - but is this post really constructive?
> No one wants to read constant bickering, especially about a topic as
> important as this one. If everything that you have posted in these
> newsgroups is correct - we will all know it soon enough. Please don't
> feel like your being attacked here, I just think that you should let the
> issue drop until everything that can be known, is. Why stir up the bee
> hive any more than you have too?
>
> Kevin Salisbury

Second that. There is lately some verbal diarrhea in this thread -- made
worse because much of it is complicated by mental constipation.

-------------
Stan Goodman
Qiryat Tiv'on
Israel

Spammers are getting smarter; email sent to [e-mail] will not reach
me. Sorry.
Send E-mail to: domain: hashkedim dot com, username: stan.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Verio (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                  22-Sep-99 11:03:12
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:24
Subj: Re: Judgement Day ... Stardock and OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Stan Goodman)

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 21:50:08, [e-mail] wrote:

> In <[e-mail]>, Dale
Erwin <[e-mail]> writes:
> >> Oh sure, I wouldnt argue this for a moment.  But lets be clear.  The
> >> one thing IBM has been very upfront about is the fact that they do not
> >> want, and are not interested in what they call 'the kitchentop
> >> market'.
> >
> >The phrase 'kitchentop market' conjures up an image into my mind, but
> >that image does not include the small business operator.  I find it
> >sad that IBM sees fit to relegate them to that group.
>
> amid all the talk of IBM and Big Business, it's easy to forget that not
> so long ago IBM sold Selectric typewriters, sold them to any size
> business, supported them well, and made money at it. There's just
> more to this OS/2 thing than meets the eye,

You could go back a little further with that analogy: IBM is the successor
of a company that made cards for punching (machinery for using them came
much later), and made money at it. But (unfortunately, sometimes) the world
moves on. As others have pointed out, IBM, like other companies that do not
belong to non-profit entities, is in the business of making money for its
owners; it is not a charitable trust, and does not exist to advance the OS
art, except as it believes that it can do so at a profit.
>
>
> >--
> >Dale Erwin
> >3624 Coral Gables Drive
> >Dallas, Texas 75229-2619
> >[phone]
>
>
> sk?l !
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> H?rad ?ngravv?rd
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>

-------------
Stan Goodman
Qiryat Tiv'on
Israel

Spammers are getting smarter; email sent to [e-mail] will not reach
me. Sorry.
Send E-mail to: domain: hashkedim dot com, username: stan.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Verio (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                    22-Sep-99 12:13:21
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:24
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

... And all of what Tim writes is a lie unless he lied to
[e-mail].  Thank you for providing even more evidence Tim.

In article <[e-mail]>,
Tim Martin  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>[e-mail] wrote:
>
>> In <[e-mail]>, "D=
>arin McBride" <[e-mail]> writes:
>> >On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 16:37:53 -0700, Tim Martin wrote:
>> snip
>> >>despite the fact that I am an OS/2 web master while she is a
>> >>Ziff Davis reporter.
>> >
>> >Nononono.  You're a *BSD* web master.  Let's keep that straight.
>>
>> do web masters have to work in dungeons, wear the funny black
>> hood, carry a whip ?  warped city is in san francisco,  isn't it ?
>> " *I* am a Web Master . . ."
>>
>> hmm.
>>
>> >
>> sk=86l !
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> H=84rad =92ngravv=86rd
>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
>Actually we've got several servers in several locations.
>Warp City is *framed* because web pages are constantly
>updated or created and simply imported from various
>server locations.   Members reading them don't know
>exactly where they are coming from they just know
>they are at Warp City.
>
>The public site (the brick wall entry point) is located in
>San Francisco.  It is the site most members never
>go to but considered our public site.  It consists of one
>primary web page (although we do provide several
>publicly accessible web pages on that server like
>John *Aloha* Twelker's OS/2-Aptiva Install guide).
>That particular server uses FreeBSD because quite
>frankly, its free and a fine server software and it is the
>only server we use in San Francisco.
>
>We have only one staffer who actually lives in SF and
>she also runs a Coffee House.  Other staffers live in
>Sausalito, Santa Barbara, Craig Colorado, Mississippi,
>and Florida.  We have part-time reporters or writers in
>other various states (Los Angeles, Boston, Chicago,
>Nevada, Kentucky, New York, Hawaii).  All staff members
>have installed and use OS/2 as their operating system.
>Windows (including WinOS2) is banned by company policy.
>None of us has WinOS2 or DOS installed on our systems.
>The company provides each staffer with their own individual
>machines preloaded with OS/2 usually from such dealers
>as Indelible Blue, Diamond Flower or other familiar hardware
>vendors who preload OS/2.  We can access the servers from
>a company 800 number or through individual dialup ISP
>accounts (paid for by the company).
>
>I have never owned or used a Windows application (but
>I have seen them).
>
>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: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          22-Sep-99 11:00:17
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:25
Subj: Re: New OS/2 client not to be

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

"M.P. van Dobben de Bruijn" wrote:
>
> [ ... ]
>
> > KDE is very close to Windows (on many points even overtaking it). Of
> > course, no WM can even stand in the shadow of the WPS (even DFM
> > is basically a kludge). The main - no, the *only* - reason my primary OS
> > is still OS/2 is the WPS. That baby is worse than heroin to quit.
>
> Ah, at least you have some compensation for the failing pills <g> .....
>
>
> >> Perhaps IBM's strategy will be moving desktops to a blend of Linux and
OS/2?
>
> > A true WPS for Linux... Now for such a thing I would put up money for.
>
> Given the time and staff, they must be able to do it and do it right. It
would
> also be a heck of an addition to the Linux world. Especially for
corporations
> and be a major blow to Windows. While they are at it <g> perhaps they could
> do a decent set of basic (Java) applications for the company-desktop as
well?

I have Linux installed at home and am studying to become a Sun Solaris 7
System Administrator (in addition to being administrator for OS/390 software,
and Windows NT Server).  I have been favorably impressed by the Desktop
environment that comes with Solaris 7, but it is no replacement for WPS.
As I have delved further into the Unix architecture, I have found that
there are some, for now, significant show stoppers with regards to running
WPS in the Unix environment (at least, in the Solaris implementation).  I
am not sure how portable this information is to the Linux world, but if
the file system implementation in Linux is based totally on Unix, then
there the hurdles exist in Linux, as well.

The most glaring problem for using WPS in Linux is the total Object
Orientation of WPS and how that is tuned to the underlying file system.
Unix was not designed from the ground up using Object Orientation.  Some
key features in WPS would be broken or hamstrung.  For example, hard and
soft links in the Unix file system are not as powerful as objects and shadows
of
objects in WPS.

As an aside, because of my experience with Linux and Solaris, I downloaded
Megadesk from the IBM Employee Written Software website.  While not perfect,
it is a great tool.  I have six desktop images active at the same time, and
it really helps organize my work by allowing me to distribute the various
open windows onto the different desktops.  Best of all, it's free.

Regards,
Bennie Nelson

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, USA (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               22-Sep-99 08:24:15
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:25
Subj: Adrian Gschwend: "I've Been Misquoted!"

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

   Wednesday, September 22

   Adrian Gschwend, Project Leader for OS/2 NetLabs, has
   responded to the latest article appearing at IDG which quotes
   him as saying "OS/2 is dead". Adrian says, "I wrote this
   *ironicaly*!!! ... I hate statements like this if the most
   important part of my text is missing: All I want to say is KEEP
   USING OS/2!!!" and we certainly believe him. Adrian adds: "I
   am the last person who would say something like this, hell, I
   can't believe it... "

   Those with an agenda, as IDG appears to have,  work to destroy
   OS/2 by purposely 'short quoting' OS/2 leaders if presented with
   the opportunity. They don't want the statements that support
   OS/2 because it doesn't scare people away from OS/2. And that's
   what has happened here. Now getting the damage undone will
   take a lot of work and public disclaimers.  Yet down the road
   there will be those who won't read or see the disclaimer and
   who will never know that Adrian was misquoted.  And there
   will be those with a personal hatred for OS/2 and OS/2 users,
   who will continue to misquote Adrian to give their negative
   positions against OS/2 some credibility.

   So let's repeat: Adrian Gschwend of OS/2 NetLabs FULLY
   supports OS/2 and has been unjustly misquoted in the recent
   IDG article. To read the full and complete text of Adrian's
   article please visit http://www.netlabs.org/tobeornot.html
    entitled "To be or not to be..." by Adrian Gschwend of OS/2
   NetLabs.

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                      22-Sep-99 18:18:07
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:25
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: Martin Nisshagen <[e-mail]>

Jason Bowen [University of Colorado, Boulder] -> comp.os.os2.misc:

» >Windows NT v4 won't install completely on my Dell Pentium Pro desktop
» >system.  Why?  Some of the hardware is not supported.
»
» Can you buy NT pre-installed?  How does the support compare to current

Yes, but not from all vendors is important to note here. Especially many
smaller vendors who mainly target the non professional market usually don't
pre install that (at least not to the same extent as the bigger ones).

From most bigger vendors (Dell, HP, IBM, etc) you get better options and can
also choose between preload of either Windows NT 4.0 or Windows 2000 Beta 3.

Other machines that doesn't come preloaded with Windows NT, but who has the
logotype "Designed for Windows NT" on them, has passed asserted testing labs
that guarantee that it will install and run on those systems.

» OS/2 can't install on a hard drive greater than 8.4 megs.  It doesn't have

That's not true.

Best regards,

m a r t i n | n

--
Martin Nisshagen                 PGP 6.0: 0x45D423AC      K R A F T W E R K
:-)
CS/CE, Chalmers, Sweden          ICQ UIN: 689662          2 x 300A @ 450 MHz
d4nisse-at-dtek-chalmers-se      home2.sbbs2.com/mn
home2.sbbs2.com/mn/kw

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                      22-Sep-99 18:18:08
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:25
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: Martin Nisshagen <[e-mail]>

Darin McBride [@Home Network Canada] -> comp.os.os2.misc:

» >>a machine with say a 10 gig hard drive seems to be a barrier to adoption
» >
» >You've done this with NT I gather?  I mean, NT with no fixes applied?
»
» I can buy a CD that has "NT 4, SP3" on it.  Is there such a CD as "OS/2 Warp

Small correction; I think that should be the NT4 SP4 CD (which is the service
pack level who starts to include support for IDE drives > 8 GB).

Best regards,

m a r t i n | n

--
Martin Nisshagen                 PGP 6.0: 0x45D423AC      K R A F T W E R K
:-)
CS/CE, Chalmers, Sweden          ICQ UIN: 689662          2 x 300A @ 450 MHz
d4nisse-at-dtek-chalmers-se      home2.sbbs2.com/mn
home2.sbbs2.com/mn/kw

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          22-Sep-99 16:54:04
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:25
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]>, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> writes:
>Brad Barclay wrote:
>
>> Tim Martin wrote:
>>
>> > The question arises: why was such a statement made?
>> > Was it merely a miswording?  A mistake borne of the
>> > writer?  Or puposely worded to cause the current reaction
>> > we are all seeing - the anger at IBM, the flood of posts
>> > declaring the flee to Linux or other operating systems,
>> > the businessmen posting their new decisions to drop
>> > OS/2 Warp Server, etc.  Was it purposely worded to force
>> > IBM to rescind their unfavorable decision and give
>> > Stardock what Brad wants?
>>
>>     Tim, you could never be the leader of a revolution.  Che would be very
>> disappointed :).
>>
>>     One great way to start a revolution is to force the issue.  And nothing
>> has ever brought the OS/2 community together so quickly as has Brad
>> Wardell's statement.  And bad press has been used to force companies to
>> rethink their product stances before.
>
>You miss the other side of the coin.  Nothing has ever brought so
>many in the OS/2 community to run away from OS/2 either.  Brad
>may have single handedly whittled OS/2 users down by half and
>for his own (Company's) benefit.

What a laughable statement.  Because you not only can't prove any of it.
and two, how would that benefit Stardock very much anyway?  Economics
seems to be a subject you have the most trouble with Tim.  You've already
stated
your revenue/cost structure of you alleged WarpCity site.  Totally,
nonfunctional,
and most definitely NOT profitable.   But no matter when you don't exist you
don't need to be profitable.


>OS/2 users should run away
>from Brad Wardell and Stardock as quickly as possible.  This is
>not a good leader to follow it is a greedy self-serving child.
>

Oh, I get it.  A better leader would be a child with delusions of greatness?
IOW, you that is.  The mere thought that brad is driving users from OS/2 to
windows
to increase his income is patently absurd.  I don't care what is said in the
press.
I walk over to my computer loaded with OS/2 and it runs, I'm using OS/2 until
something
better comes along.  Win95 is for Games.
and OS/2 is for real work, plain and simple.

have fun in your world laughable one.




>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: Usenet: University of Louisville (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          22-Sep-99 18:28:23
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:25
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>John Thompson
>people who use Windows "routinely install Windows."

Well for sure, they don't routinely install OS/2. Few people use it
any more. I see even more interest in Be OS than OS/2 today

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          22-Sep-99 18:24:01
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:25
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>>>Karel Jansens
>>>Idiots shouldn't install or run OS/2.

>> That doesn't explain why Tholen has installed and run OS/2.

>On the contrary.

On the contrary, it doesn't explain why you're buddy Tholen has
installed and run OS/2.

Here, I'll quote your buddy and note that your failure to explain why
underscores your "reading comprehension problems".

>BTW, do you install or run OS/2?
>(Only asking, I'm sure I know the answer)

I'm sure you don't have a clue. After all, I've read a number of your
posts to this newsgroup

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             22-Sep-99 13:49:11
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:25
Subj: IBM Speaks...

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>

The following message is from Stephen King, an IBM exec who spoke last
Saturday at Warp Expo West to Dan Casey, president of VOICE.  It is
excerpted from a WarpCast post by Dan Casey that can be read at:

http://www.os2ss.com/warpcast/wc4117.html

[9/21/99]
**********************Begin Stephen King Message**********************
Hi Dan -

The IPMT (Integrated Product Management Team) meeting scheduled for 9/16
did
not take place due to the weather situation on the east coast. There are
2 key
issues that we are facing:

     Volume/revenue forecast for such an offering

     National language plan (can we release an offering with fewer than
an
     IBM-required 28 NLVs)

Any outcome projection at this point would be incomplete.

Steven

**********************End Stephen King Message**********************

Stephen King apparently is a member of the IPMT committee whose 9/16/99
meeting was cancelled.  (He must be, he knows what IPMT stands for
<heh><heh>).  Stephen makes no reference whatsoever to any earlier
pre-meeting where IBM supposedly turned Stardock down and "indicated" to
Brad Wardell that no new OS/2 client was coming.  The only references to
this phantom pre-meeting meeting seem to be from Brad Wardell and Tim
Sipples of IBM.  In a post to Dan Casey, Tim Sipples says:

"The [judgment day] meeting didn't take place because there was a
meeting ahead of the meeting, at which it was decided there wasn't any
need to have a meeting because IBM was not going to pursue Stardock's
proposal (and the "agreement in principle" between IBM and
Stardock)...IBM hasn't ruled any third party out of offering a new
client, but it hasn't ruled any third party (or itself) *in*, either..."

Tim concludes his message by saying:

"And I'll repeat my earlier comment which is that I'm in the dark on
this one (because I am)."

Tim says the judgment day meeting did not happen because of the
pre-meeting.  Stephen King says the judgment day meeting did not happen
because of weather problems.  Stephen sits on the IPMT committee meeting
and would be expected to the be the most knowledgable about this.  Tim
freely admits that he is 'in the dark,' which makes his comments more
speculative in nature.

So we are again left with Brad Wardell's statement which I urge everyone
who is interested to reread.  (It is included at the URL listed above.)
The tone of Brad's statement is that some sort of major and final
decision was made by IBM which 'killed' OS/2.  He is the only person
with this message.  If Hurricane George had not lead to the IPMt meeting
cancellation, perhaps this would have been an accurate message.  But
George hit, the meeting was cancelled, and it appears to me that there
is a large quantity of egg running down Brad's face and dripping from
his chin.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             21-Sep-99 16:51:15
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:25
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: "Doug Darrow" <[e-mail]>

On 21 Sep 1999 12:41:22 GMT, Esther Schindler wrote:

>Let's just say that I know more than is/was publicly available.
>
>--Esther

I actually wanted the SECOND part of that question answered. I was
pretty sure the FIRST part would be in the affirmative.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                            22-Sep-99 22:26:16
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:25
Subj: Re: OS2NetLabs Head: "OS/2 is Dead"

From: "Adrian Gschwend" <[e-mail]>

On 21 Sep 1999 22:06:01 -0500, Jason wrote:

Hi Jason,

>Personally I don't think Adrian got a fair representation in the
>article.  Your only quote from a person, shouldn't be text that was
>italicised.

You are completely right. It looks like the OS/2 community is able to
interpret my text as it should be. But IDG Net is not able to do this. I
wrote this statement ironicaly because this is the most written sentence in
the "press" about OS/2 and I just wanted to show, that this is another
bullshit we don't care about...

For sure I and OS/2 Netlabs are 200% behind OS/2 and we will keep up our
efforts to provide great applications for the best OS available. BTW: We will
also start two projects to rewrite os2ldr and os2krnl, so OS/2 is far away
from beeing dead!

Thanks for your words, you are right

BTW: Tim Martin contacted me and as you can see he already corrected the
statement, thanks Tim.

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]                            22-Sep-99 22:21:20
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:25
Subj: Re: OS/2ezine??

From: "Adrian Gschwend" <[e-mail]>

On 21 Sep 1999 20:04:05 GMT, Mirage Media wrote:

>Does anyone know it's status? Is it ever coming back?

I'm sure about that. They are working on a new webbackend to provide more up
to date articles, I do the same with OS/2 Netlabs and I know how much time
this effort is taking (Netlabs should be ready for month, but it still
isn't...). Be patient.

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]                             21-Sep-99 17:40:01
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:25
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: "Doug Darrow" <[e-mail]>

On 20 Sep 1999 23:04:20 GMT, Jason Bowen wrote:

>.... and you will always lick-up what they tell you too.  I don't notice
>IBM saying anything bad about what Brad said, do you?  I don't see press
>releases denouncing what he said. ...

True, but then, IBM has NEVER been known for defending itself with
public statements. Back when they WERE supporting and pushing OS/2 on
the desktop you never saw them defend themselves against M$ FUD either.
I'd think you'd have to cut them pretty deeply to get any kind of
PUBLIC statement from them.

It's already been mentioned in this group, but it is evident now that
there are more proposals on the table than the one from StarDock.
Remember that DC (NOT BW!) once approached IBM about marketing WSeB
with fewer than the 20 client licenses now required -- and was turned
down by IBM as well. Yet here we are, six months later, and Serinity
Systems is doing just that. With no fanfare, no big media event to
launch this remarkable "idea". Add to THAT fact a statement made by Tim
Sipples way back when IBM first announced that it was dropping support
for small users. Tim's statement, which occurred in an open newsgroup
exchange between Tim and Timur Tabi follows:

>--[quote]--<

A word about OS/2 Warp Version 5...  In the past we (IBM) have gotten
burned (frankly) by overpromising and underdelivering.  I know this may
seem revolutionary, but we're going to try underpromising and
overdelivering for a while and see how that goes.  What we're going to
promise is continued enhancements across the entire OS/2 Warp product
line (not just fixes).  I think we've amply demonstrated that
commitment
already (for example, with the fastest Java on the PC, the only Java
1.1.4 outside of Javasoft, and the fastest and arguably most complete
TCP/IP suite on the PC).

>--[end quote]--<

The above statement was made in November of 1997! Has IBM followed
through with "underpromising?" You BET they have! Have they also
followed through with "overdelivering?" You be the judge. But one thing
I feel fairly certain of; We won't ever know what IBM's "plans" are
until THEY decide to announce them.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                            22-Sep-99 18:29:05
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:25
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>>
>> Now, while word processing can be done on lesser machines, like my
mother-in-
>> laws 486/Word 97 combo, number crunching needs the faster hardware
possible.
>> For example, I ran SETI@home on my P166 and overclocked(366->550) Celeron.
It
>> took 9.24 hours to complete on the Celeron. 18 hours later, the P166 was
almost
>> 20% done. That is sheer number crunching. How exactly can this be done on
less
>> expensive hardware than the marketeers would have one think?
>
>Just a little aside here FWIW.  On my same given system, I run Warp 4, and
>used to run NT 4.0.  With the same hardware configuration, I benchmarked
>the latest versions (at the time) of the RC5-64 clients in OS/2 and NT.  On
>the same hardware, the OS/2 client got 15K keys/sec higher than the NT one
>did (for my machine, that's about a 5% speed difference).  The OS/2 client
>version was older than the NT client by about a week.  I realize this is
>not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison, as the RC5 client software was
>"different," but I think it's as close as you can get for pure
>number-crunching benchmark comparison.
>
>- Marty
>

So what? First, let's say it is apples to apple? So what? 5% is nothing.
Second, how were they compiled? Were they optimized? Do you know?

What was running on both machines?

It is a bad number-crunching comparsion, and all but meaningless as a standard

of comparsion. Heck, for SETI, I've got a friend who has the same overclocked
CPU running Win2k and a very similar application mix and yet his SETI clocked
14 hours and mine did 9.5.

Does this mean that my machine is 1.5 times faster? No.

--
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               22-Sep-99 22:25:27
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:25
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 23:51:31, "Doug Darrow" <[e-mail]>
wrote:

| I actually wanted the SECOND part of that question answered. I was
| pretty sure the FIRST part would be in the affirmative.

I've been around IBM way too long to pretend an ability to
second-guess their decisions. (Even when I know what one person or
group _wants_ to happen, I'm smart enough by now to grok that it won't
necessarily happen.)

--Esther

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]               22-Sep-99 14:33:20
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:25
Subj: Re: IBM Speaks...

From: "Kim Cheung" <[e-mail]>

On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 13:49:23 -0400, David T. Johnson wrote:

>So we are again left with Brad Wardell's statement which I urge everyone
>who is interested to reread.  (It is included at the URL listed above.)

David,

Please.    These kind of post are making life harder for all those involved.

All three of them are correct.

It's a wonderful way of life dealing with IBM.




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               22-Sep-99 22:36:22
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:25
Subj: Re: OS2NetLabs Head: "OS/2 is Dead"

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 04:02:21, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
| Expect to read the same kind of thing at Ziff Davis, Wired,
| CNET, TechWire, InfoWorld, The Register, SJ Mercury News,
| MSNBC News, USANews, etc.  Because they'll pick up the
| IDG story and site the quotes from that story verbatim.

Sheesh, you sure don't seem to read messages.

I already told you -- at least once -- that ZDNN isn't interested. We
don't consider this a news story.

Oh... it's *cite,* not *site.* Please _do_ hurry out and buy that
dictionary, would you?

--Esther

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               22-Sep-99 22:52:13
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:25
Subj: Re: Question about Warp Expo

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 06:07:10, [e-mail] wrote:

| I was unable to attend Warp Expo West as I had prior
| commitments.
|
| I really wanted to attend the video editing program. I would really like
| to know which cards the presenter found that worked best for video
| editing. Is this info on the web? Or can someone share?

I didn't have a chance to attend that session, gino, but I suspect
that one of the organizers can put you in touch with the presenter.
I'm sure their information is still up at
http://www.scoug.com/warpexpowest. (Along with pictures from the
event.)

(Since there were a lot of OS/2 advocates at the event, I'm taking the
liberty of crossposting this message to c.o.o.advocacy.)

--Esther

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               22-Sep-99 19:12:21
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:25
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >
> >Just a little aside here FWIW.  On my same given system, I run Warp 4, and
> >used to run NT 4.0.  With the same hardware configuration, I benchmarked
> >the latest versions (at the time) of the RC5-64 clients in OS/2 and NT.  On
> >the same hardware, the OS/2 client got 15K keys/sec higher than the NT one
> >did (for my machine, that's about a 5% speed difference).  The OS/2 client
> >version was older than the NT client by about a week.  I realize this is
> >not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison, as the RC5 client software was
> >"different," but I think it's as close as you can get for pure
> >number-crunching benchmark comparison.
> >
> >- Marty
> >
>
> So what? First, let's say it is apples to apple? So what? 5% is nothing.

Well... on the same hardware, I thought it was a bit odd.  It's very
reproducable.  I didn't just run the benchmark until it went "my way" and
then call it quits.  I took the average of 5 runs for each platform.  The
5%, as I said before, equates to 15K keys/sec.  To (possibly) put things in
perspective, a SparcStation II maxes out at around 15K keys/sec.

> Second, how were they compiled? Were they optimized? Do you know?

Yes.  Both were optimized and I was using the K6 MMX optimized cores in
both cases.

> What was running on both machines?

Firstly, it was the same machine.  Secondly, the Win32 system was running
NT 4.0 with no networking installed and no apps in the Systray or started
in any manner that I knew about.  In OS/2, I had full networking, FTP
daemon, and Apache web server running, though I don't think they were being
accessed during the benchmark.  No foreground applications were running,
nor did I even touch the keyboard or mouse while the benchmark was being
conducted.

> It is a bad number-crunching comparsion, and all but meaningless as a
standard
> of comparsion.

How so?  Everything is identical except for the OS, the software running on
it at the time (which should have biased it towards NT), and the frontend
to the RC5 client (though the optimized cores are the same code).

> Heck, for SETI, I've got a friend who has the same overclocked
> CPU running Win2k and a very similar application mix and yet his SETI
clocked
> 14 hours and mine did 9.5.
>
> Does this mean that my machine is 1.5 times faster? No.

Right, but weren't you both using your machines over that time?  I'm
talking about a pure benchmark where the "benchmarking software" is all
that is running without disturbance.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             22-Sep-99 16:14:15
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:25
Subj: Re: Is IBM serious about licensing OS/2?

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>


Kim Cheung wrote:
>
> On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 10:08:01 -0400, David T. Johnson wrote:
>
> >If IBM was truly considering a Stardock proposal to license their OS/2
> >software, it seems that they would have to make some sort of effort to
> >determine if the Stardock deal was the best one they could make.  Does
> >IBM really know that other software companies are NOT interested in
> >selling an OS/2 client?  Why not open this up to bidding to see just who
> >is really interested and how much they will pay?
>
> It would be nice if things work that way.

Don't think for a moment that they won't.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                      22-Sep-99 23:22:04
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:25
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
  Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:

<snip>

> All staff members have installed and use OS/2 as their operating
> system. Windows (including WinOS2) is banned by company policy.
> None of us has WinOS2 or DOS installed on our systems.

Mein Fⁿhrer, klingt wie eine gute Politik zum Zerst÷ren der schlechten
freien denker. Alle hageln den Fⁿhrer!

--
-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/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you do
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               22-Sep-99 22:48:11
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:25
Subj: Re: Who to believe?  [follow-up]

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

David,

I concur with Kim.

People are hard at work finding out (a) what actually happened and,
more importantly (b) what can happen from here. I know several people
who have burned up phone lines, in the last several days, spending
non-billable time trying to come to a resolution that's good for
_everyone_ concerned.

To the best I've been able to tell -- and the story is far from over
-- _EVERYBODY TOLD THE TRUTH_ as they knew it, based on the
information available to them at the time. Every one of the people
you've heard from (directly or indirectly) had and has the best
interests of the OS/2 community at heart, and wants a new client.

Speculation, finger-pointing, and blamefinding do _not_ help anybody
right now. All they do is create anger and dissension, which are
qualities that the OS/2 community already has in overabundance. Some
here might already hate Stardock; others might not personally care
about the existance of a new client but resent any "...but it's dead!"
claims. Please, set all those emotional issues aside for a couple of
days, and let the people who have the IBM or other contacts find out
the actuality instead of the apparency. Instead of yelling about who
set the fire, why not grab a bucket and help to put it out?

In the meantime, I suggest that this would be a good time to get in a
discussion about the success of Warp Expo West and what _else_ you
learned there, plus who you're likely to meet at Warpstock, and what
the OS/2 NetLabs is busy working on. If indeed c.o.o.a has lurkers
looking for funeral pyres, wouldn't it be a little more effective for
them to discover a lively discussion about where we're going, rather
than where we've been?

--Esther

On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 02:47:19, "David T. Johnson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

| Kim Cheung wrote:
| >
| > On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 17:11:11 -0400, David T. Johnson wrote:
| >
| > >>
| >
| > David,
| >
| > I admire your die-heart support of OS/2 but please don't flame Brad.
|
| It wasn't my intent to flame.  I do feel that it is important to
| question some of the apparent inconsistencies in the Judgment Day story
| until it is a little clearer as to what actually happened.  I also think
| it is time for Brad to step forward and tell us exactly what has
| happened rather than lead us on with his vague ('trust me, it's true!)
| stories of the death of OS/2.  Brad Wardell has convinced a large number
| of OS/2 users that he has their interests at heart and is now busy going
| around pronouncing OS/2 to be dead based on his personal account of this
| 'Judgment Day' meeting.  After repeated challenges, he seems to agree
| that the Judgment Day meeting did not actually happen but OS/2 died
| anyway at another meeting 'several days earlier.'  If he does not have
| personal knowledge of the judgment day (whatever day it was) meeting, he
| shouldn't go around suggesting that he does.  If he was told this stuff
| by someone else, he should identify the source.  And I find it hard to
| believe that if he is bound by a nondisclosure agreement that prevents
| him from talking, that such an agreement would still allow him to
| provide the information that he has posted in his various statements.
| So YES, I have a LOT of questions and I think OS/2 users deserve some
| answers from Mr. Wardell.   And no, I don't think these questions are
| "flames."
|
| >  He did
| > everything in his power to push this.   There is no inconsistency with
what
| > he said because it was based on what he was told or lead to believe.
|
| Excuse me but Brad Wardell is claiming that IBM told him at a 'Judgment
| Day' meeting (as Brad refers to it) that they were not going to develop
| another OS/2 client and that they also would not give a license to
| Brad's company, Stardock, to do it.  Now, Brad is posting that this is
| the "Death of OS/2" as revealed to him by IBM.
|
| I personally do not believe that IBM knows what they will do with the
| OS/2 client but I WAS willing to believe that this corporate committee
| at IBM had told him this (we all seem to want to believe this, don't we)
| until it turned out that this Judgment Day meeting did not actually even
| happen.  THEN, Brad's story about the Death of OS/2 started sounding
| pretty shaky.  NOW, I have a LOT of questions as I posted earlier.
|
| And I have another question that I did not mention earlier.  Based on my
| experience, I am very skeptical that a decision on a relatively minor
| IBM product like the OS/2 client would be decided by some high-level
| corporate committee.  The product is currently owned by the Network
| Computing Software Division and THEY would have ultimate profit-and-loss
| responsibility for their division and its products.  Corporate
| management might establish strategic directions for divisions but I
| don't think they could or would reach down into a division and make
| decisions about any one product such as a relatively low-cost (to IBM,
| anyway) update to the OS/2 client.  The more I think about it, the more
| ridiculous this sounds.  So how about it Brad, WHO at IBM Corporate do
| you say was making these decisions?


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                            22-Sep-99 20:38:09
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:25
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>>
>> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>> >
>> >Just a little aside here FWIW.  On my same given system, I run Warp 4, and
>> >used to run NT 4.0.  With the same hardware configuration, I benchmarked
>> >the latest versions (at the time) of the RC5-64 clients in OS/2 and NT.
On
>> >the same hardware, the OS/2 client got 15K keys/sec higher than the NT one
>> >did (for my machine, that's about a 5% speed difference).  The OS/2 client
>> >version was older than the NT client by about a week.  I realize this is
>> >not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison, as the RC5 client software was
>> >"different," but I think it's as close as you can get for pure
>> >number-crunching benchmark comparison.
>> >
>> >- Marty
>> >
>>
>> So what? First, let's say it is apples to apple? So what? 5% is nothing.
>
>Well... on the same hardware, I thought it was a bit odd.  It's very
>reproducable.  I didn't just run the benchmark until it went "my way" and
>then call it quits.  I took the average of 5 runs for each platform.  The
>5%, as I said before, equates to 15K keys/sec.  To (possibly) put things in
>perspective, a SparcStation II maxes out at around 15K keys/sec.

Again, it is difficult to get excited about 5%.

>> Second, how were they compiled? Were they optimized? Do you know?
>
>Yes.  Both were optimized and I was using the K6 MMX optimized cores in
>both cases.

What compiler optimizations?

>> What was running on both machines?
>
>Firstly, it was the same machine.  Secondly, the Win32 system was running
>NT 4.0 with no networking installed and no apps in the Systray or started
>in any manner that I knew about.  In OS/2, I had full networking, FTP
>daemon, and Apache web server running, though I don't think they were being
>accessed during the benchmark.  No foreground applications were running,
>nor did I even touch the keyboard or mouse while the benchmark was being
>conducted.

Taskmanager on NT? Did the screensave kick in on OS/2?

>> It is a bad number-crunching comparsion, and all but meaningless as a
standard
>> of comparsion.
>
>How so?  Everything is identical except for the OS, the software running on
>it at the time (which should have biased it towards NT), and the frontend
>to the RC5 client (though the optimized cores are the same code).

But are were they optimized using the same compiler? Do they start at the same

default priorities?

>> Heck, for SETI, I've got a friend who has the same overclocked
>> CPU running Win2k and a very similar application mix and yet his SETI
clocked
>> 14 hours and mine did 9.5.
>>
>> Does this mean that my machine is 1.5 times faster? No.
>
>Right, but weren't you both using your machines over that time?  I'm
>talking about a pure benchmark where the "benchmarking software" is all
>that is running without disturbance.

No. We both left the machines idle. In fact, I have more stuff running on mine

in the systray, yet it took his almost 50% longer to finish.

>- Marty
>

--
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               22-Sep-99 20:19:28
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 04:15:25
Subj: Re: OS2NetLabs Head: "OS/2 is Dead"

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

William Sonna wrote:
>
> On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 21:17:19, Marty <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> > Adrian Gschwend wrote:
> > >
> > > For sure I and OS/2 Netlabs are 200% behind OS/2 and we will keep up our
> > > efforts to provide great applications for the best OS available. BTW: We
will
> > > also start two projects to rewrite os2ldr and os2krnl, so OS/2 is far
away
> > > from beeing dead!
> >
> > Is this going to be done from scratch or is there some pre-existing
> > source code involved?
> >
> > Also, why were these two picked as important to rewrite?  Why not target
> > PMSHELL (not all of it and the API, mind you, just the shell itself) to
> > get rid of some of the single input queue problems?  It seems like a
> > more managable and possibly more fruitful project.  Just my $.02.
> >
> > - Marty
>
> No way.  Get a simple command-line OS working and build from there.
> The shell comes later (much later).
>
> After all, you can't build much without a good foundation. And
> anything but open-source looks pretty shakey these days.  My $0.02.

My point being... why start from scratch when you can work on the stuff
that <really> needs work off of a pre-existing platform?  Is the goal to
make a FreeWarp type of thing so that anyone can download and install it,
or is the goal to give the existing platform extended life for all of its
current users?

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             22-Sep-99 16:13:12
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 06:08:13
Subj: Re: IBM Speaks...

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>


Kim Cheung wrote:
>
> On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 13:49:23 -0400, David T. Johnson wrote:
>
> >So we are again left with Brad Wardell's statement which I urge everyone
> >who is interested to reread.  (It is included at the URL listed above.)
>
> David,
>
> Please.    These kind of post are making life harder for all those involved.

I was not attempting to make life easier for 'all those involved.'  Why
are you assuming that this is a goal?  To whom are you referring,
anyway?

>
> All three of them are correct.

What?  Which three?

>
> It's a wonderful way of life dealing with IBM.

Glad you're enjoying life! :).

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                    22-Sep-99 23:41:23
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 06:08:13
Subj: Re: Did Brad make me drop OS/2? was: Re: Netlabs statement about the fu

From: [e-mail] (William Sonna)

On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 00:59:53, Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Jason wrote:
> >
> > In comp.os.os2.advocacy Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > : I do not accept anecdotal stories from strangers as found in
> > : USENET as proof.  Why?  Because email addresses are so easy
> > : to counterfeit.  That may be arbitrary on my part, but I
> > : believe it is quite reasonable.  Now, if there is incontrovertible
> > : evidence from a source other than USENET, then I will consider
> > : the USENET data in light of the other information.  But, to
> > : solely rely upon USENET is not, in my estimation, sufficient
> > : for establishing your position.
> >
> > I'm one of the people who posted that I was going to "drop" OS/2.  You
> > can email me to prove my address is not fake.  If you check the Stardock
> > news server you'll find many people who are or now are considering to
> > drop OS/2.  These have been people who have been pro-OS/2.
>
> The following paragraphs completely back up my claim that the SD decision
> was a part of the decision to move on from OS/2, BUT the SD decision and
> Brad Wardell in particular are not the SOLE reason for leaving OS/2.
>

If I have learned anything from usenet, it is not to believe
testimonials in general, and in particular the testimonials of
individuals trying to make a point.

I personally think that anyone who freaks out and dumps OS/2 over this
probably was on the bubble, or is not thinking rationally anyway.

But will it encourage a large number of users to explore other
options?  You bet.

Ironically,  if you are following the (IBM) party line/mantra ("making
the transition to network computing"), you're supposed to be doing
that anyway.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                    23-Sep-99 00:08:10
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 06:08:13
Subj: Re: OS2NetLabs Head: "OS/2 is Dead"

From: [e-mail] (William Sonna)

On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 21:17:19, Marty <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Adrian Gschwend wrote:
> >
> > For sure I and OS/2 Netlabs are 200% behind OS/2 and we will keep up our
> > efforts to provide great applications for the best OS available. BTW: We
will
> > also start two projects to rewrite os2ldr and os2krnl, so OS/2 is far away
> > from beeing dead!
>
> Is this going to be done from scratch or is there some pre-existing
> source code involved?
>
> Also, why were these two picked as important to rewrite?  Why not target
> PMSHELL (not all of it and the API, mind you, just the shell itself) to
> get rid of some of the single input queue problems?  It seems like a
> more managable and possibly more fruitful project.  Just my $.02.
>
> - Marty

No way.  Get a simple command-line OS working and build from there.
The shell comes later (much later).

After all, you can't build much without a good foundation. And
anything but open-source looks pretty shakey these days.  My $0.02.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                22-Sep-99 20:52:26
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 06:08:13
Subj: Re: Judgment Day ... Stardock and OS/2

From: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Buddy Donnelly) said:
>Businesses are not Star Boarders on this planet. Businesses drink our  water,
>breath our air, take up space in our community and therefore have  the SAME
>responsibilities towards the community, to enhance, improve, and  protect the
>common good and commonwealth, as any of its citizens, so they  are NOT
allowed
>to smirk and say "We get to do this or that crime against  humanity because
all
>we have to do is make profits for our shareholders."

>I agree it's not popular, and I agree it's not usual, to say this,

Hear, hear.

Businesses are, composed of people.  Your picture of business is a picture of
people.  And they say the race is improving.

Jim L
Remove XX from address to Email
Crooks and kooks will get guns regardless of laws.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                     23-Sep-99 04:39:23
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 06:08:14
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail]

Steven Hunter writes:

> Joe Malloy wrote:

> <snip>

>>> It was released yesterday.  Go to IBM's Software Choice web site.

>> Not when I was there it wasn't.

> Oh I see; you're the ultimate judge of what is fact and not... If you
> don't see it, it can't possibly be true.

Par for Malloy.  I certainly didn't have any trouble finding the betas
that have been available for download for several weeks.  Of course,
Malloy was probably there years ago but not since then.

>>> Chalk up another bonehead posting by Joe Malloy.

>> IBM posts his Netscape 4.61 just in the nick of time (at least
>> according to him).  It figures Tholen is a bonehead about it -- once
>> a Kook-of-the-Month, always a Kook.

> Why can't you just admit you were wrong?

It would go against his pattern of posting just to contradict or abuse
me.  He has a lengthy track record of such responses.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                     23-Sep-99 04:41:29
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 06:08:14
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail]

Bennie Nelson writes:

>>>> Bennie Nelson writes [to Jeff Glatt]:

>>>>> You've taken to using Dave Tholen's words to convey your meaning.
That's
>>>>> risky, don't you think?  People might actually say that because you're
>>>>> using his words, that means you're just like him.  In fact, that's the
>>>>> kind of thing you've done in the past.

>>>> Except I haven't engaged in libel the way Jeff did recently.

>>> I guess I could have put <g> at the end of that paragraph.

>> You could have.

>>> I wasn't trying to imply the reverse situation: that you are like Jeff.

>> I still don't agree with the non-reverse situation.

> I don't, either.  And, I figured that Jeff didn't, either.  He just didn't
> think through the consequences of his words versus his erroneous
condemnation
> of me for writing something similar.  Knowing Jeff's antipathy towards you,
I
> thought it was a good opportunity to shove a mirror in front of him and hope
> that he'd see the error in his thinking.

Been there, done that.  He doesn't see himself in that mirror.  Must
be a vampire.

>>> I was simply pointing out to Jeff a ramification of a tactic he'd used
>>> earlier.  I'd cited the fact that some people believe that playing cards
>>> is immoral.  He used that to assert that I was allied with those people
>>> as an active supporter, and moreover, that I was just like those people.
>>>
>>> Given his train of thought: since he'd cited your words, that makes
>>> him a Tholen supporter, and furthermore, it means he's just like you.

>> There are significant differences between me and Jeff.

> Agreed.

>>>>> You really need to be careful what you post here.

>>>> Yes, he should.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                   23-Sep-99 02:15:15
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 06:08:14
Subj: NS 4.61GA  Was: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail]   (Joe Kovacs)

In <7s9cl2$bbb$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
>In article <[e-mail]>,
>  "Joe Malloy" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> Something vaporous like a <[e-mail]> tholened:
>>
>> > I'm a home user, and IBM is providing me with Netscape 4.61, which
>> > isn't what I call abandonment.
>>
>> Where is Netscape 4.61 for your beloved OS?  Why, nowhere to be seen!
>
>Try here:
>ftp://service5.boulder.ibm.com/software/asd/ns40/en_us/comm461.exe

Not so.  You get NS 4.61GA from Software Choice, here and
drill in...

http://www.software.ibm.com/os/warp/swchoice/

When you're downloading NS 4.61, you might see that it's
coming from the Boulder site above.  But that is closed to you
and you cannot get to that site directly, you must get to it
through the Software Choice page.


Joe Kovacs
Guelph Ontario Canada


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Water Utilities Hydraulic Analysis (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                              22-Sep-99 22:57:01
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 06:08:14
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: Dennis Peterson <[e-mail]>

rj friedman wrote:
>
> It would be funny, if it weren't so ludicrous, the way so
> many are fuming and venting, rushing to blame IBM for the
> Stardock/Warp5 fiasco.

I don't know if it was a fiasco. There is no proof one way or the other.

> Has it not occurred to anyone that
> the reason Stardock was turned down was because they were
> not able to come up with a sufficiently convincing business
> plan that would persuade IBM it was worth their while to
> entrust OS/2 to Stardock?

How do you know Stardock applied for something at IBM for which they
were turned down?

dp

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: I'm not organized at all (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               22-Sep-99 19:47:29
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:01
Subj: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: "Kelly Robinson" <[e-mail]>

Let's assume I'm a typical 95/98/NT user (I use more than windows but let's
stick to what the majority uses for my damning point:)

If I, as an uninformed typical computer user who doesn't know the
behind-the-scenes stuff, and heard that someone created a virus or trojan or
lifestyles or whatever sort of nasty which would exterminate my computer, I
would more likely blame the fucking bastards who created these things (who
claim they want to point of MS bugs but are merely TERRORIZING THE FRIGGING
PUBLIC by their despicable acts).

So to you fucking bastards and everyone else who want to blame MS, keep this
truth in mind:

When one man kills another with a shotgun and takes his posessions, who is
to blame:  the man or the gun?

The computer is the gun.

The man who makes the virus is no different than the man who  has a gun,
aims it, and shoots it once or thrice.

So for those of you who like to laugh in MS's face, go right ahead.  I might
almost join you.

But unlike you, there are millions who suffer because supposedly intelligent
people use viruses and such s if you took a cat and tormented and physically
beaten it.

Bottom line?  You cannot excuse the behavior.

You cannot say that MS's lack of security is to blame.  Why not get some
sugar, find a car, and dump the sugar in?  Who's to blame for making a car
with inadequate fuel locking systems?  Your arguement is bullshit since it
is inevitable that something is going to be missed.  Inevitable.  You remain
civilized.  You do not be a spoiled little brat who deserves to die in an
electric chair and fuck up millions of lives.

Fair enough?   See you in hell, hackers, I'll bribe the devil to give you a
nasty punishment.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: http://extra.newsguy.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                      22-Sep-99 21:27:11
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:01
Subj: Anti-Windows t-shirts at www.dumbentia.com

From: "ccondon" <[e-mail]>

Dumbentia - http://www.dumbentia.com

Do you hate Windows? Do you dislike Microsoft with a vengeance? Then take a
look at the new anti-Windows t-shirts now available at Dumbentia.

The designs include:

 - Just Say NO to Windows
 - Windows Sucks
 - Friends Don't Let Friends Do Windows
 - I think, therefore I run Linux
 - Where does Microsoft want you to go today?



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: larson (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               22-Sep-99 19:33:22
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:01
Subj: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: "Kelly Robinson" <[e-mail]>

Every time some one rags on all of the MacOS weak points (a very un-easy to
use 1 button mouse, co-operative (in other words, none) multitasking,
frequent system crashes because you did somtehing with an app such as
attempting to start a second instance of it [to you mac users who live in
the 19th century:  a second instance is running the program again.  In real
OSes, the program can run as many times as it wants and in seperate
allocated memory spaces.  This can be extremely useful.]  I could go on and
on...)

Anyway, when I say that, MacOS users promptly remind me that MacOS X solves
these problems.

But what do they try to hide?  The facts that mac OS X is currently an
overpriced server OS and that the WORKSTATION edition (what we want,
apparently) is still not out - and won't be until mid-2000.  Is this to
ensure it's Y2K compliant?   hehe.

So, Mac losers, do you want us to wait for Apple to finish wiping its rear,
having finished using the toilet... or should people get something which
suits their needs NOW?

Most people need stuff now.  Loyalty only goes so far.  And if you need more
than a pretty case, Apple is completely and utterly worthless.

So if you want everything the Mac lacks, get Windows NT or BeOS.  They're
easier to use than MacOS and infinitely superior (BeOS is so superior that
Apple prohibited Be from making BeOS for their G3-based hardware!  Apple
can't stand the fact that someone else made something better than them and a
lot sooner.  Heh, ask Xerox about that...)

So, in conclusion, and I hope every single one of you has tuned in, you Mac
people need to get real.  Apple hasn't a prayer (or a penis) to grab a hold
on.  So when somebody posts these simple truths about macs, DO NOT e-mail
that person back saying Mac OS X is out.  That's bullshit.  Nobody who is
sane would pay $1000 for a server OS to exclusively run workstation apps and
no more.  Of course, you guys are mac users...  and nobody would sit like a
bump on a log to wait for Apple to get its act together.  Remember that OS/2
thing?  IBM made it.  IBM also sat like a lump thinking people would buy it.
Nope, people saw OS/2's weaknesses (combined with IBM's own obvious attitude
toward it) so OS/2 died, and good riddance.  Let's hope Apple does the same
and soon.  Apple needs to be put out of its misery since all its products
are filled with worms.

Oh yeah, if OS X Server is out, why the [beep] is the workstation edition
taking soooooooo long?  That's ridiculous and is worthy of investigation,
not blind hubris.  But then, you're mac people and hubris is natural to you.

Cheers,
a realist.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: http://extra.newsguy.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             22-Sep-99 21:38:08
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:01
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: "Brian Lewis" <[e-mail]>

Kelly, I say this only because I care.. There are many decaffinated brands
on the market that are just as tasty as the real thing.

Kelly Robinson <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:7sbtci$[e-mail]...
> Let's assume I'm a typical 95/98/NT user (I use more than windows but
let's
> stick to what the majority uses for my damning point:)
>
> If I, as an uninformed typical computer user who doesn't know the
> behind-the-scenes stuff, and heard that someone created a virus or trojan
or
> lifestyles or whatever sort of nasty which would exterminate my computer,
I
> would more likely blame the fucking bastards who created these things (who
> claim they want to point of MS bugs but are merely TERRORIZING THE
FRIGGING
> PUBLIC by their despicable acts).
>
> So to you fucking bastards and everyone else who want to blame MS, keep
this
> truth in mind:
>
> When one man kills another with a shotgun and takes his posessions, who is
> to blame:  the man or the gun?
>
> The computer is the gun.
>
> The man who makes the virus is no different than the man who  has a gun,
> aims it, and shoots it once or thrice.
>
> So for those of you who like to laugh in MS's face, go right ahead.  I
might
> almost join you.
>
> But unlike you, there are millions who suffer because supposedly
intelligent
> people use viruses and such s if you took a cat and tormented and
physically
> beaten it.
>
> Bottom line?  You cannot excuse the behavior.
>
> You cannot say that MS's lack of security is to blame.  Why not get some
> sugar, find a car, and dump the sugar in?  Who's to blame for making a car
> with inadequate fuel locking systems?  Your arguement is bullshit since it
> is inevitable that something is going to be missed.  Inevitable.  You
remain
> civilized.  You do not be a spoiled little brat who deserves to die in an
> electric chair and fuck up millions of lives.
>
> Fair enough?   See you in hell, hackers, I'll bribe the devil to give you
a
> nasty punishment.
>
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               22-Sep-99 21:56:08
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:01
Subj: Re: Anti-Windows t-shirts at www.dumbentia.com

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

ccondon wrote:
>
> Dumbentia - http://www.dumbentia.com
>
> Do you hate Windows? Do you dislike Microsoft with a vengeance? Then take a
> look at the new anti-Windows t-shirts now available at Dumbentia.
>
> The designs include:
>
>  - Just Say NO to Windows
>  - Windows Sucks
>  - Friends Don't Let Friends Do Windows
>  - I think, therefore I run Linux
>  - Where does Microsoft want you to go today?

Why not just make shirts that say, "Kick me," "Mug me," or "I'm a computer
dork"?

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                    23-Sep-99 01:50:07
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:01
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: Steve Mading <[e-mail]>

In comp.os.linux.advocacy Kelly Robinson <[e-mail]> wrote:

: So to you fucking bastards and everyone else who want to blame MS, keep this
: truth in mind:

: When one man kills another with a shotgun and takes his posessions, who is
: to blame:  the man or the gun?

: The computer is the gun.

: The man who makes the virus is no different than the man who  has a gun,
: aims it, and shoots it once or thrice.

If someone sells a 'safe' kevlar jacket that is advertised to protect
you from a bullet and it turns out it doesn't work at all then you should
damn well get mad at the company that made it.  If the reason you found
out about the flaw was because of someone shooting you on the street, then
you should get mad at the gunman as well, but this doesn't remove any blame
from the company that made the jacket.  Now, if the reason you found out
about it was that some consumer advocacy group performed a bunch of tests
and then published the results would you get angry at the consumer group
and call them 'fucking bastards' for telling all the criminals that the
jacket is unsafe?  The people who get pissed at those who find MS's holes
by exploiting them are forgetting that that's the *only* way to get MS
to actually do anything about them.  If you tell them about a theoretical
hole it won't get fixed.  You have to show how to exploit it, and announce
to the world how to do it (to give them the incentive to do something
besides just sweeping it under the rug.)

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Wisconsin, Madison (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             22-Sep-99 21:40:09
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:01
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: "Brian Lewis" <[e-mail]>

Troll rating : 2.5 / 10

Pros : Lots of sarcasm
Cons : Too many words. Not enough swearing.

Penalties : 15-yard penalty for cross posting, replay third down.

Kelly Robinson <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:7sbsog$[e-mail]...
> Every time some one rags on all of the MacOS weak points (a very un-easy
to
> use 1 button mouse, co-operative (in other words, none) multitasking,
> frequent system crashes because you did somtehing with an app such as
> attempting to start a second instance of it [to you mac users who live in
> the 19th century:  a second instance is running the program again.  In
real
> OSes, the program can run as many times as it wants and in seperate
> allocated memory spaces.  This can be extremely useful.]  I could go on
and
> on...)
>
> Anyway, when I say that, MacOS users promptly remind me that MacOS X
solves
> these problems.
>
> But what do they try to hide?  The facts that mac OS X is currently an
> overpriced server OS and that the WORKSTATION edition (what we want,
> apparently) is still not out - and won't be until mid-2000.  Is this to
> ensure it's Y2K compliant?   hehe.
>
> So, Mac losers, do you want us to wait for Apple to finish wiping its
rear,
> having finished using the toilet... or should people get something which
> suits their needs NOW?
>
> Most people need stuff now.  Loyalty only goes so far.  And if you need
more
> than a pretty case, Apple is completely and utterly worthless.
>
> So if you want everything the Mac lacks, get Windows NT or BeOS.  They're
> easier to use than MacOS and infinitely superior (BeOS is so superior that
> Apple prohibited Be from making BeOS for their G3-based hardware!  Apple
> can't stand the fact that someone else made something better than them and
a
> lot sooner.  Heh, ask Xerox about that...)
>
> So, in conclusion, and I hope every single one of you has tuned in, you
Mac
> people need to get real.  Apple hasn't a prayer (or a penis) to grab a
hold
> on.  So when somebody posts these simple truths about macs, DO NOT e-mail
> that person back saying Mac OS X is out.  That's bullshit.  Nobody who is
> sane would pay $1000 for a server OS to exclusively run workstation apps
and
> no more.  Of course, you guys are mac users...  and nobody would sit like
a
> bump on a log to wait for Apple to get its act together.  Remember that
OS/2
> thing?  IBM made it.  IBM also sat like a lump thinking people would buy
it.
> Nope, people saw OS/2's weaknesses (combined with IBM's own obvious
attitude
> toward it) so OS/2 died, and good riddance.  Let's hope Apple does the
same
> and soon.  Apple needs to be put out of its misery since all its products
> are filled with worms.
>
> Oh yeah, if OS X Server is out, why the [beep] is the workstation edition
> taking soooooooo long?  That's ridiculous and is worthy of investigation,
> not blind hubris.  But then, you're mac people and hubris is natural to
you.
>
> Cheers,
> a realist.
>
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             22-Sep-99 18:28:23
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:01
Subj: Re: Who to believe?  [follow-up]

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>


Esther Schindler wrote:
>
> David,
>
> I concur with Kim.
>
> People are hard at work finding out (a) what actually happened and,
> more importantly (b) what can happen from here. I know several people
> who have burned up phone lines, in the last several days, spending
> non-billable time trying to come to a resolution that's good for
> _everyone_ concerned.
>
> To the best I've been able to tell -- and the story is far from over
> -- _EVERYBODY TOLD THE TRUTH_ as they knew it, based on the
> information available to them at the time. Every one of the people
> you've heard from (directly or indirectly) had and has the best
> interests of the OS/2 community at heart, and wants a new client.

I've tried to look at the information available and draw the obvious
conclusions.  You and others may draw different conclusions from the
same information and that is certainly your privelege.  The main point
here is to bring out whatever information is available.  As a
professional journalist, I would hope that you share that objective.

>
> Speculation, finger-pointing, and blamefinding do _not_ help anybody
> right now.

Agreed.  But it is important to ask the questions that need to be asked
and challenge the people that need to be challenged.  For example, if a
client would be a big opportunity for Stardock, why are they so quick to
publicly slam the door when IBM execs are apparently  saying that it's
still an open question?  What did Stardock have to lose by waiting a few
more weeks or months to see what happens?  And WHO was the IBM person(s)
who told Brad Wardell that the deal was off?  This is starting to be a
regular whodunnit.  Heh, heh, heh.

> All they do is create anger and dissension, which are
> qualities that the OS/2 community already has in overabundance.

I don't think it's worthwhile to talk about what is wrong with the 'OS/2
Community.'  My questions are directed at the information available
regarding Brad Wardell's Judgment Day OS/2 Death.  That's enough for me
for now.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                            22-Sep-99 22:18:09
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:01
Subj: Re: Anti-Windows t-shirts at www.dumbentia.com

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>ccondon wrote:
>>
>> Dumbentia - http://www.dumbentia.com
>>
>> Do you hate Windows? Do you dislike Microsoft with a vengeance? Then take a
>> look at the new anti-Windows t-shirts now available at Dumbentia.
>>
>> The designs include:
>>
>>  - Just Say NO to Windows
>>  - Windows Sucks
>>  - Friends Don't Let Friends Do Windows
>>  - I think, therefore I run Linux
>>  - Where does Microsoft want you to go today?
>
>Why not just make shirts that say, "Kick me," "Mug me," or "I'm a computer
>dork"?
>
>- Marty
>

Hate an OS? Dislike with vengeance? Sounds like people who want those shirts
just need mental help.

--
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                22-Sep-99 18:12:24
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:01
Subj: Re: IBM Speaks...

From: [e-mail] (Jerry McBride)

In article <[e-mail]>,
"David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]> wrote:

--- big snip ---

>Tim says the judgment day meeting did not happen because of the
>pre-meeting.  Stephen King says the judgment day meeting did not happen
>because of weather problems.  Stephen sits on the IPMT committee meeting
>and would be expected to the be the most knowledgable about this.  Tim
>freely admits that he is 'in the dark,' which makes his comments more
>speculative in nature.
>
>So we are again left with Brad Wardell's statement which I urge everyone
>who is interested to reread.  (It is included at the URL listed above.)
>The tone of Brad's statement is that some sort of major and final
>decision was made by IBM which 'killed' OS/2.  He is the only person
>with this message.  If Hurricane George had not lead to the IPMt meeting
>cancellation, perhaps this would have been an accurate message.  But
>George hit, the meeting was cancelled, and it appears to me that there
>is a large quantity of egg running down Brad's face and dripping from
>his chin.

I don't know Brad personally, but I can say I didn't and don't like his
"style"
in the way he posts messages to these news groups. This last "burst" of miss-
information has clinched it for me. Tight, I may add...

Put me down as a NON-StarDock customer... Whatever StarDock had forsale for
OS/2, isn't worth me selling my soul to the devil. Shame too, from what I hear
they had some interesting stuff...




--

*******************************************************************************

*            Sometimes, the BEST things in life really ARE free...
*
*       Get a FREE copy of NetRexx 1.150 for your next java project at:
*
*                     http://www2.hursley.ibm.com/netrexx
*
*******************************************************************************


/----------------------------------------\
| From the desktop of: Jerome D. McBride |
|         [e-mail]             |
\----------------------------------------/

--

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TEAM-NETREXX (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                   22-Sep-99 18:54:09
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:01
Subj: Re: OS2NetLabs Head: "OS/2 is Dead"

From: [e-mail] (Tim Smith)

Tim Martin  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> The hack job was done by IDG.  Tim only fell for IDG's tricks.  Although
>> I'm suprised as someone who boasts as being one of the most informed
>> people about OS/2, that he wouldn't have remembered Adrian's original
>> message to the OS/2 community, but hey we all make mistakes.
>>
>> -Jason
>
>It was not forgetful but on purpose to prove a point.

So, you admit that you purposefully spread statements attributed to Adrian
that YOU KNEW were misquotes, and thus likely to harm his reputation, in
order to make your point about Brad?  Nice ethics.

--Tim Smith

ps: "Nice ethics" is sarcasm.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Institute of Lawsonomy (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               23-Sep-99 03:05:04
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:01
Subj: Re: Who to believe?  [follow-up]

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 22:28:46, "David T. Johnson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:
| I've tried to look at the information available and draw the obvious
| conclusions.  You and others may draw different conclusions from the
| same information and that is certainly your privelege.  The main point
| here is to bring out whatever information is available.  As a
| professional journalist, I would hope that you share that objective.

The problem, David, is that you don't have all the information that's
available. Some of us have more information than do others, but nobody
has _all_ of it, yet. That's why the people making those cross-country
phone calls and scurrying around sending email haven't said anything;
nothing is clear enough to report, quite yet.

I have no problem with people asking questions. I think that's
healthy, and I'm glad to see the number of OS/2 users who care about
the matter. However, in the absence of data, it's impossible to draw
conclusions. As a journalist and -- more importantly -- as a human
being with ethics, I think it's important to collect the data before
we make any judgements. Or, moreover, to come out with any kind of a
report before the facts are in. (Dan Casey's summarized messages was
an example of how to do it right; he presented all the information
available, without commentary.)

As it happens, I know the answers to some of the questions you pose. I
know exactly who it was that Brad spoke with, for instance; heck, I've
met the guy on a few occasions.

But doing a "tell all" _does not help,_ at this point. You aren't
going to do investigative journalism by posing questions and making
assumptions in a newsgroups, however good those questions or
assumptions may be. There are individuals who know the real story, and
few of them are lurking in this newsgroup. I think this may be a case
of "those who know, can't say, and those who say, don't know."

| I don't think it's worthwhile to talk about what is wrong with the 'OS/2
| Community.'  My questions are directed at the information available
| regarding Brad Wardell's Judgment Day OS/2 Death.  That's enough for me
| for now.

However, you're operating on incomplete data. You _know_ it's
incomplete. Don't draw conclusions or make assumptions when you don't
have all the information to hand.

--Esther

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                  22-Sep-99 23:18:00
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:01
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: Peter Ammon <[e-mail]>

Please don't send serious replies to crap like this.

-Peter

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Cornell University (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                  22-Sep-99 22:44:11
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:01
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: [e-mail] (ZnU)

In article <7sbtci$[e-mail]>, "Kelly Robinson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> Let's assume I'm a typical 95/98/NT user (I use more than windows but let's
> stick to what the majority uses for my damning point:)
>
> If I, as an uninformed typical computer user who doesn't know the
> behind-the-scenes stuff, and heard that someone created a virus or trojan or
> lifestyles or whatever sort of nasty which would exterminate my computer, I
> would more likely blame the fucking bastards who created these things (who
> claim they want to point of MS bugs but are merely TERRORIZING THE FRIGGING
> PUBLIC by their despicable acts).
>
> So to you fucking bastards and everyone else who want to blame MS, keep this
> truth in mind:
>
> When one man kills another with a shotgun and takes his posessions, who is
> to blame:  the man or the gun?
>
> The computer is the gun.
>
> The man who makes the virus is no different than the man who  has a gun,
> aims it, and shoots it once or thrice.

Ahh, but you've missed a piece.  Mr. Killer is doing the shooting with
Mr. Victim╣s gun! The company that sold Mr. Victim the gun claimed that it
was a secure gun. All the other gun makers have reasonably secure guns
that are difficult for anyone but the owner to use, but this company,
although making that claim, and putting in all kinds of safety features,
has done something dumb that allows anyone to bypass the security and use
the gun, even for such purposes as shooting its own owner!

Now who╣s to blame? Clearly Mr. Killer should take some of the blame. But
it would have been much harder for him to kill Mr. Victim has the gun been
as secure as it should have been.

How about if you leave your door unlocked, and go on vacation for two
weeks. When you get back, you discover everything that wasn╣t too big to
load in a pickup truck is gone. Theft is illegal of course. But who╣s
fault is this? Do you leave _your_ door open when you go out? After all,
it╣s only the fault of the thief if something gets stolen, right?

[snip]

--
This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a
means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us.
        - Western Union internal memo, 1876.

ZnU <[e-mail]>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: . (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                  23-Sep-99 03:41:12
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:01
Subj: Re: Anti-Windows t-shirts at www.dumbentia.com

From: [e-mail] (Steve Sheldon)

"ccondon" <[e-mail]> writes:

>Dumbentia - http://www.dumbentia.com

>Do you hate Windows? Do you dislike Microsoft with a vengeance? Then take a
>look at the new anti-Windows t-shirts now available at Dumbentia.


 Are you a Linux zealot?  Does your hatred consume you?  Do you read Moby
Dick and see yourself in the position of Captain Ahab?

 Did you believe the Emperor when he said "embrace your hatred"?

 If so, then these t-shirts are for you!


--
Steve Sheldon                          email: [e-mail]
BSCS/MCSE                              url: http://www.sheldon.visi.com

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: rdshutts@NO_SPAM.mediaone.net                     22-Sep-99 22:38:13
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:01
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: Bob S <rdshutts@NO_SPAM.mediaone.net>

Lots of angst here.  I suspect the author has many issues to deal with,
platform choice being but one.

In article <7sbsog$[e-mail]>, Kelly Robinson
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> Every time some one rags on all of the MacOS weak points (a very un-easy to
> use 1 button mouse, co-operative (in other words, none) multitasking,

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: MediaOne Express -=- Central Region (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                  22-Sep-99 22:57:24
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:01
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: [e-mail] (ZnU)

In article <7sbsog$[e-mail]>, "Kelly Robinson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

[snip]

> Oh yeah, if OS X Server is out, why the [beep] is the workstation edition
> taking soooooooo long?  That's ridiculous and is worthy of investigation,
> not blind hubris.  But then, you're mac people and hubris is natural to you.
>
> Cheers,
> a realist.

4 out of 10, mostly due to unintentional humor. Good use of distortion,
misinformation and flat out lies. Amusing that troll seems to think he can
actually "convert" people with this sort of thing. Troll displays very
amusing lack on knowledge about Mac OS and Mac OS X.

--
This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a
means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us.
        - Western Union internal memo, 1876.

ZnU <[e-mail]>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: . (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               23-Sep-99 03:07:07
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:01
Subj: Re: Is IBM serious about licensing OS/2?

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 20:14:31, "David T. Johnson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:
| Kim Cheung wrote:

| > >If IBM was truly considering a Stardock proposal to license their OS/2
| > >software, it seems that they would have to make some sort of effort to
| > >determine if the Stardock deal was the best one they could make.  Does
| > >IBM really know that other software companies are NOT interested in
| > >selling an OS/2 client?  Why not open this up to bidding to see just who
| > >is really interested and how much they will pay?
| >
| > It would be nice if things work that way.
|
| Don't think for a moment that they won't.

And you say this from _what_ vast experience doing business with IBM?

Don't think for a moment that other companies haven't already
negotiated with IBM to do an OS/2 client... and given up. There are
two or three that I know of... and I'm sure that I don't know about
every one.

--Esther

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               22-Sep-99 23:42:12
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:01
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

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...
> >> >
> >> >Just a little aside here FWIW.  On my same given system, I run Warp 4,
and
> >> >used to run NT 4.0.  With the same hardware configuration, I benchmarked
> >> >the latest versions (at the time) of the RC5-64 clients in OS/2 and NT.
On
> >> >the same hardware, the OS/2 client got 15K keys/sec higher than the NT
one
> >> >did (for my machine, that's about a 5% speed difference).  The OS/2
client
> >> >version was older than the NT client by about a week.  I realize this is
> >> >not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison, as the RC5 client software
was
> >> >"different," but I think it's as close as you can get for pure
> >> >number-crunching benchmark comparison.
> >> >
> >> >- Marty
> >> >
> >>
> >> So what? First, let's say it is apples to apple? So what? 5% is nothing.
> >
> >Well... on the same hardware, I thought it was a bit odd.  It's very
> >reproducable.  I didn't just run the benchmark until it went "my way" and
> >then call it quits.  I took the average of 5 runs for each platform.  The
> >5%, as I said before, equates to 15K keys/sec.  To (possibly) put things in
> >perspective, a SparcStation II maxes out at around 15K keys/sec.
>
> Again, it is difficult to get excited about 5%.

It's enough to make a difference in my key rate.  It's just a curiosity I
had.  I'm not claiming that I'd notice a 5% difference in performance, but
it's reproducible and it's definitely there.

> >> Second, how were they compiled? Were they optimized? Do you know?
> >
> >Yes.  Both were optimized and I was using the K6 MMX optimized cores in
> >both cases.
>
> What compiler optimizations?

I don't know.  I haven't built it.  I think the win32 CLI client was made
with MSVC and the OS/2 client was made with GCC.  Both cores contain the
same hand-assembled code, however, which is where all of the number
crunching occurs.

> >> What was running on both machines?
> >
> >Firstly, it was the same machine.  Secondly, the Win32 system was running
> >NT 4.0 with no networking installed and no apps in the Systray or started
> >in any manner that I knew about.  In OS/2, I had full networking, FTP
> >daemon, and Apache web server running, though I don't think they were being
> >accessed during the benchmark.  No foreground applications were running,
> >nor did I even touch the keyboard or mouse while the benchmark was being
> >conducted.
>
> Taskmanager on NT? Did the screensave kick in on OS/2?

Neither.  The benchmark only takes about a minute or so to run anyway.

> >> It is a bad number-crunching comparsion, and all but meaningless as a
standard
> >> of comparsion.
> >
> >How so?  Everything is identical except for the OS, the software running on
> >it at the time (which should have biased it towards NT), and the frontend
> >to the RC5 client (though the optimized cores are the same code).
>
> But are were they optimized using the same compiler? Do they start at the
same
> default priorities?

The crunching cores are hand-optimized assembly which is common to both
clients.  They both ran at default "normal" process priority.

> >> Heck, for SETI, I've got a friend who has the same overclocked
> >> CPU running Win2k and a very similar application mix and yet his SETI
clocked
> >> 14 hours and mine did 9.5.
> >>
> >> Does this mean that my machine is 1.5 times faster? No.
> >
> >Right, but weren't you both using your machines over that time?  I'm
> >talking about a pure benchmark where the "benchmarking software" is all
> >that is running without disturbance.
>
> No. We both left the machines idle. In fact, I have more stuff running on
mine
> in the systray, yet it took his almost 50% longer to finish.

Same exact hardware?  Perhaps the difficulty of the block being analyzed
was different.  Does it happen this way in a repeatable fashion?  Are your
block sizes the same? (if that's applicable to SETI)

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                     23-Sep-99 04:13:22
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:01
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: [e-mail] (Byron Desnoyers Winmill)

Jeff Glatt ([e-mail]) wrote:
: >> I have a 3MHz Apple IIgs which turns out wounderful audio
: >> (on par with my 486).

: You know, someone should warn musically inclined people of the
: presence of truly frightening admissions in a given post. The above
: statement can be most disturbing.

NOTE: I was comparing this to my 486 on an SBPro and Crystal sound card.
I was never hiding that.  Noise was a big problem on both of these cards
and, as a result, the IIgs put these cards to shame.  Not to mention that
I had a few suggestions to get decent audio from this machine.  Perhaps
you did, perhaps you did not.  I can not speak for your experience.

--
Stopped (SIGTTOU)         byron.
$

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The University of Calgary (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                 23-Sep-99 04:51:15
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:02
Subj: Re: Is IBM serious about licensing OS/2?

From: JohnS <[e-mail]>


Esther Schindler wrote:
>
> On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 20:14:31, "David T. Johnson"
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> | Kim Cheung wrote:
>
> | > >If IBM was truly considering a Stardock proposal to license their OS/2
> | > >software, it seems that they would have to make some sort of effort to
> | > >determine if the Stardock deal was the best one they could make.  Does
<snip>

> Don't think for a moment that other companies haven't already
> negotiated with IBM to do an OS/2 client... and given up. There are
> two or three that I know of... and I'm sure that I don't know about
> every one.
>
> --Esther

An interesting perspective on IBM's direction in licensing is found at
Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/forbes/99/1004/6408090a.htm).
Looks like Lou is willing sell even the family jewels. I wonder why IBM
is so
dead set against licensing or outright selling those parts of OS/2 that
they own. It appears to go against Lou's express direction.

1.43 cents

JohnS

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Sympatico (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                23-Sep-99 03:53:20
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:02
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Jack Troughton)

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 16:49:58, Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>
wrote:

ΩTim,
ΩI will not engage in ceaseless and senseless name calling.
█

Then you might as well killfile him, as I have.  It's the only arguing
style he seems to know.

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]                      22-Sep-99 23:56:09
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:02
Subj: Re: Anti-Windows t-shirts at www.dumbentia.com

From: Jason <[e-mail]>

David H. McCoy <[e-mail]> wrote:
: In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
:>ccondon wrote:

:>> Do you hate Windows? Do you dislike Microsoft with a vengeance? Then take
a
:>> look at the new anti-Windows t-shirts now available at Dumbentia.

:>Why not just make shirts that say, "Kick me," "Mug me," or "I'm a computer
:>dork"?

: Hate an OS? Dislike with vengeance? Sounds like people who want those shirts

: just need mental help.

I think people who spend a considerable chunk of time on Usenet attacking
an OS they don't use, but disklike, need more mental help then people who
buy shirts that make people laugh.  And trust me a lot of people laugh
over making fun of Microsoft, mostly people who use Windows.

-Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                      23-Sep-99 00:01:04
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:02
Subj: Re: Anti-Windows t-shirts at www.dumbentia.com

From: Jason <[e-mail]>

In comp.os.os2.advocacy ccondon <[e-mail]> wrote:
: Dumbentia - http://www.dumbentia.com

: Do you hate Windows? Do you dislike Microsoft with a vengeance? Then take a
: look at the new anti-Windows t-shirts now available at Dumbentia.

: The designs include:

:  - Just Say NO to Windows
:  - Windows Sucks
:  - Friends Don't Let Friends Do Windows
:  - I think, therefore I run Linux
:  - Where does Microsoft want you to go today?

I'd much rather have seen some of the old OS/2 graphics turned into
Shirts.  You could easily insert other Operating Systems names to make a
versatile stock.

Also beware that your using Bill Gates' face on a shirt.  Bill Gates'
face is a protected trademark acording to his lawyers.  They shut down
the Borg Gates t shirt guy.

-Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               22-Sep-99 21:11:23
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:02
Subj: Re: OS2NetLabs Head: "OS/2 is Dead"

From: Tim Martin <[e-mail]>

Tim Smith wrote:

> Tim Martin  <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >> The hack job was done by IDG.  Tim only fell for IDG's tricks.  Although
> >> I'm suprised as someone who boasts as being one of the most informed
> >> people about OS/2, that he wouldn't have remembered Adrian's original
> >> message to the OS/2 community, but hey we all make mistakes.
> >>
> >> -Jason
> >
> >It was not forgetful but on purpose to prove a point.
>
> So, you admit that you purposefully spread statements attributed to Adrian
> that YOU KNEW were misquotes, and thus likely to harm his reputation, in
> order to make your point about Brad?  Nice ethics.
>
> --Tim Smith
>
> ps: "Nice ethics" is sarcasm.

His reputation as well as OS/2's was harmed by the
IDG writer.  I merely pointed it out as you purposely
and unethically edited out of my entire response.

Often OS/2 leaders want their article or opinion pieces
to be 'catchy' to catch the reader's eye and without
thinking of the immoral ethics of many of today's
hack writers who also seek to gain the attention of
others, will include an inflammatory or derogatory
statement which they follow up and refute.  That
happened in this case.

Adrian wanted people to read his opinion/article.
To do that he led it off with the statement under
his own byline that OS/2 was definitely dead.
That's very alarming to the average OS/2 user who
reads it at the beginning of the opinion/article.

Sadly many of today's hack reporters need to make
a name for themselves and to draw world-wide attention
to their hack work so they look for statements that
are outrageous and can be 'short quoted' and used
for their unethical purposes.

That happened in this case and it should be an alert
to all who love OS/2 and write articles and opinion
pieces that are displayed publicly.  Give the hack
writer the opportunity and what the OS/2 leader
thought was a clever bit of controversial writing ends
up causing his own reputation unwarranted harm
and in this case, OS/2's as well.

That's what happened to Adrian and I pointed that
out in my earlier response - that would be the response
prior to your response in which you edited to pose
your 'cheap shot' above.

So you see, you've hacked someone else's statement
to fit your personal agenda too.

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: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]               22-Sep-99 21:36:19
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:02
Subj: Re: Is IBM serious about licensing OS/2?

From: "Kim Cheung" <[e-mail]>

On 23 Sep 1999 03:07:14 GMT, Esther Schindler wrote:

>On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 20:14:31, "David T. Johnson"
><[e-mail]> wrote:
>| Kim Cheung wrote:
>
>| > >If IBM was truly considering a Stardock proposal to license their OS/2
>| > >software, it seems that they would have to make some sort of effort to
>| > >determine if the Stardock deal was the best one they could make.  Does
>| > >IBM really know that other software companies are NOT interested in
>| > >selling an OS/2 client?  Why not open this up to bidding to see just who
>| > >is really interested and how much they will pay?
>| >
>| > It would be nice if things work that way.
>|
>| Don't think for a moment that they won't.
>
>And you say this from _what_ vast experience doing business with IBM?
>
>Don't think for a moment that other companies haven't already
>negotiated with IBM to do an OS/2 client... and given up. There are
>two or three that I know of... and I'm sure that I don't know about
>every one.
>

May be they just don't light fire works when a particular proposal didn't get
accepted.   Different people handles set-backs in a very different manner.




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]               22-Sep-99 21:51:25
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:02
Subj: Re: Who to believe?  [follow-up]

From: "Kim Cheung" <[e-mail]>

On 23 Sep 1999 03:05:08 GMT, Esther Schindler wrote:

>But doing a "tell all" _does not help,_ at this point. You aren't
>going to do investigative journalism by posing questions and making
>assumptions in a newsgroups, however good those questions or
>assumptions may be. There are individuals who know the real story, and
>few of them are lurking in this newsgroup. I think this may be a case
>of "those who know, can't say, and those who say, don't know."

If you look at public record, there is nothing inconsistant about what IBM's
position is on the "traditional fat client" version of OS/2.  It is also
apparent to this date IBM's position did not change.   If you deduce from
common logic, whatever happended from there to here did not cause a change in
IBM's position.   So, I think it is safe to draw the conclusion that the
"form" of the client as proposed was not in a form that gathered enough
support to cause a change in IBM's position.

Why everybody picks this up as "the sky has fallen" or "judgement day
decision" is beyond me.

There was no plan for a new "traditional fat OS/2 client" eight months ago -
and there is no plan for a new "traditional fat OS/2 client" now.    Will
there be one tomorrow?   Only God knows.   I certainly would not know if IBM
WILL get into the gardening tools business.

The one thing that happened is that one of the parties that tried lit some
firework on their way out when their proposal got turned down.   It was a
courageous effort - but this is hardly THE end game.




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             22-Sep-99 23:22:20
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:02
Subj: Re: And another thing...

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>

>
> Esther Schindler wrote:

[big snip]
> I think this may be a case
> of "those who know, can't say, and those who say, don't know."
>
You have described all of this secrecy and mystery surrounding a piece
of software that has a tiny share of the market, that many (including
you) have pronounced to be dead or dying, that IBM is supposedly going
to discontinue, and which is supposedly a commercial failure.  Can't you
see the absurdity of this?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             22-Sep-99 22:29:08
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:02
Subj: Re: Is IBM serious about licensing OS/2?

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>

Esther Schindler wrote:
>
> On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 20:14:31, "David T. Johnson"
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> | Kim Cheung wrote:
>
> | > >If IBM was truly considering a Stardock proposal to license their OS/2
> | > >software, it seems that they would have to make some sort of effort to
> | > >determine if the Stardock deal was the best one they could make.  Does
> | > >IBM really know that other software companies are NOT interested in
> | > >selling an OS/2 client?  Why not open this up to bidding to see just
who
> | > >is really interested and how much they will pay?
> | >
> | > It would be nice if things work that way.
> |
> | Don't think for a moment that they won't.
>
> And you say this from _what_ vast experience doing business with IBM?
>
> Don't think for a moment that other companies haven't already
> negotiated with IBM to do an OS/2 client... and given up. There are
> two or three that I know of... and I'm sure that I don't know about
> every one.

Maybe Asok the intern stuck his head out of the meeting room and gave a
'thumbs down' to the eager would-be buyers waiting outside who then went
away and posted to usenet.  Har..Har..Har..Heeenk..Heh..Heh!

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             22-Sep-99 22:57:06
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:02
Subj: Re: Who to believe?  [follow-up]

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>

Esther Schindler wrote:
>
> On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 22:28:46, "David T. Johnson"
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> | I've tried to look at the information available and draw the obvious
> | conclusions.  You and others may draw different conclusions from the
> | same information and that is certainly your privelege.  The main point
> | here is to bring out whatever information is available.  As a
> | professional journalist, I would hope that you share that objective.
>
> The problem, David, is that you don't have all the information that's
> available. Some of us have more information than do others, but nobody
> has _all_ of it, yet. That's why the people making those cross-country
> phone calls and scurrying around sending email haven't said anything;
> nothing is clear enough to report, quite yet.

It is right and proper to take notice of the information that is out.
To suggest otherwise is ridiculous.  And why do you tell me to *wait*
for some unknown people to do some sort of unknown investigation for
some unknown length of time while you say nothing to Brad Wardell who
has felt free to pronounce OS/2 to be 'dead' based on the flimsiest of
one-sided stories.


>
> I have no problem with people asking questions.

Glad to hear it but this sounds extremely arrogant that you would even
think to 'approve.'

> I think that's
> healthy, and I'm glad to see the number of OS/2 users who care about
> the matter. However, in the absence of data, it's impossible to draw
> conclusions. As a journalist and -- more importantly -- as a human
> being with ethics, I think it's important to collect the data before
> we make any judgements. Or, moreover, to come out with any kind of a
> report before the facts are in. (Dan Casey's summarized messages was
> an example of how to do it right; he presented all the information
> available, without commentary.)

The newsgroups have been FILLED with commentary on this issue, a lot of
it one-sided from Stardock.  Who are YOU to suggest there be no
commentary?


>
> As it happens, I know the answers to some of the questions you pose. I
> know exactly who it was that Brad spoke with, for instance; heck, I've
> met the guy on a few occasions.

But you're not telling.  Your claim is therefore both meaningless and
irrelevant.

>
> But doing a "tell all" _does not help,_ at this point. You aren't
> going to do investigative journalism by posing questions and making
> assumptions in a newsgroups, however good those questions or
> assumptions may be. There are individuals who know the real story, and
> few of them are lurking in this newsgroup. I think this may be a case
> of "those who know, can't say, and those who say, don't know."

Your commentary here is vaguely elitist and definitely not helpful.  Are
you disputing the statements of Tim Sipples, Brad Wardell, or Stephen
King?  Or do you wish to add additional information?  I think your
answer is no to both questions, isn't it?


>
> | I don't think it's worthwhile to talk about what is wrong with the 'OS/2
> | Community.'  My questions are directed at the information available
> | regarding Brad Wardell's Judgment Day OS/2 Death.  That's enough for me
> | for now.
>
> However, you're operating on incomplete data. You _know_ it's
> incomplete. Don't draw conclusions or make assumptions when you don't
> have all the information to hand.

I didn't claim to have ALL the information and I would certainly hope
that you don't do this.  All I did was copy excerpts from Dan Casey's
post.  You apparently object to this as well as generally to my comments
though you do not seem to take exception to anything in particular.  I
look forward to reading your thorough story which will undoubtedly be
chock full of information that will clarify this issue.  However, if we
all waited until we had ALL the information, we would be reading dusty
history books in our rocking chairs at the old folks home.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]               23-Sep-99 00:14:23
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:02
Subj: Re: what's worth writing about?

From: "Kim Cheung" <[e-mail]>

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 14:46:41 -0400, David T. Johnson wrote:

>This was something like 5 years ago.  IBM used to have the Charlie
>Chaplin guy selling "Personal Computers" as well.  And before that, they
>had the guy with the white shirt and tie.  What' your point?  Times
>change.

Time might have changed but IBM hasn't.   One of their biggest failure in
marketing OS/2 - as Esther said - is to utilize the help of their "friends".
 The concept of "in business, the
best solutions are found when _everyone_ makes money together" continues to
be a foreign concept to them.

Case in point: I started a company based on the business model of marketing
WSOD service to channel partners.   By the time WSOD rolled out, IBM decided
it should not be a product for the channel - only for their enterprise
customer.   The real angle is that WSOD is so damn hard to deploy that they
wouldn't even dare letting the reporters install it themselves.   After a
couple of very bad reviews, I decided to write a GUI add-on for it.   In the
process, WSOD keep shrinking into a tiny corner of the computing world that
it is no longer viable in the channel.   On the other hand, my "home brew"
application expanded to something that is actually quite usable - works even
without WSOD.   It still requires WarpServer and it sells OS/2: and more
importantly, we offer an option to the IBM sales force in situations where
WSOD gets shot down.   Well, guess what?   Somebody gets upset at Austin and
go out of their way to label us as "competitor": people are "reminded" or
"encouraged" not to help us.

And we were hoping to sell some NCSD software.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                              22-Sep-99 22:47:22
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:02
Subj: Re: Credibility

From: Dennis Peterson <[e-mail]>

Esther Schindler wrote:
>
> On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 03:40:21, Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> | This year several Warp City members have
> | nearly begged us to buy a booth at Warpstock, even promised
> | to pay for it and generate a few hundred Warp City logo T-shirts
> | but we asked them not to.  They are certainly welcome to announce
> | their affilation with Warp City.  Many people don't because
> | they've seen what has happened to others who have
> | publicly stepped forward.  Who needs the harassment?
>
> Ah, I see, you admit it. You don't have the courage to face those who
> disagree with you.
>
> While two of the Ziff Davis writers you decry (and a third editor,
> who's the author of one of the WSfeB reviews) had no problem with
> appearing on a panel in front of those same users.
>
> --Esther

Why do you give this idiot space in your brain, Esther? You're an
author, write him off.

dp

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: I'm not organized at all (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                              22-Sep-99 23:04:20
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:02
Subj: Re: It doesn't bother people that a new client won't be confirmed?

From: Dennis Peterson <[e-mail]>

Jason Bowen wrote:
>
> Warp 4 out of the box has to be patched to be installed on new hardware.
> Do you think this helps acceptance?

Nope.

>  Do you think this would stall sales
> of software if the current userbase is perfectly happy to keep using the
> software they have as new users avoid adopting it due to IBM's
> unwillingness to provide a new client?

Huh?

> How does this affect ISV's writing
> OS/2 software?

Don't know.

> Do you think this is an acceptable scenario for OS/2's
> continued existance?

OS/2 is selling as well as it ever has. It doesn't seem to be hurting.

>  Is the fixpack way really good?

Compared to no fixpack? Yes.

>  It seems a lot of
> users in this group do find this acceptable.

And OS/2 sales are brisk and IBM is happy. What is wrong with that?

dp

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: I'm not organized at all (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                            23-Sep-99 09:04:01
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:02
Subj: Re: Anti-Windows t-shirts at www.dumbentia.com

From: Tim Timmins <[e-mail]>

Mental help, John?


Regards,
Tim

"David H. McCoy" wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >ccondon wrote:
> >>
> >> Dumbentia - http://www.dumbentia.com
> >>
> >> Do you hate Windows? Do you dislike Microsoft with a vengeance? Then take
a
> >> look at the new anti-Windows t-shirts now available at Dumbentia.
> >>
> >> The designs include:
> >>
> >>  - Just Say NO to Windows
> >>  - Windows Sucks
> >>  - Friends Don't Let Friends Do Windows
> >>  - I think, therefore I run Linux
> >>  - Where does Microsoft want you to go today?
> >
> >Why not just make shirts that say, "Kick me," "Mug me," or "I'm a computer
> >dork"?
> >
> >- Marty
> >
>
> Hate an OS? Dislike with vengeance? Sounds like people who want those shirts
> just need mental help.
>
> --
> ---------------------------------------
> David H. McCoy
> dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
> ---------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]_this_...               23-Sep-99 00:53:01
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:02
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

Message sender: [e-mail]_this_part.net.invalid

From: [e-mail]_this_part.net.invalid (evilsofa)

In article <7sbtci$[e-mail]>, "Kelly Robinson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> Let's assume I'm a typical 95/98/NT user (I use more than windows but let's
> stick to what the majority uses for my damning point:)
>
> If I, as an uninformed typical computer user who doesn't know the
> behind-the-scenes stuff, and heard that someone created a virus or trojan or
> lifestyles or whatever sort of nasty which would exterminate my computer, I
> would more likely blame the fucking bastards who created these things (who
> claim they want to point of MS bugs but are merely TERRORIZING THE FRIGGING
> PUBLIC by their despicable acts).
>
> So to you fucking bastards and everyone else who want to blame MS, keep this
> truth in mind:
>
> When one man kills another with a shotgun and takes his posessions, who is
> to blame:  the man or the gun?
>
> The computer is the gun.
>
> The man who makes the virus is no different than the man who  has a gun,
> aims it, and shoots it once or thrice.
>
> So for those of you who like to laugh in MS's face, go right ahead.  I might
> almost join you.
>
> But unlike you, there are millions who suffer because supposedly intelligent
> people use viruses and such s if you took a cat and tormented and physically
> beaten it.
>
> Bottom line?  You cannot excuse the behavior.
>
> You cannot say that MS's lack of security is to blame.  Why not get some
> sugar, find a car, and dump the sugar in?  Who's to blame for making a car
> with inadequate fuel locking systems?  Your arguement is bullshit since it
> is inevitable that something is going to be missed.  Inevitable.  You remain
> civilized.  You do not be a spoiled little brat who deserves to die in an
> electric chair and fuck up millions of lives.
>
> Fair enough?   See you in hell, hackers, I'll bribe the devil to give you a
> nasty punishment.

You seem awfully convinced that you're going to hell.  I will not attempt
to dissuade you of this.  I do hope it is not for the animal abuse which
you seem to be feeling quite guilty about (you got quite agitated when you
got to that part y'know).

--
                 QUESTION AUTHORITY
"Oh yeah? Who _says_ I should question authority, huh?"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Unorganized (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]               22-Sep-99 14:11:26
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:02
Subj: Horka-hoagie, JoeView

From: [e-mail] (Paul Doyle)

Kewel.  Let's try this.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Fidonet Net109 Gateway (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                   23-Sep-99 08:45:18
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:02
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: [e-mail] (Pascal Haakmat)

Kelly Robinson wrote:

>Let's assume I'm a typical 95/98/NT user (I use more than windows but let's
>stick to what the majority uses for my damning point:)

It's quite obvious you use more than just Windows.

[snip]

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: A2000 Kabeltelevisie en Telecommunicatie (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                     23-Sep-99 05:49:05
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:02
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: [e-mail] (Ralph Vose)

---bunch of whining snipped...
>
> So if you want everything the Mac lacks, get Windows NT or BeOS.  They're
> easier to use than MacOS and infinitely superior (BeOS is so superior that
> Apple prohibited Be from making BeOS for their G3-based hardware!  Apple
> can't stand the fact that someone else made something better than them and a
> lot sooner.  Heh, ask Xerox about that...)
>
> So, in conclusion, and I hope every single one of you has tuned in, you Mac
> people need to get real.  Apple hasn't a prayer (or a penis) to grab a hold
> on.  So when somebody posts these simple truths about macs, DO NOT e-mail
> that person back saying Mac OS X is out.  That's bullshit.  Nobody who is
> sane would pay $1000 for a server OS to exclusively run workstation apps and
> no more.  Of course, you guys are mac users...  and nobody would sit like a
> bump on a log to wait for Apple to get its act together.  Remember that OS/2
> thing?  IBM made it.  IBM also sat like a lump thinking people would buy it.
> Nope, people saw OS/2's weaknesses (combined with IBM's own obvious attitude
> toward it) so OS/2 died, and good riddance.  Let's hope Apple does the same
> and soon.  Apple needs to be put out of its misery since all its products
> are filled with worms.
>
> Oh yeah, if OS X Server is out, why the [beep] is the workstation edition
> taking soooooooo long?  That's ridiculous and is worthy of investigation,
> not blind hubris.  But then, you're mac people and hubris is natural to you.
>
> Cheers,
> a realist.

Old news, as simple compilation of all the tired, old complaints we have
heard so many times before. I'd have to say thet most of you have been too
generous in your ratings. The penis reference is, however new. Must be
some unresolved issues with his mother or something.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Chickadee Communications (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: nospam@null                                       23-Sep-99 10:04:17
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:02
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: nospam@null (Richard A Crane)

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 02:10:58, [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt) wrote:

> >Bennie Nelson
> >OS/2 works with hardware that is current.  I have built brand new systems
> >with recently released off-the-shelf components, this year.  No problems.
>
> >Windows 95, on the other hand, did not fare so well.
>
> Only because you're obviously not competent enough to do what many,
> many other people (including myself) do routinely -- install Windows.
> In fact, just this week I put together 3 various systems and installed
> Windows 9x from scratch. No problems. But then, unlike you, I know
> what I'm doing and have the skills to do it
I disagree. I have 2 machines that I have successfully installed DOS Win311
Linux and OS/2 on with minor problems only (eg getting a particular soundcard
to
work in Linux and the same sound card to work in OS/2). Neither machine has
been
able to install Win95 without major problems and tinkering, in fact one still
has never been able to successfully connect to the internet (and yes it
can/has
under OS/2, Linux (2 versions) and even Dos with Win311.
To accuse someone of not knowing what their doing because they have a problem
with something that you apparently haven't is merely insulting. People's
equipment varies and the problems they can have do also - many have been
complaining in this thread that OS/2 is to hard to install.
BTW comp.os.os2.misc trimmed this has fallen to mere advocacy so lets keep it
there.
Richard A Crane
Check Copyright of this with the author or you may suffer litigation or
embarrassment.

ps General Protection Fault ... Retry or Replace shot General and continue?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                         23-Sep-99 11:22:12
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:02
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: "Jose Cardoso" <[e-mail]>

Kelly Robinson <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:7sbtci$[e-mail]...
> Let's assume I'm a typical 95/98/NT user (I use more than windows but
let's
> stick to what the majority uses for my damning point:)
>
>[snip]

This post has no relevance to BeOS so stop cross-posting.

--
Jose Cardoso.
Internet Support Consultant,
Gentia Software (UK) Limited.
mailto:[e-mail]
http://www.gentia.com
(Reply by removing the "block" from my e-mail address)


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Gentia Software (UK) Limited (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                            23-Sep-99 11:52:03
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:00
Subj: Re: NS 4.61GA  Was: Why blame IBM?

From: Steve Drewell <[e-mail]>

On Thu, 23 Sep 1999, Joe Kovacs wrote:

ε >Try here:
ε >ftp://service5.boulder.ibm.com/software/asd/ns40/en_us/comm461.exe
ε
ε Not so.  You get NS 4.61GA from Software Choice, here and
ε drill in...
ε
ε http://www.software.ibm.com/os/warp/swchoice/
ε
ε When you're downloading NS 4.61, you might see that it's
ε coming from the Boulder site above.  But that is closed to you
ε and you cannot get to that site directly, you must get to it
ε through the Software Choice page.

I think you're mistaken on that point....I was able to access the file
directly via ftp.

Steve

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Western Geophysical, Houston, TX (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                   23-Sep-99 12:23:01
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:00
Subj: Re: Anti-Windows t-shirts at www.dumbentia.com

From: "LeemingIT" <[e-mail]>

What about :

Where _did_ you want to go today, but couldn't because the OS was late?

:-)


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                       23-Sep-99 21:30:19
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:00
Subj: Re: Who to believe?  [follow-up]

From: "nospam" <[e-mail]>

Straight from SDS Online September issue:-

## OS/2 News ##

For the past several months, Stardock and IBM have been conducting formal
talks for Stardock to release an OS client based on OS/2 technology.
Stardock's position was that if IBM was not going to do a new client version
of OS/2, that someone should do one.

Last week Stardock received word from IBM that after much deliberation, it
is not in IBM's strategic best interests to license OS/2 technology for use
as a desktop client.  They also indicated that they had no plans to do a
client themselves.

This news spread far faster than Stardock or presumably IBM thought as
Stardock's brief announcement of this news took place only on its own
internal news server (news.stardock.com).  No mention on its website was
made and Stardock did not contact any members of the press or make a press
release about this news.

This week, after the news spread to slashdot.org, IDG, and other places,
there seems to be some confusion in IBM on what the status of OS/2 itself
is.  I.e. A reckoning of sorts seems to be forming within IBM on what the
future of the IBM operating system is.

The current indication from IBM is that IBM does not have any plans for a
client based on OS/2 Warp Server for eBusiness.  However, should this
change, Stardock will appraise its customers of the situation.

Stardock's position remains that for OS/2 to remain even remotely viable as
a desktop solution, a new client needs to be in the relatively near future.
Stardock would welcome such a client whether it came from IBM, a third
party, or of course Stardock itself.

Note, Stardock does not presume to speak for IBM or its policies.  Nor
should such reports of confusion on policy within IBM be misconstrued as
giving users hope that there will be a new OS/2 client.  IBM's stated policy
is presently that they have no plans to create a new client based on OS/2 or
to allow a third party to do it at this time.

While such phrases as "at this time" implies that they may change their
policy.  One can accurately state "IBM has no plans at this time to go into
the gardening tools business."

We do think that IBM will continue to make decisions that are in the best
interests of their customers as they have shown time and time again in the
past.  We will keep you informed if there are any new developments.



David T. Johnson <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
> Kim Cheung wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 17:11:11 -0400, David T. Johnson wrote:
> >
> > >>
> >
> > David,
> >
> > I admire your die-heart support of OS/2 but please don't flame Brad.
>
> It wasn't my intent to flame.  I do feel that it is important to
> question some of the apparent inconsistencies in the Judgment Day story
> until it is a little clearer as to what actually happened.  I also think
> it is time for Brad to step forward and tell us exactly what has
> happened rather than lead us on with his vague ('trust me, it's true!)
> stories of the death of OS/2.  Brad Wardell has convinced a large number
> of OS/2 users that he has their interests at heart and is now busy going
> around pronouncing OS/2 to be dead based on his personal account of this
> 'Judgment Day' meeting.  After repeated challenges, he seems to agree
> that the Judgment Day meeting did not actually happen but OS/2 died
> anyway at another meeting 'several days earlier.'  If he does not have
> personal knowledge of the judgment day (whatever day it was) meeting, he
> shouldn't go around suggesting that he does.  If he was told this stuff
> by someone else, he should identify the source.  And I find it hard to
> believe that if he is bound by a nondisclosure agreement that prevents
> him from talking, that such an agreement would still allow him to
> provide the information that he has posted in his various statements.
> So YES, I have a LOT of questions and I think OS/2 users deserve some
> answers from Mr. Wardell.   And no, I don't think these questions are
> "flames."
>
> >  He did
> > everything in his power to push this.   There is no inconsistency with
what
> > he said because it was based on what he was told or lead to believe.
>
> Excuse me but Brad Wardell is claiming that IBM told him at a 'Judgment
> Day' meeting (as Brad refers to it) that they were not going to develop
> another OS/2 client and that they also would not give a license to
> Brad's company, Stardock, to do it.  Now, Brad is posting that this is
> the "Death of OS/2" as revealed to him by IBM.
>
> I personally do not believe that IBM knows what they will do with the
> OS/2 client but I WAS willing to believe that this corporate committee
> at IBM had told him this (we all seem to want to believe this, don't we)
> until it turned out that this Judgment Day meeting did not actually even
> happen.  THEN, Brad's story about the Death of OS/2 started sounding
> pretty shaky.  NOW, I have a LOT of questions as I posted earlier.
>
> And I have another question that I did not mention earlier.  Based on my
> experience, I am very skeptical that a decision on a relatively minor
> IBM product like the OS/2 client would be decided by some high-level
> corporate committee.  The product is currently owned by the Network
> Computing Software Division and THEY would have ultimate profit-and-loss
> responsibility for their division and its products.  Corporate
> management might establish strategic directions for divisions but I
> don't think they could or would reach down into a division and make
> decisions about any one product such as a relatively low-cost (to IBM,
> anyway) update to the OS/2 client.  The more I think about it, the more
> ridiculous this sounds.  So how about it Brad, WHO at IBM Corporate do
> you say was making these decisions?


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                         23-Sep-99 11:45:17
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:00
Subj: Borland C++

From: [e-mail] (Richard R. Klemmer)

On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 02:01:27, [e-mail] (Paul Fedorenko) wrote:

>
> Incidentally, Borland released the most recent version of it's C++
> compiler for OS/2 just this past August.  yep, August '99.  So there IS

What's that you say?  Borland release a new version of their compiler?
 I haven't heard anything about this.  I'll have to check this out.


-----------------------------
Richard R. Klemmer
[e-mail]
http://www.webtrek.com
-----------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: WebTrek L.L.C. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                              23-Sep-99 05:03:17
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: "Michael Bolton" <[e-mail]>

>Let's assume I'm a typical 95/98/NT user (I use more than windows but let's
>stick to what the majority uses for my damning point:)


>When one man kills another with a shotgun and takes his posessions, who is
>to blame:  the man or the gun?


Yawn.  This sounds like another gun control debate in the making.  I'm outta
this newsgroup.

---Michael B.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: EarthLink Network, Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          23-Sep-99 12:34:01
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: NS 4.61GA  Was: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Buddy Donnelly)

On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 10:52:06, Steve Drewell <[e-mail]> a
┌crit dans un message:

> On Thu, 23 Sep 1999, Joe Kovacs wrote:
>
> ε >Try here:
> ε >ftp://service5.boulder.ibm.com/software/asd/ns40/en_us/comm461.exe
> ε
> ε Not so.  You get NS 4.61GA from Software Choice, here and
> ε drill in...
> ε
> ε http://www.software.ibm.com/os/warp/swchoice/
> ε
> ε When you're downloading NS 4.61, you might see that it's
> ε coming from the Boulder site above.  But that is closed to you
> ε and you cannot get to that site directly, you must get to it
> ε through the Software Choice page.
>
> I think you're mistaken on that point....I was able to access the file
> directly via ftp.

And if not, it's still there for open FTP at:

ftp://peak1.boulder.ibm.com:/software/asd/ns40/en_us/comm461.exe

along with a June build of 404 I think I missed earlier.



Good luck,

Buddy

Buddy Donnelly
[e-mail]


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: RoadRunner - TampaBay (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                23-Sep-99 08:38:00
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: [e-mail] (M.Vaughn)

Couldn't get laid last night? Taking it out on the world?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Somewhat but not too much.. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                 23-Sep-99 08:34:06
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Raphael Tennenbaum)

[e-mail] (Jack Troughton) wrote:

>On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 16:49:58, Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>
>wrote:
>
>█Tim,
>█I will not engage in ceaseless and senseless name calling.
>█
>
>Then you might as well killfile him, as I have.

That's for sure.  I do not know why people take him so
seriously.  I mean, I do understand, but he's just a troll,
sitting at his keyboard goofing on everyone.

Folks, JUST IGNORE HIM, that's the worst thing you can do to
him.  Don't let him get your goat, 'cause that's all he
doing.  He'll find an issue and start harping on it until he
gets a few people wound up 'cause they can't stand his BS.
If no one goes for his bait, he throws more juicy stuff out
there.  Then he sits back and enjoys all the flaming, and
winds everyone up even more.

Then he waits until things die down a bit -- maybe if he
gets attacked again, he vows to leave usenet.  Then he
quiets for a few weeks or months.  Then he posts some useful
information and pointers, and softens the hearts of people,
because he knows a bit about OS/2.  Then he finds an
"issue," or makes one up, and starts the cycle all over
again.

It may happen someday that he oversteps the line and
slanders or libels someone, but I suspect he's rather too
cowardly to veer that close.  Failing that, in any case, I
believe you'll be doing yourself and everyone else a favor
by simply ignoring him, or killfiling him.


--
Ray Tennenbaum        '99 YZF-R6
readme@ http://www.ray-field.com

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: AT&T WorldNet Services (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: Jo                                                23-Sep-99 06:32:27
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: highest customer dissatisfaction

From: Jo

-----
http://www.sjmercury.com/svtech/news/breaking/merc/docs/061026.htm

While the Star office software lacks the features of Office, it's
getting passing marks from reviewers, who see it as acceptable for all
but ``power users.'' Indeed, one of the key worries and sources of
debate in the marketplace is whether it can fully share documents from
Microsoft Office, a sign that potential users may be viewing it as an
alterative.

 ``There is an opportunity for someone to displace Microsoft,'' said
Rob Enderle of Giga Information Systems, an industry consultant.

*****  ``I would argue that it (the threat) is as strong as when IBM
went into its decline. Microsoft is dealing with one of the highest
levels of customer dissatisfaction of any company that we
follow.''******

Microsoft users have come to view Office upgrades as ``a tax,'' that
users need to pay, and ``the (perceived) value has gotten disconnected
from the revenue.''

No one would suggest that Microsoft is playing a shell game. Each of
the upgrades has been an awesome technical feat, involving tens of
millions of lines of code and putting highly sophisticated automation
features on every desktop.

Indeed, it's the sophistication that could be Microsoft's Achilles
heel.
-----------



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               23-Sep-99 13:48:05
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

To the contrary. This opinion is my opinion based on 7 years of
dealing with several IBM divisions, and reporting on IBM's activities,
from the point of view of ISVs and software entrepreneurs, as a book
author about two IBM products, as a sysop in IBM forums, and from
interaction with dozens of IBM employees (on the record and off).

You're welcome to your own opinion, Tim, based on whatever data you
have to work with.

--Esther

On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 09:56:37, Tim Timmins <[e-mail]>
wrote:

| err... This bullshit is your opinion masquerading as facts.
|
|
| Kind regards,
| Tim
|
| Esther Schindler wrote:
|
| > On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 03:01:47, [e-mail] wrote:
| >
| > | In a nutshell, that's my beef with IBM. How about a little open and
honest
| > | dissemination of intentions from the ONLY people who know their plans -
| > | IBM ? We all bought the product, we all have time and effort and money
| > | invested, whatever they want to do is their business, just TELL US !
then
| > | we can get on with our lives, decide what is best for us individually,
not
| > | have to sift rumours and innuendo for scraps of insight.  Or does IBM
shelter
| > | under the CIA umbrella now ? If anyone can be said to be responsible for
the
| > | OS/2 FUD campaign, it'd be IBM for never being upfront with us. And YES,
| > | we deserve it - we bought the product, now come out and tell the truth,
| > | get it over with !
| >
| > I'm afraid that the chances of this happening are rather low.
| >
| > Even if IBM has no intention of coming out with a new client, if they
| > believe a new client is an utter and complete impossibility, they
| > won't say so, straight out. They never want to put themselves in the
| > position of being wrong. If they say, "We'll never do it" and then
| > later they _do_ find themselves in the position of doing it (for
| > whatever reason, because situations change) then someone can say, "you
| > lied!" So they say, "...not at this time..." which is purposefully
| > vague.
| >
| > I'm not saying that this is the right thing to do, but it's a common
| > corporate thing to do. <sigh>
| >
| > --Esther
|


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               23-Sep-99 13:39:23
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: And another thing...

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 03:22:40, "David T. Johnson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

| You have described all of this secrecy and mystery surrounding a piece
| of software that has a tiny share of the market, that many (including
| you) have pronounced to be dead or dying, that IBM is supposedly going
| to discontinue, and which is supposedly a commercial failure.  Can't you
| see the absurdity of this?

Not at all.

The smaller the pond, the harder people wrestle for its control.

--Esther

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                23-Sep-99 10:19:23
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: "Mike Ruskai" <[e-mail]>

On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 20:38:18 -0400, David H. McCoy wrote:

>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>>"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>>>
>>> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>>> >
>>> >Just a little aside here FWIW.  On my same given system, I run Warp 4,
and
>>> >used to run NT 4.0.  With the same hardware configuration, I benchmarked
>>> >the latest versions (at the time) of the RC5-64 clients in OS/2 and NT.
On
>>> >the same hardware, the OS/2 client got 15K keys/sec higher than the NT
one
>>> >did (for my machine, that's about a 5% speed difference).  The OS/2
client
>>> >version was older than the NT client by about a week.  I realize this is
>>> >not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison, as the RC5 client software
was
>>> >"different," but I think it's as close as you can get for pure
>>> >number-crunching benchmark comparison.
>>> >
>>> >- Marty
>>> >
>>>
>>> So what? First, let's say it is apples to apple? So what? 5% is nothing.
>>
>>Well... on the same hardware, I thought it was a bit odd.  It's very
>>reproducable.  I didn't just run the benchmark until it went "my way" and
>>then call it quits.  I took the average of 5 runs for each platform.  The
>>5%, as I said before, equates to 15K keys/sec.  To (possibly) put things in
>>perspective, a SparcStation II maxes out at around 15K keys/sec.
>
>Again, it is difficult to get excited about 5%.

You seem overly enamored with percentages.  To put it into real
perspective, the difference corresponds to about 1.3 billion keys at day's
end.

For even more perspective, if decoding a 40-bit key, the OS/2 version
would be done two whole days before the NT version.




 - Mike

Remove 'spambegone' to send e-mail.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TLF (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          23-Sep-99 10:25:25
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: New OS/2 client not to be

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

"M.P. van Dobben de Bruijn" wrote:
>
> > Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the info. I'll try to look into
> MagicDesk later on. On the subject of
> WPS and the Linux file-system we had a
> small thread one or one-and-a-half month
> ago in this newsgroup, I think. Karel was al-
> so involved and it contained some info on the
> filesystem of Linux which might get in the way.
>

Thanks for the tip.  I think I missed that, at least
partly  because I was on travel learning about Sun
Solaris.

BTW, it's MEGADESK, in case you go looking for it.

Bennie Nelson

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, USA (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: pojpl@_ais.ucla.edu                               23-Sep-99 14:47:08
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: pojpl@_ais.ucla.edu (Jim Lewis)

Wow.  Time to get that prescription refilled.



"Kelly Robinson" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Let's assume I'm a typical 95/98/NT user (I use more than windows but let's
>stick to what the majority uses for my damning point:)
>
>If I, as an uninformed typical computer user who doesn't know the
>behind-the-scenes stuff, and heard that someone created a virus or trojan or
>lifestyles or whatever sort of nasty which would exterminate my computer, I
>would more likely blame the fucking bastards who created these things (who
>claim they want to point of MS bugs but are merely TERRORIZING THE FRIGGING
>PUBLIC by their despicable acts).
>
>So to you fucking bastards and everyone else who want to blame MS, keep this
>truth in mind:
>
>When one man kills another with a shotgun and takes his posessions, who is
>to blame:  the man or the gun?
>
>The computer is the gun.
>
>The man who makes the virus is no different than the man who  has a gun,
>aims it, and shoots it once or thrice.
>
>So for those of you who like to laugh in MS's face, go right ahead.  I might
>almost join you.
>
>But unlike you, there are millions who suffer because supposedly intelligent
>people use viruses and such s if you took a cat and tormented and physically
>beaten it.
>
>Bottom line?  You cannot excuse the behavior.
>
>You cannot say that MS's lack of security is to blame.  Why not get some
>sugar, find a car, and dump the sugar in?  Who's to blame for making a car
>with inadequate fuel locking systems?  Your arguement is bullshit since it
>is inevitable that something is going to be missed.  Inevitable.  You remain
>civilized.  You do not be a spoiled little brat who deserves to die in an
>electric chair and fuck up millions of lives.
>
>Fair enough?   See you in hell, hackers, I'll bribe the devil to give you a
>nasty punishment.
>
>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of California, Los Angeles (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          23-Sep-99 10:34:04
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Richard A Crane wrote:
>
> On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 02:10:58, [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt) wrote:
>
> > >Bennie Nelson
> > >OS/2 works with hardware that is current.  I have built brand new systems
> > >with recently released off-the-shelf components, this year.  No problems.
> >
> > >Windows 95, on the other hand, did not fare so well.
> >
> > Only because you're obviously not competent enough to do what many,
> > many other people (including myself) do routinely -- install Windows.
> > In fact, just this week I put together 3 various systems and installed
> > Windows 9x from scratch. No problems. But then, unlike you, I know
> > what I'm doing and have the skills to do it
> I disagree. I have 2 machines that I have successfully installed DOS Win311
> Linux and OS/2 on with minor problems only (eg getting a particular
soundcard to
> work in Linux and the same sound card to work in OS/2). Neither machine has
been
> able to install Win95 without major problems and tinkering, in fact one
still
> has never been able to successfully connect to the internet (and yes it
can/has
> under OS/2, Linux (2 versions) and even Dos with Win311.
> To accuse someone of not knowing what their doing because they have a
problem
> with something that you apparently haven't is merely insulting. People's
> equipment varies and the problems they can have do also - many have been
> complaining in this thread that OS/2 is to hard to install.
> BTW comp.os.os2.misc trimmed this has fallen to mere advocacy so lets keep
it
> there.
> Richard A Crane
> Check Copyright of this with the author or you may suffer litigation or
> embarrassment.
>
> ps General Protection Fault ... Retry or Replace shot General and continue?

Mr. Crane,

Thanks for the post.  Another item that I should have mentioned regarding
installing Windows 95 on new gear: Win 95 will not run on AMD K6-2 400 Mhz
or greater.  A patch must be applied to the Win 95 to get it to run on these
faster cpus.

Another thing, I had to install a product called RAIN to cool the cpu.  Win 95
does not use the HALT instruction during idle times.  Instead it simply does
nothing as fast as the CPU can go which keeps the temperature up.

Regards,
Bennie Nelson

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, USA (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          23-Sep-99 10:22:15
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Jack Troughton wrote:
>
> On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 16:49:58, Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
>  Tim,
>  I will not engage in ceaseless and senseless name calling.
> á
>
> Then you might as well killfile him, as I have.  It's the only arguing
> style he seems to know.

Mr. Troughton,

I appreciate your advice, but I don't use a killfile.  I know that
Tim has been involved in some pretty nasty skirmishes in this
newsgroup, but I don't believe he is to blame for most of that.
Yes, he's posted his share, but I still believe that some of his
material was posted in reaction to the treatment he received.
Those who posted the attacks against him also bear responsibility.

I have watched as someone, with what can be described as boyish
exuberance and zeal, posted articles, and then was soundly and
repeatedly thrashed by a USENET mob.  Tim's reaction was not
the best, admittedly.  But, I'll give him credit for this: he
hasn't backed down.

Now, I certainly don't approve of the way he handled the situation.
But, I also want to make it clear that I am not to be numbered
amongst those who participated or who will join in the USENET
beatings of Tim or anyone else.

Tim continues to make good contributions to other OS/2 newsgroups.
I am encouraging him to reconsider his stance in this newsgroup.

Thanks for the post.

Bennie Nelson

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, USA (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                23-Sep-99 11:23:03
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Raphael Tennenbaum) said:

> Failing that, in any case, I
>believe you'll be doing yourself and everyone else a favor
>by simply ignoring him, or killfiling him.

Amen - Hallelujah!!

Jim L
Remove XX from address to Email
Crooks and kooks will get guns regardless of laws.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                23-Sep-99 14:59:26
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: OS/2 Users Must Read

From: [e-mail] (rj friedman)

I came across an article "IBM, Forests, and Trees," at Tom
Nadeau's OS/2 Headquarters site (http://ww.os2hq.com) that
is a MUST READ for any OS/2 user concerned with the future
of OS/2 in the aftermath of IBM's decision that they didn't
want Stardock as a third party distributor of their OS/2
operating system, and Brad Wardell's irresponsible
declaration that OS/2 was dead because of that decision.

IMO, it is the most succint, clear, and cogent, exposition
of the topic that I have seen yet (including my own <g>).



________________________________________________________

[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]                                   23-Sep-99 08:29:28
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: [e-mail] (David Kurtz)

In article <7sbsog$[e-mail]>, "Kelly Robinson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> So, Mac losers, do you want us to wait for Apple to finish wiping its rear,
> having finished using the toilet... or should people get something which
> suits their needs NOW?

This was the best part of your troll. The rest was too long, and too
coherent. Although I like (or rather, find particularly disgusting) the
imagery you've evoked here, you lose points for trying to make sense. Of
course, you didn't make sense in the end, so overall it wasn't a bad
effort.

I give you an 8.6.


> So if you want everything the Mac lacks, get Windows NT or BeOS.  They're
> easier to use than MacOS and infinitely superior (BeOS is so superior that
> Apple prohibited Be from making BeOS for their G3-based hardware!  Apple
> can't stand the fact that someone else made something better than them and a
> lot sooner.  Heh, ask Xerox about that...)

Aside... I wonder how many ex-Apple people are now working at Be?

MmMmm Be.... I do wish Apple would give them the hardware info they
need... I may just have to buy myself an Intel box. Stupid Apple.

--
David Kurtz  * remove the underscore from my email address to reply
PGP key and more: <http://www.lightside.net/~david/>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Independent sentient carbon-based unit (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]               23-Sep-99 08:29:13
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: OS/2 Users Must Read

From: "Kim Cheung" <[e-mail]>

On 23 Sep 1999 14:59:52 GMT, rj friedman wrote:

>Brad Wardell's irresponsible
>declaration that OS/2 was dead because of that decision.

I would not agree to that as "irresponsible".   This is very common with ISVs
that got drag through the mud.   Brad invested significant amount of energy
and resource on this issue.

He got "burnt" - beyond recognition: if I may add.

Since you spent some time in Taiwan, you should understand the Chinese pharse
of "Two faces and three daggers".   He got stabed by that third dagger.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                   23-Sep-99 08:38:28
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: [e-mail] (David Kurtz)

In article <7sbtci$[e-mail]>, "Kelly Robinson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> Fair enough?   See you in hell, hackers, I'll bribe the devil to give you a
> nasty punishment.

ROTFL.

I'm glad I finished drinking my coffee before I read this post. What an
enjoyable experiment in non sequitur!

[follow-ups to comp.sys.mac.advocacy -- the *best* advocacy group on
Usenet (so say the pundits on comp.sys.mac.advocacy.advocacy)]

--
David Kurtz  * remove the underscore from my email address to reply
PGP key and more: <http://www.lightside.net/~david/>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Independent sentient carbon-based unit (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            23-Sep-99 15:17:02
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: New OS/2 client not to be

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 10:16:37, [e-mail] (M.P. van Dobben de
Bruijn) wrote:

> > Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the info. I'll try to look into
> MagicDesk later on. On the subject of
> WPS and the Linux file-system we had a
> small thread one or one-and-a-half month
> ago in this newsgroup, I think. Karel was al-
> so involved and it contained some info on the
> filesystem of Linux which might get in the way.
>
<sticking nose into discussion>
I remember that. I figure, the way EA's are implemented in OS/2,
OOUI's could be hooked up onto practically any filesystem. Heck, if
IBM managed to do it smoothly with FAT, ext2fs shouldn't be that big a
problem.

And now for some comments of people who *really* know what they are
talking about:.... ?

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net
=======================================================
If we could have our cake _and_ eat it,
people would start whining about seconds.
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            23-Sep-99 15:17:01
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: New OS/2 client not to be

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 10:16:36, [e-mail] (M.P. van Dobben de
Bruijn) wrote:

>
> [ .. ]
>
> > I'm getting more and more depressed over this whole thing.
> > An' I ain't even got me pills anymore...
>
> Please, don't. Let's stop discussing it then, September is
> almost gone, so anything else adding to depressions should
> be prevented. The club could give the pre-orders of beginning
> this year more face or better teeth. In the mean time they could
> lobby for an updated CD-change-around programm and the trick-
> ling down of new tech (iie JFS, TCP/IP 4.2) as Friedman suggested.
>
Ask them if they could also throw in Sun's StarOffice 5.1a (it's a
bugger to download, and I'm especially piffed because I ordered the
personal version of 5.0 on CD from Mensys about a month before Sun
took over and released the suite - just to show you the kind of luck I
usually have with software purchases). And yes, I also want Friedman's
goodies, thank you very much.

> [ .. ]
>
> > I'm renowned for having the social conscience of a sedimentary rock,
> > so pardon me for not getting too excited over this. Less than fifteen
> > years ago I was a pauper with no prospects and today...
> >
> > Come to think of it, not much change there. Can you spare a dollar,
> > Mister?
>
> I am sorry but I do not give away money to make addictions flourish.
> Sure you go out to buy a PSION 7 as soon as you got my dollar <g>.
> But if you want some bytes, I will happily donate those. I am cheap too!
>
Actually, I won't. I'm still quite happy with my four year old Series
3a. At least for this one I don't need Windows installed on my desktop
for it to function properly. IMHO, Psion went downhill very fast when
they decided to support virtually exclusively the Windows 9x platform
with their Series 5 and successors. The Series 7 is bigger, more like
a subnotebook, and has a colour touchscreen. The really wonderful
thing is that they still manage to squeeze 10+ hours of juice out of
the battery. The only other computer that does that is my Omnibook 425
(also a salvage operation, and currently the only Windos computer I
own - it runs DOS 5 + Win 3.1, Word 2 and Excel 4; doesn't crash too
much and is plenty fast with only flash as storage. I'd say it's a
pretty nifty combination, if I wasn't afraid of being called a
heretic).

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net
=======================================================
If we could have our cake _and_ eat it,
people would start whining about seconds.
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             23-Sep-99 09:37:18
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: "fretwiz" <[e-mail]>


----------
In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (David Kurtz) wrote:


> In article <7sbsog$[e-mail]>, "Kelly Robinson"
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> So, Mac losers, do you want us to wait for Apple to finish wiping its rear,
>> having finished using the toilet... or should people get something which
>> suits their needs NOW?
>
> This was the best part of your troll. The rest was too long, and too
> coherent. Although I like (or rather, find particularly disgusting) the
> imagery you've evoked here, you lose points for trying to make sense. Of
> course, you didn't make sense in the end, so overall it wasn't a bad
> effort.
>
> I give you an 8.6.
>


8.6? I'd give him a .86 for a boorishly unimaginative rehash! The sentence
you include above assumes a Mac user would give a shit:

"So, Mac losers, do you want us to wait..."

Novice, completely novice in every way.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Netcom (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             23-Sep-99 16:16:09
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[e-mail]>

Brian Lewis <[e-mail]> writes:

: Troll rating : 2.5 / 10

: Pros : Lots of sarcasm
: Cons : Too many words. Not enough swearing.

: Penalties : 15-yard penalty for cross posting, replay third down.

ROTFLMAO!@#

Sir, this comeback is pure platinum.  :-)
--
.-----.
|[_] :| Stephen S. Edwards II | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
| =  :| "Humans have the potential to become irrational... perhaps
|     |  you should attempt to access that part of your psyche."
|_..._|                    -- Lieutenant Commander Data

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Anamorphic 3-D Graphics Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               23-Sep-99 12:13:16
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: New OS/2 client not to be

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Karel Jansens wrote:
>
> On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 10:16:37, [e-mail] (M.P. van Dobben de
> Bruijn) wrote:
>
> > > Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for the info. I'll try to look into
> > MagicDesk later on. On the subject of
> > WPS and the Linux file-system we had a
> > small thread one or one-and-a-half month
> > ago in this newsgroup, I think. Karel was al-
> > so involved and it contained some info on the
> > filesystem of Linux which might get in the way.
> >
> <sticking nose into discussion>
> I remember that. I figure, the way EA's are implemented in OS/2,
> OOUI's could be hooked up onto practically any filesystem. Heck, if
> IBM managed to do it smoothly with FAT, ext2fs shouldn't be that big a
> problem.

I don't really feel that it was done (or can be done) smoothly with
FAT.  They way it was implemented was to hack it on top of the
filesystem.  While it functions quite well inside of OS/2, when you boot
another operating system that also recognizes FAT partitions, your OS/2
EAs are easily lost, corrupted, or orphaned.  To prove my point, change
the icon on a program on one of your FAT drives.  Then boot a non-OS/2
operating system and delete the file.  Then come back to OS/2 and run
CHKDSK /f on the drive.

If EAs are not built into the filesystem spec, then implementing them on
top of a filesystem is a hack which is subject to break down under
certain conditions.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             23-Sep-99 16:23:29
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: The Linux agenda revealed...

From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[e-mail]>

ccondon <[e-mail]> writes:

: Dumbentia - http://www.dumbentia.com

: Do you hate Windows? Do you dislike Microsoft with a vengeance? Then take a
: look at the new anti-Windows t-shirts now available at Dumbentia.

: The designs include:

:  - Just Say NO to Windows
:  - Windows Sucks
:  - Friends Don't Let Friends Do Windows
:  - I think, therefore I run Linux
:  - Where does Microsoft want you to go today?

I think I understand...

Microsoft markets products...

The Linux community markets "emotions"...

Now you tell me which one is without substance.
--
.-----.
|[_] :| Stephen S. Edwards II | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
| =  :| "Humans have the potential to become irrational... perhaps
|     |  you should attempt to access that part of your psyche."
|_..._|                    -- Lieutenant Commander Data

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Anamorphic 3-D Graphics Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                23-Sep-99 18:00:12
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: [e-mail] (C Lund)

In article <7sbsog$[e-mail]>, "Kelly Robinson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> Every time some one rags on all of the MacOS weak points (a very un-easy to
> use 1 button mouse,

Not a weak point...

> co-operative (in other words, none) multitasking,

Not that weak a point...

> frequent system crashes because you did somtehing with an app such as
> attempting to start a second instance of it

You've never used a Mac, have you?

> [to you mac users who live in
> the 19th century:  a second instance is running the program again.

Which is just plain silly. Why the buggerall would I want to have n
versions of so and so app running at the same time?

>  In real
> OSes, the program can run as many times as it wants and in seperate

In real OSes, the program can handle multiple files at a time.

> allocated memory spaces.  This can be extremely useful.]  I could go on and
> on...)

Running multiple versions of an app is *not* useful.

> But what do they try to hide?  The facts that mac OS X is currently an
> overpriced server OS

MacOS X Server is a server OS, yes.

> and that the WORKSTATION edition (what we want,
> apparently) is still not out

So? I'd rather Apple releases a finished version, rather than the beta
versions M$ tends to dump on the PC herd.

>- and won't be until mid-2000.  Is this to
> ensure it's Y2K compliant?   hehe.

You really don't have a clue.

> So, Mac losers, do you want us to wait for Apple to finish wiping its rear,
> having finished using the toilet... or should people get something which
> suits their needs NOW?

I have something that suits my needs NOW: A Macintosh.

> Most people need stuff now.  Loyalty only goes so far.

Then why are you still likcing Bill Gate's hiny?

> And if you need more
> than a pretty case, Apple is completely and utterly worthless.

Tell that to the shareholders.

> So if you want everything the Mac lacks, get Windows NT or BeOS.

Everything the mac lacks? Like... 1000 000 000 dlls? No thanks.

(more kissing of BG's rear end deleted)

I think it's safe to conclude you're just a troll with no life worth living.


> Cheers,
> a realist.

--

C Lund
http://www.notam.uio.no/~clund/

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Oslo, Norway (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                23-Sep-99 16:02:11
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: Is IBM serious about licensing OS/2?

From: [e-mail] (rj friedman)

On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 14:08:01, "David T. Johnson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

εIf IBM was truly considering a Stardock proposal to license their OS/2
εsoftware, it seems that they would have to make some sort of effort to
εdetermine if the Stardock deal was the best one they could make.  Does
εIBM really know that other software companies are NOT interested in
εselling an OS/2 client?  Why not open this up to bidding to see just who
εis really interested and how much they will pay?

For what I thought was a really, cogent and clear headed
analysis of IBM's thinking wrt OS/2 check out "IBM, Forests,
and Trees," at Tom Nadeau's OS/2 Headquarters site
(http://www.os2hq.com).


________________________________________________________

[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]                             23-Sep-99 16:48:16
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[e-mail]>

David Kurtz <[e-mail]> writes:

: In article <7sbsog$[e-mail]>, "Kelly Robinson"
: <[e-mail]> wrote:

: > So, Mac losers, do you want us to wait for Apple to finish wiping its
rear,
: > having finished using the toilet... or should people get something which
: > suits their needs NOW?

: This was the best part of your troll. The rest was too long, and too
: coherent. Although I like (or rather, find particularly disgusting) the
: imagery you've evoked here, you lose points for trying to make sense. Of
: course, you didn't make sense in the end, so overall it wasn't a bad
: effort.

: I give you an 8.6.

LOL... you Mac users do have a wonderful sense of humor.  :-)

: > So if you want everything the Mac lacks, get Windows NT or BeOS.  They're
: > easier to use than MacOS and infinitely superior (BeOS is so superior that
: > Apple prohibited Be from making BeOS for their G3-based hardware!  Apple
: > can't stand the fact that someone else made something better than them and
a
: > lot sooner.  Heh, ask Xerox about that...)

: Aside... I wonder how many ex-Apple people are now working at Be?

: MmMmm Be.... I do wish Apple would give them the hardware info they
: need... I may just have to buy myself an Intel box. Stupid Apple.

If you do, make sure the motherboard is either Genuine Intel, ASUS, or
Tyan... most others are substandard.
--
.-----.
|[_] :| Stephen S. Edwards II | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
| =  :| "Humans have the potential to become irrational... perhaps
|     |  you should attempt to access that part of your psyche."
|_..._|                    -- Lieutenant Commander Data

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Anamorphic 3-D Graphics Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          23-Sep-99 12:08:03
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: "Tim Mayer" <[e-mail]>

Steve Mading <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:7sc10n$rhq$[e-mail]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Kelly Robinson <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> : So to you fucking bastards and everyone else who want to blame MS, keep
this
> : truth in mind:
>
> : When one man kills another with a shotgun and takes his posessions, who
is
> : to blame:  the man or the gun?
>
> : The computer is the gun.
>
> : The man who makes the virus is no different than the man who  has a gun,
> : aims it, and shoots it once or thrice.
>
> If someone sells a 'safe' kevlar jacket that is advertised to protect
> you from a bullet and it turns out it doesn't work at all then you should
> damn well get mad at the company that made it.  If the reason you found
> out about the flaw was because of someone shooting you on the street, then
> you should get mad at the gunman as well, but this doesn't remove any
blame
> from the company that made the jacket.  Now, if the reason you found out
> about it was that some consumer advocacy group performed a bunch of tests
> and then published the results would you get angry at the consumer group
> and call them 'fucking bastards' for telling all the criminals that the
> jacket is unsafe?  The people who get pissed at those who find MS's holes
> by exploiting them are forgetting that that's the *only* way to get MS
> to actually do anything about them.  If you tell them about a theoretical
> hole it won't get fixed.  You have to show how to exploit it, and announce
> to the world how to do it (to give them the incentive to do something
> besides just sweeping it under the rug.)
>

Isn't it more like someone buys a kevlar jacket, then someone else, invents
an illegal bullet that can penetrate it. Now who do you get mad at, the
maker of the kevlar jacket or the maker of the illegal bullet? If the maker
of the kevlar jacket comes out with a special patch that prevents this new
illegal bullet from penetrating the kevlar jacket, and offer it as a free
patch then great (considering that their motivation for doing so is that
they want to keep selling kevlar jackets).

Tim


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Pathway Communications (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                 23-Sep-99 17:17:01
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: The Linux agenda revealed...

From: [e-mail] (Donovan Rebbechi)

On 23 Sep 1999 16:23:59 GMT, Stephen S. Edwards II wrote:
>ccondon <[e-mail]> writes:
>

>I think I understand...
>
>Microsoft markets products...
>
>The Linux community markets "emotions"...

Since when was this idiot a spokesperson for the "Linux community"
anyway ? What are his credentials ? Is he a significant developer or an
insignificant worm ?

Take a look at what the linux developers say from time to time. AFAICT,
they are not marketting emotions.

--
Donovan

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                23-Sep-99 11:30:07
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: Mayor Of R'lyeh <[e-mail]>

On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 12:08:06 -0400, "Tim Mayer"
<[e-mail]> chose to bless us with this bit of wisdom:

>
>Steve Mading <[e-mail]> wrote in message
>news:7sc10n$rhq$[e-mail]...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Kelly Robinson <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> : So to you fucking bastards and everyone else who want to blame MS, keep
>this
>> : truth in mind:
>>
>> : When one man kills another with a shotgun and takes his posessions, who
>is
>> : to blame:  the man or the gun?
>>
>> : The computer is the gun.
>>
>> : The man who makes the virus is no different than the man who  has a gun,
>> : aims it, and shoots it once or thrice.
>>
>> If someone sells a 'safe' kevlar jacket that is advertised to protect
>> you from a bullet and it turns out it doesn't work at all then you should
>> damn well get mad at the company that made it.  If the reason you found
>> out about the flaw was because of someone shooting you on the street, then
>> you should get mad at the gunman as well, but this doesn't remove any
>blame
>> from the company that made the jacket.  Now, if the reason you found out
>> about it was that some consumer advocacy group performed a bunch of tests
>> and then published the results would you get angry at the consumer group
>> and call them 'fucking bastards' for telling all the criminals that the
>> jacket is unsafe?  The people who get pissed at those who find MS's holes
>> by exploiting them are forgetting that that's the *only* way to get MS
>> to actually do anything about them.  If you tell them about a theoretical
>> hole it won't get fixed.  You have to show how to exploit it, and announce
>> to the world how to do it (to give them the incentive to do something
>> besides just sweeping it under the rug.)
>>
>
>Isn't it more like someone buys a kevlar jacket, then someone else, invents
>an illegal bullet that can penetrate it.

Why do you think it would be illegal?

> Now who do you get mad at, the
>maker of the kevlar jacket or the maker of the illegal bullet?

Plenty of perfectly legal bullets can go  through a kevlar jacket
right now.

> If the maker
>of the kevlar jacket comes out with a special patch that prevents this new
>illegal bullet from penetrating the kevlar jacket, and offer it as a free
>patch then great (considering that their motivation for doing so is that
>they want to keep selling kevlar jackets).
>
>Tim
>

--

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: City Of R'lyeh (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                    23-Sep-99 17:15:12
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: OS/2 Users Must Read

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

Except you're being dishonest,  Brad didn't declare OS/2 dead, he repeated
what everybody knows, IBM won't commit to a new client.

In article <M3mPvLdzxX1t-pn2-ZCJRIdDU6FVd@localhost>,
rj friedman <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I came across an article "IBM, Forests, and Trees," at Tom
>Nadeau's OS/2 Headquarters site (http://ww.os2hq.com) that
>is a MUST READ for any OS/2 user concerned with the future
>of OS/2 in the aftermath of IBM's decision that they didn't
>want Stardock as a third party distributor of their OS/2
>operating system, and Brad Wardell's irresponsible
>declaration that OS/2 was dead because of that decision.
>
>IMO, it is the most succint, clear, and cogent, exposition
>of the topic that I have seen yet (including my own <g>).
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________
>
>[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: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             23-Sep-99 10:28:18
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: IBM Speaks...

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>


rj friedman wrote:
>
> On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 17:49:23, "David T. Johnson"
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> ÿStephen King apparently is a member of the IPMT committee whose 9/16/99
> ÿmeeting was cancelled.  (He must be, he knows what IPMT stands for
> ÿ<heh><heh>).  Stephen makes no reference whatsoever to any earlier
> ÿpre-meeting where IBM supposedly turned Stardock down and "indicated" to
> ÿBrad Wardell that no new OS/2 client was coming.  The only references to
> ÿthis phantom pre-meeting meeting seem to be from Brad Wardell and Tim
> ÿSipples of IBM...
>
> I may be mistaken on this - and stand corrected in advance
> if I am - but I seem to recall from earlier postings that
> Tim Sipples (in addition to being "of IBM"), was part of the
> Stardock team trying to put the deal together. Am I wrong on
> this?

In his message, Tim Sipples said he was in the dark.  Brad Wardell
says:  "Stardock would like to extend a special thanks to all the IBMers
(and in particular Ken Christopher and Timothy Sipples) who went above
and beyond the call in working with us and going to bat inside IBM."
Tim works for NCSD in the IBM Chicago office.  I think he was a "coach"
for Brad Wardell but not a decisionmaker on the OS/2 client issue.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               23-Sep-99 12:40:10
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: Who to believe?  [follow-up]

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

rj friedman wrote:
>
> On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 21:51:50, "Kim Cheung"
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> εIf you look at public record, there is nothing inconsistant about what
IBM's
> εposition is on the "traditional fat client" version of OS/2.  It is also
> εapparent to this date IBM's position did not change.   If you deduce from
> εcommon logic, whatever happended from there to here did not cause a change
in
> εIBM's position.   So, I think it is safe to draw the conclusion that the
> ε"form" of the client as proposed was not in a form that gathered enough
> εsupport to cause a change in IBM's position.
>
> Exactly. No more, no less.
>
> εWhy everybody picks this up as "the sky has fallen" or "judgement day
> εdecision" is beyond me.
>
> Because that is the statement (irresponsibly, and IMO
> vindictively) made by one of the prinicipals representing
> Stardock (Brad Ward, Stardock's President, to be specific),
> and which was picked up and repeated at several major OS/2
> (and non-OS/2 - such as the Register, and Slashdot), news
> sites. The very title of his post had the words "Judgement
> Day" in them, and his posting, with his words, and his
> extremely slanted portrayal of what happened and its
> implications, caused a panic.
>
> εThere was no plan for a new "traditional fat OS/2 client" eight months ago
-
> εand there is no plan for a new "traditional fat OS/2 client" now.    Will
> εthere be one tomorrow?   Only God knows.   I certainly would not know if
IBM
> εWILL get into the gardening tools business.
> »
> εThe one thing that happened is that one of the parties that tried lit some
> εfirework on their way out when their proposal got turned down.
>
> It seems to me that Brad Wardell acted irresponsibly and
> vindictively - ok, if they're not going to give me what I
> want, I'll just pull the house down on my way out (so to
> speak).

That would be a very childish activity for a millionare business owner,
don't you think?  One doesn't become a successful entreprenuer or
executive by behaving in such a way.  Sure Brad may have personal
feelings about what's going on, but he wouldn't let those feelings get
in the way of his business.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             23-Sep-99 17:39:18
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[e-mail]>

mlw <[e-mail]> writes:

: Kelly Robinson wrote:
: >
: [snipped]

: Some of the decaffeinated brands are just as flavorful as the
: caffeinated ones.

: Also, lets look at this:

: The man that shoots the gun is guilty of murder. Yes.
: The gun shop that does not exercise judgment, while perfectly legal to
: do so, is IMHO partially to blame. People that buy guns for the purpose
: of killing are usually obvious.

Ever been to a gun show, Mark?  Talk about scary.

I've actually been to one here in the AZ Civic Center where they were
selling (get this) an _anti-aircraft cannon_ (20mm I think)!  When I asked
the person selling it if it was filled with cement, he said "nah, most
folks wouldn't know where to get ammo anyway"... I was astounded... I
mean, what about people who _DO_ know where to get ammo?

Anyone wanna go hunting for assault choppers?

: The gun manufacturer who lobbies against a waiting period for handgun
: purchase also has some responsibility.

: As for the Virus writers.

: Have you ever written a virus? I have, it is fun. It is challenging.
: have I ever released my viruses? No, that would be wrong.

Besides, who says that viruses are bad just by their very being?  Some can
actually be used to recover data from frizzled systems, from what I've
been told.

: Operating systems must, in this day and age, be designed with the
: reasonable expectation that security is an issue. There will always be
: vandals in every aspect of society. An OS manufacturer has the
: reasonable expectation that their OS must protect the customers
: computer.

I agree (for once).  :-)
--
.-----.
|[_] :| Stephen S. Edwards II | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
| =  :| "Humans have the potential to become irrational... perhaps
|     |  you should attempt to access that part of your psyche."
|_..._|                    -- Lieutenant Commander Data

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Anamorphic 3-D Graphics Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                   23-Sep-99 11:00:21
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: [e-mail] (David Kurtz)

In article <7sdht6$[e-mail]>, "fretwiz"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> ----------
> In article <[e-mail]>,
> [e-mail] (David Kurtz) wrote:
>
>
> > In article <7sbsog$[e-mail]>, "Kelly Robinson"
> > <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> >> So, Mac losers, do you want us to wait for Apple to finish wiping its
rear,
> >> having finished using the toilet... or should people get something which
> >> suits their needs NOW?
> >
> > This was the best part of your troll. The rest was too long, and too
> > coherent. Although I like (or rather, find particularly disgusting) the
> > imagery you've evoked here, you lose points for trying to make sense. Of
> > course, you didn't make sense in the end, so overall it wasn't a bad
> > effort.
> >
> > I give you an 8.6.
> >
>
>
> 8.6? I'd give him a .86 for a boorishly unimaginative rehash! The sentence
> you include above assumes a Mac user would give a shit:
>
> "So, Mac losers, do you want us to wait..."
>
> Novice, completely novice in every way.

I thought the more boorish the troll, the higher the score, no?

--
David Kurtz  * remove the underscore from my email address to reply
PGP key and more: <http://www.lightside.net/~david/>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Independent sentient carbon-based unit (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               23-Sep-99 13:17:25
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Tim Mayer wrote:
>
> Steve Mading <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> news:7sc10n$rhq$[e-mail]...
> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Kelly Robinson <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > : So to you fucking bastards and everyone else who want to blame MS, keep
> this
> > : truth in mind:
> >
> > : When one man kills another with a shotgun and takes his posessions, who
> is
> > : to blame:  the man or the gun?
> >
> > : The computer is the gun.
> >
> > : The man who makes the virus is no different than the man who  has a gun,
> > : aims it, and shoots it once or thrice.
> >
> > If someone sells a 'safe' kevlar jacket that is advertised to protect
> > you from a bullet and it turns out it doesn't work at all then you should
> > damn well get mad at the company that made it.  If the reason you found
> > out about the flaw was because of someone shooting you on the street, then
> > you should get mad at the gunman as well, but this doesn't remove any
> blame
> > from the company that made the jacket.  Now, if the reason you found out
> > about it was that some consumer advocacy group performed a bunch of tests
> > and then published the results would you get angry at the consumer group
> > and call them 'fucking bastards' for telling all the criminals that the
> > jacket is unsafe?  The people who get pissed at those who find MS's holes
> > by exploiting them are forgetting that that's the *only* way to get MS
> > to actually do anything about them.  If you tell them about a theoretical
> > hole it won't get fixed.  You have to show how to exploit it, and announce
> > to the world how to do it (to give them the incentive to do something
> > besides just sweeping it under the rug.)
> >
>
> Isn't it more like someone buys a kevlar jacket, then someone else, invents
> an illegal bullet that can penetrate it. Now who do you get mad at, the
> maker of the kevlar jacket or the maker of the illegal bullet? If the maker
> of the kevlar jacket comes out with a special patch that prevents this new
> illegal bullet from penetrating the kevlar jacket, and offer it as a free
> patch then great (considering that their motivation for doing so is that
> they want to keep selling kevlar jackets).

Tell the people that died from it that it's "great".

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                            23-Sep-99 18:59:05
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: OS2NetLabs Head: "OS/2 is Dead"

From: "Adrian Gschwend" <[e-mail]>

On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 20:19:57 -0400, Marty wrote:

>My point being... why start from scratch when you can work on the stuff
>that <really> needs work off of a pre-existing platform?  Is the goal to
>make a FreeWarp type of thing so that anyone can download and install it,
>or is the goal to give the existing platform extended life for all of its
>current users?

I think the first goal is to enhance the platform for current users because
it's almost impossible to rewrite the complete OS/2 in the near future. The
OS/2 is simply too small to do this at the moment so we have to concentrate
our efforts on little steps.

cu


---
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]                            23-Sep-99 18:57:20
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: OS2NetLabs Head: "OS/2 is Dead"

From: "Adrian Gschwend" <[e-mail]>

On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 17:17:19 -0400, Marty wrote:

>Is this going to be done from scratch or is there some pre-existing
>source code involved?

The project started at EDM/2 and we will use the code the author of this
article did (don't remember the name actually but he contacted me about this
subject).

>Also, why were these two picked as important to rewrite?  Why not target
>PMSHELL (not all of it and the API, mind you, just the shell itself) to
>get rid of some of the single input queue problems?  It seems like a
>more managable and possibly more fruitful project.  Just my $.02.

Good idea, I just picked up these two things because there is already some
work done on this.

For sure we have to enhance this later so PMSHEL is a good idea!

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]                           23-Sep-99 13:34:09
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: NS 4.61GA  Was: Why blame IBM?

From: "Mark L. Kahnt" <[e-mail]>

Buddy Donnelly wrote:
>
> On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 10:52:06, Steve Drewell <[e-mail]> a
>  crit dans un message:
>
> > On Thu, 23 Sep 1999, Joe Kovacs wrote:
> >
> > ε >Try here:
> > ε >ftp://service5.boulder.ibm.com/software/asd/ns40/en_us/comm461.exe
> > ε
> > ε Not so.  You get NS 4.61GA from Software Choice, here and
> > ε drill in...
> > ε
> > ε http://www.software.ibm.com/os/warp/swchoice/
> > ε
> > ε When you're downloading NS 4.61, you might see that it's
> > ε coming from the Boulder site above.  But that is closed to you
> > ε and you cannot get to that site directly, you must get to it
> > ε through the Software Choice page.
> >
> > I think you're mistaken on that point....I was able to access the file
> > directly via ftp.
>
> And if not, it's still there for open FTP at:
>
> ftp://peak1.boulder.ibm.com:/software/asd/ns40/en_us/comm461.exe
>
> along with a June build of 404 I think I missed earlier.
>
> Good luck,
>
> Buddy
>
> Buddy Donnelly
> [e-mail]

Joe is accurate, though, if you are looking for the 128-bit security
edition - that requires a password bundled into the web-based download
procedure, while the international version is freely available via ftp
et al.
--

============================================================
To respond via e-mail - remove the "go-away-spammers"
portion of the Reply to: value.

Mark L. Kahnt, C.P. Box 1263, Kingston, Ontario   K7L 4Y8
Voix:        [phone]   Cellulaire: [phone]
Telecopieur: [phone]   Email: [e-mail]

References to "spam" in the above post refer to any of numerous
abuse of the Internet to repeatedly place off-topic messages in
inappropriate or unauthorised locations. The term should in no
way be construed as involving the products of Hormel Foods
Corporation.

Further, the use of the term "spam" should in no way be construed
to imply the support or involvement of Hormel Foods in conjunction
with such Internet abuse. Indeed, Hormel has publicly expressed
its disapproval of such actions.

SPAM  is a registered trademark of Hormel Foods for luncheon meat
and is a damn fine product at that. The author of this signature
attachment has no legal, commercial or financial involvement with
Hormel; rather, is active in the fields of copyright, trademark,
and Internet abuse analysis.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: M.L. Kahnt New Markets Consulting (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                            23-Sep-99 18:23:07
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: The Linux agenda revealed...

From: [e-mail]

Put up the shields, the LinoNuts are coming out of the woodwork.

time2leave


On 23 Sep 1999 16:23:59 GMT, "Stephen S. Edwards II"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

>ccondon <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>: Dumbentia - http://www.dumbentia.com
>
>: Do you hate Windows? Do you dislike Microsoft with a vengeance? Then take a
>: look at the new anti-Windows t-shirts now available at Dumbentia.
>
>: The designs include:
>
>:  - Just Say NO to Windows
>:  - Windows Sucks
>:  - Friends Don't Let Friends Do Windows
>:  - I think, therefore I run Linux
>:  - Where does Microsoft want you to go today?
>
>I think I understand...
>
>Microsoft markets products...
>
>The Linux community markets "emotions"...
>
>Now you tell me which one is without substance.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: AT&T WorldNet Services (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                    23-Sep-99 18:05:00
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: Borland C++

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

Yes provide us with a url.  They released some old copies of Turbo Pascal
and Turbo C for free but no mention of OS/2.

In article <[e-mail]>,
Richard R. Klemmer <[e-mail]> wrote:
>On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 02:01:27, [e-mail] (Paul Fedorenko) wrote:
>
>>
>> Incidentally, Borland released the most recent version of it's C++
>> compiler for OS/2 just this past August.  yep, August '99.  So there IS
>
>What's that you say?  Borland release a new version of their compiler?
> I haven't heard anything about this.  I'll have to check this out.
>
>
>-----------------------------
>Richard R. Klemmer
>[e-mail]
>http://www.webtrek.com
>-----------------------------
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                              23-Sep-99 17:21:28
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:02
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: mlw <[e-mail]>

Kelly Robinson wrote:
>
[snipped]

Some of the decaffeinated brands are just as flavorful as the
caffeinated ones.

Also, lets look at this:

The man that shoots the gun is guilty of murder. Yes.
The gun shop that does not exercise judgment, while perfectly legal to
do so, is IMHO partially to blame. People that buy guns for the purpose
of killing are usually obvious.
The gun manufacturer who lobbies against a waiting period for handgun
purchase also has some responsibility.

As for the Virus writers.

Have you ever written a virus? I have, it is fun. It is challenging.
have I ever released my viruses? No, that would be wrong.

If I sell you an elevator, I must make sure it is "reasonably" secure
from tampering. If I own a radio station, I have to make sure the
transmitter can not be used by an invading army. If I make a armored
car, I have to make efforts to ensure it can't be robbed. These are
reasonable expectations for the products mentioned.

Operating systems must, in this day and age, be designed with the
reasonable expectation that security is an issue. There will always be
vandals in every aspect of society. An OS manufacturer has the
reasonable expectation that their OS must protect the customers
computer.


--
Mohawk Software
Windows 95, Windows NT, UNIX, Linux. Applications, drivers, support.
Visit http://www.mohawksoft.com

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                23-Sep-99 13:46:14
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:02
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: cap student <[e-mail]>

The last line in your post disturbs me.  Just for the record not 5% of hackers
create any type of virus.  The community is subject to the same
generalizations
as every other one.  Just like all kids that commit crimes ruin it for the
rest
and even less than are repeat offenders.

To get back to the point most (95%) of hackers just do it for the challenge of
getting in and at most will copy a file for a trophy if that.  If you contact
any public community (2600, deadcowcult) they will trash those people just
like
you.

And remember that if those people don't find the holes in the security systems
then we are that much more vulnerable to outside threats.

Kelly Robinson wrote:

> Let's assume I'm a typical 95/98/NT user (I use more than windows but let's
> stick to what the majority uses for my damning point:)
>
> If I, as an uninformed typical computer user who doesn't know the
> behind-the-scenes stuff, and heard that someone created a virus or trojan or
> lifestyles or whatever sort of nasty which would exterminate my computer, I
> would more likely blame the fucking bastards who created these things (who
> claim they want to point of MS bugs but are merely TERRORIZING THE FRIGGING
> PUBLIC by their despicable acts).
>
> So to you fucking bastards and everyone else who want to blame MS, keep this
> truth in mind:
>
> When one man kills another with a shotgun and takes his posessions, who is
> to blame:  the man or the gun?
>
> The computer is the gun.
>
> The man who makes the virus is no different than the man who  has a gun,
> aims it, and shoots it once or thrice.
>
> So for those of you who like to laugh in MS's face, go right ahead.  I might
> almost join you.
>
> But unlike you, there are millions who suffer because supposedly intelligent
> people use viruses and such s if you took a cat and tormented and physically
> beaten it.
>
> Bottom line?  You cannot excuse the behavior.
>
> You cannot say that MS's lack of security is to blame.  Why not get some
> sugar, find a car, and dump the sugar in?  Who's to blame for making a car
> with inadequate fuel locking systems?  Your arguement is bullshit since it
> is inevitable that something is going to be missed.  Inevitable.  You remain
> civilized.  You do not be a spoiled little brat who deserves to die in an
> electric chair and fuck up millions of lives.
>
> Fair enough?   See you in hell, hackers, I'll bribe the devil to give you a
> nasty punishment.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The University of Manitoba (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                       23-Sep-99 17:49:21
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:02
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: [e-mail]

<nostalgic sigh>

Yeah, I can remember when I first had beer...

-a

In article <7sbtci$[e-mail]>,
  "Kelly Robinson" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> Let's assume I'm a typical 95/98/NT user (I use more than windows but
let's
> stick to what the majority uses for my damning point:)
>
> If I, as an uninformed typical computer user who doesn't know the
> behind-the-scenes stuff, and heard that someone created a virus or
trojan or
> lifestyles or whatever sort of nasty which would exterminate my
computer, I
> would more likely blame the fucking bastards who created these things
(who
> claim they want to point of MS bugs but are merely TERRORIZING THE
FRIGGING
> PUBLIC by their despicable acts).
>
> So to you fucking bastards and everyone else who want to blame MS,
keep this
> truth in mind:
>
> When one man kills another with a shotgun and takes his posessions,
who is
> to blame:  the man or the gun?
>
> The computer is the gun.
>
> The man who makes the virus is no different than the man who  has a
gun,
> aims it, and shoots it once or thrice.
>
> So for those of you who like to laugh in MS's face, go right ahead.  I
might
> almost join you.
>
> But unlike you, there are millions who suffer because supposedly
intelligent
> people use viruses and such s if you took a cat and tormented and
physically
> beaten it.
>
> Bottom line?  You cannot excuse the behavior.
>
> You cannot say that MS's lack of security is to blame.  Why not get
some
> sugar, find a car, and dump the sugar in?  Who's to blame for making a
car
> with inadequate fuel locking systems?  Your arguement is bullshit
since it
> is inevitable that something is going to be missed.  Inevitable.  You
remain
> civilized.  You do not be a spoiled little brat who deserves to die in
an
> electric chair and fuck up millions of lives.
>
> Fair enough?   See you in hell, hackers, I'll bribe the devil to give
you a
> nasty punishment.
>
>


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you do
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             23-Sep-99 17:06:16
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:02
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[e-mail]>

C Lund <[e-mail]> writes:

: In article <7sbsog$[e-mail]>, "Kelly Robinson"
: <[e-mail]> wrote:

: > Every time some one rags on all of the MacOS weak points (a very un-easy
to
: > use 1 button mouse,

: Not a weak point...

That depends on your preference... I for one like having two mouse
buttons... button 1 selects objects, and button 2 brings up contextual
menus.  But hey, use what you like.

: > co-operative (in other words, none) multitasking,

: Not that weak a point...

Again, that depends.  :-)  I have a dual-processor system, so cooperative
multitasking would be very hindering to me, especially if the system
didn't handle threading.  But this is a moot point, since MacOS 8
preemptively multitasks fairly well.  SMP on MacOS would be nice,
however... I think Apple needs to get cracking on this.

: > [to you mac users who live in
: > the 19th century:  a second instance is running the program again.

: Which is just plain silly. Why the buggerall would I want to have n
: versions of so and so app running at the same time?

In most cases, you don't.  However, there are some instances where it is
nice to be able to do so... opening multiple command prompts in WindowsNT,
or multiple bash interfaces under a typical UNIX are one instance.

: >  In real
: > OSes, the program can run as many times as it wants and in seperate

: In real OSes, the program can handle multiple files at a time.

Windows can do this just fine... what are you getting at here?

: > allocated memory spaces.  This can be extremely useful.]  I could go on
and
: > on...)

: Running multiple versions of an app is *not* useful.

Again, that depends upon what you're doing... it would be more accurate to
say, that in most instances, it's not useful to spawn multiple versions of
the same processes.

: > But what do they try to hide?  The facts that mac OS X is currently an
: > overpriced server OS

: MacOS X Server is a server OS, yes.

Surprisingly, he has a point here... MacOS X Server is merely a
reimplementation of BSD... you can get that for free from:

http://www.netbsd.org/
http://www.openbsd.org/
http://www.freebsd.org/

Why would I shell money out for a BSD-based product when I can just have a
genuine BSD product for free?  Still, I think MacOS X will be a rather
nice product, considering what they're doing with the interface.  But most
UNIX admins will probably prefer to use a bona-fide BSD-based UNIX than
MacOS X.

: > and that the WORKSTATION edition (what we want,
: > apparently) is still not out

: So? I'd rather Apple releases a finished version, rather than the beta
: versions M$ tends to dump on the PC herd.

If you're referring to the Windows2000 beta that Microsoft made
commercially available to those who wanted to try it out:

1.)  Hordes of users requested that they make it available, despite it
     being in development still.

2.)  It's actually running some large infrastructures, even at this point
     in its development.

Not bad for beta software, if you ask me.

: > So, Mac losers, do you want us to wait for Apple to finish wiping its
rear,
: > having finished using the toilet... or should people get something which
: > suits their needs NOW?

: I have something that suits my needs NOW: A Macintosh.

: > Most people need stuff now.  Loyalty only goes so far.

: Then why are you still likcing Bill Gate's hiny?

Actually, I'm puzzled by this post of his... he's usually rambling on
about how much Microsoft Windows sucks, so I don't know what the purpose
of his post was, other than to troll.

: > And if you need more
: > than a pretty case, Apple is completely and utterly worthless.

: Tell that to the shareholders.

Actually, I read in the local paper that Apple's shares went down a
significant amount, because there was a holdup with the G4, thanks to
Motorola.

: > So if you want everything the Mac lacks, get Windows NT or BeOS.

: Everything the mac lacks? Like... 1000 000 000 dlls? No thanks.

Heh... DLL hell is a reality, but Windows2000 no longer suffers from it...
it's looking like a pretty dern neat OS.  :-)
--
.-----.
|[_] :| Stephen S. Edwards II | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
| =  :| "Humans have the potential to become irrational... perhaps
|     |  you should attempt to access that part of your psyche."
|_..._|                    -- Lieutenant Commander Data

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Anamorphic 3-D Graphics Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               23-Sep-99 13:18:01
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:02
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hobbyist_=A9?= <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy, Stephen S. Edwards II posted :

>  If you do, make sure the motherboard is either Genuine Intel, ASUS, or
>  Tyan... most others are substandard.

Is this your order of preference?

--
-=Ali=-

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                              23-Sep-99 18:32:29
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:02
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: mlw <[e-mail]>

"Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
>
> mlw <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> : Kelly Robinson wrote:
> : >
> : [snipped]
>
> : Some of the decaffeinated brands are just as flavorful as the
> : caffeinated ones.
>
> : Also, lets look at this:
>
> : The man that shoots the gun is guilty of murder. Yes.
> : The gun shop that does not exercise judgment, while perfectly legal to
> : do so, is IMHO partially to blame. People that buy guns for the purpose
> : of killing are usually obvious.
>
> Ever been to a gun show, Mark?  Talk about scary.
>
> I've actually been to one here in the AZ Civic Center where they were
> selling (get this) an _anti-aircraft cannon_ (20mm I think)!  When I asked
> the person selling it if it was filled with cement, he said "nah, most
> folks wouldn't know where to get ammo anyway"... I was astounded... I
> mean, what about people who _DO_ know where to get ammo?
>
> Anyone wanna go hunting for assault choppers?

When I worked for Denning Mobile Robotics, one of the potential
customers was a "Security" company that advertised in Soldier of
Fortune. This is not a lie, this is the honest truth, they had compact
automatic weapons (I think UZI, but I am not sure) in the trunks of
their cars and were not reticent about bragging. The marketing guys
insisted all we geeks meet with all these mercenaries for dinner. Now
mind you, it was fun. These guys know how to live, but it is frightening
to think that these guys were all getting tanked and were all probably
carrying.

Gun shows, and the people that attend them, scare the shit out of me. It
should also be noted that the broad powers of the FBI, ATF and DEA also
scares the shit out of me.

>
> : The gun manufacturer who lobbies against a waiting period for handgun
> : purchase also has some responsibility.
>
> : As for the Virus writers.
>
> : Have you ever written a virus? I have, it is fun. It is challenging.
> : have I ever released my viruses? No, that would be wrong.
>
> Besides, who says that viruses are bad just by their very being?  Some can
> actually be used to recover data from frizzled systems, from what I've
> been told.

An example of a good virus would be one that hangs around Windows and NT
checking for registry modifications and writing a diff file for each
change so that any change to the registry can be backed-out.

>
> : Operating systems must, in this day and age, be designed with the
> : reasonable expectation that security is an issue. There will always be
> : vandals in every aspect of society. An OS manufacturer has the
> : reasonable expectation that their OS must protect the customers
> : computer.
>
> I agree (for once).  :-)

It does not happen often.
;-)


--
Mohawk Software
Windows 95, Windows NT, UNIX, Linux. Applications, drivers, support.
Visit http://www.mohawksoft.com

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]               23-Sep-99 11:37:05
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:02
Subj: Re: Who to believe?  [follow-up]

From: "Kim Cheung" <[e-mail]>

On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 12:40:21 -0400, Marty wrote:

>That would be a very childish activity for a millionare business owner,
>don't you think?  One doesn't become a successful entreprenuer or
>executive by behaving in such a way.  Sure Brad may have personal
>feelings about what's going on, but he wouldn't let those feelings get
>in the way of his business.

Until I get drag through the mud too, I wouldn't know what mud taste like.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                       23-Sep-99 13:30:15
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:02
Subj: FW: Response from IBM

From: Wayne Johnson <[e-mail]>

When Brad told us that there would not be a Warp client from Stardock, I
sent a note to Lou ( you know, the BIG guy at IBM ) and I didn't expect
any response other than an automated message saying that they received
my message.  Today I received the following from IBM, I assume it is in
response to the message I sent to Lou.

Wayne
wjohnson<shift 2>worldnet.att.net


--------------------------
(From [e-mail])

Dear Mr. Johnson,

Thank you for your interest in IBM's OS/2 family of products. IBM often
explores possible business opportunities with other companies. We do not

discuss these potential opportunities publicly until a contractual
relationship
is finalized.

IBM's OS/2 initiative is for customers to achieve platform independence
via our
application model referred to as the Application Framework for
e-business. Our
strategy is focused on server-managed clients. WorkSpace On-Demand and
Warp
Server for e-business is our solution to this environment and is a early
step
for transition to the Application Framework. Our server-managed client
solution
offers centralized management and control of heterogeneous clients,
potential
lower cost of ownership, and rapid deployment of applications.

We plan to continue enhancements to OS/2 Warp 4, Warp Server for
e-business and
WorkSpace On-Demand through December 31, 2002. These enhancements will
focus on
e-business technologies, extending WorkSpace On-Demand to industry
servers other
than OS/2, and hardware and device driver support that we believe is
most
essential to our key enterprise customers.

We appreciate your feedback regarding IBM and its products.

Regards,

Larry Thorn
NCSD Marketing

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: U S WEST Interprise (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                  23-Sep-99 14:47:05
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:02
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: "Joe Malloy" <[e-mail]>

Oy vey!  Something tholened like a stuck tholen:
>
> >>> It was released yesterday.  Go to IBM's Software Choice web site.
>
> >> Not when I was there it wasn't.
>
> > Oh I see; you're the ultimate judge of what is fact and not... If you
> > don't see it, it can't possibly be true.
>
> Par for Malloy.  I certainly didn't have any trouble finding the betas
> that have been available for download for several weeks.  Of course,
> Malloy was probably there years ago but not since then.

Bingo!  I was wrong on this one, but that doesn't change to fact that OS/2
doesn't have much to work with.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                23-Sep-99 18:23:05
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:02
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: [e-mail] (Dan)

On 23 Sep 1999 01:50:15 GMT, Steve Mading
<[e-mail]> wrote:
>If someone sells a 'safe' kevlar jacket that is advertised to protect
>you from a bullet and it turns out it doesn't work at all then you should
>damn well get mad at the company that made it.  If the reason you found
>out about the flaw was because of someone shooting you on the street, then

I think your point is moot, because we know that there are no kevlar
full body suits.

Something is unprotected, it's just a matter of shooting it enough
times.  Of course you could go for a real low blow by kicking them in
the nuts.

Not to say security isn't worthy . . . I mean, most people can't hit
you at 5 feet anyway.

Think abstractly and sybollically.

dan

http://www.ilstu.edu/~drmaure/

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Illinois State University (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]               23-Sep-99 11:32:12
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:02
Subj: Am I a lamb heading to the slaughter house?

From: "Kim Cheung" <[e-mail]>

As a principal in both TouchVoice, a Computer Telephony Integration
(CTI) application developer and marketer, and Serenity Systems, a
marketing and channel development organization, I feel obliged to
comment on the IBM - Stardock decision and Mr. Brad Wardell's recent
remarks.

First, I agree and support Mr. Bob St.John's remarks regarding Serenity
Systems and Managed Client(r) product positioning which appeared here,
on Warpcast, on Monday, September 20
(http://www.os2ss.com/warpcast/wc4111.html). That includes exploring
the licensing of a client product based on the Warp Server for
e.business product. We are currently working to resolve product and
technical issues related to this effort - which we shall refer to as:
"Project eStation".

Second, OS/2 continues to provide the best
combination of price performance and reliability required for CTI
applications. This includes the TouchVoice WisePath product
(http://www.deltanet.com/touchvoice), a
carrier class product which can scale up to support the incredible
number of 1.3 million phone lines, and the new WiseTalker Database
Server, marketed through Serenity Systems (www.serenity-systems.com),
allowing this product to scale from supporting one telephone line to
over 2,000. That's the value of OS/2 to a CTI developer.

Third, our Managed Client products create a
computing environment which runs 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, with
exceptional management for operations and software deployment. This was
demonstrated at the Warp Expo West Vendor 100 exhibit where we built
six client workstations over the network, loaded the OS and close to
100 native OS/2 applications, all within minutes. We will be
demonstrating this again at Warpstock in the Serenity Systems pavilion.
OS/2 Merlin delivers the industry's best Managed Client platform
available today and for the forseeable future.

The Managed Client is intended to provide the ability to outsource the
entire computing environment to a third party, an aspect attractive to
consultants acquiring a recurring revenue stream, and to small and
medium sized business, which have difficulty supporting fat clients and
need an less expensive computing model that the traditional Wintel
network. It also addresses the most expensive support activities in
large organizations. And the Managed Client network can be seen as a
step toward operating system independance for desktop users.

And I have not even begin talking about the WiseAlert Server for
monitoring mission critical operations and BASS (Building Automaticon
and Security Service) channel partner programs - both of which are
available from Serenity Systems.

Last week OS/2 offered TouchVoice and Serenity Systems excellent
revenue opportunities. Nothing has changed this week. In fact, this
week Serenity Systems has received encouraging inquiries from potential
channel partners in the US, Mexico, and Europe.

I applaude Stardock and IBM for the work they did in considering how to
support an new fat client product. I regret the outcome. Mr. Wardell
has tried to deliver a balanced message regarding OS/2. Even so, I
believe the message is too negative. I do believe that not having
Stardock as part of plans for a new OS/2 fat client will hurt a set of
users most directly effected by the traditional fat client. This is an
important group of users but does not represent the end of commercial
opportunity for OS/2.

TouchVoice has never stood still and is not standing still today. We
still see OS/2 as our flagship OS because of the business solutions it
enables. Serenity Systems makes new contacts every week, which
represent new relationships, new beginnings. Not the end.

I feel compelled to be on record with what I believe is a positive,
accurate, and realistic business message.

Kim Cheung




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          23-Sep-99 14:35:21
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:02
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: "Tim Mayer" <[e-mail]>

Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
> Tim Mayer wrote:
> >
> > Steve Mading <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> > news:7sc10n$rhq$[e-mail]...
> > > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Kelly Robinson <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > >
[SNIP]
> > >
> > > If someone sells a 'safe' kevlar jacket that is advertised to protect
> > > you from a bullet and it turns out it doesn't work at all then you
should
> > > damn well get mad at the company that made it.  If the reason you
found
> > > out about the flaw was because of someone shooting you on the street,
then
> > > you should get mad at the gunman as well, but this doesn't remove any
> > blame
> > > from the company that made the jacket.  Now, if the reason you found
out
> > > about it was that some consumer advocacy group performed a bunch of
tests
> > > and then published the results would you get angry at the consumer
group
> > > and call them 'fucking bastards' for telling all the criminals that
the
> > > jacket is unsafe?  The people who get pissed at those who find MS's
holes
> > > by exploiting them are forgetting that that's the *only* way to get MS
> > > to actually do anything about them.  If you tell them about a
theoretical
> > > hole it won't get fixed.  You have to show how to exploit it, and
announce
> > > to the world how to do it (to give them the incentive to do something
> > > besides just sweeping it under the rug.)
> > >
> >
> > Isn't it more like someone buys a kevlar jacket, then someone else,
invents
> > an illegal bullet that can penetrate it. Now who do you get mad at, the
> > maker of the kevlar jacket or the maker of the illegal bullet? If the
maker
> > of the kevlar jacket comes out with a special patch that prevents this
new
> > illegal bullet from penetrating the kevlar jacket, and offer it as a
free
> > patch then great (considering that their motivation for doing so is that
> > they want to keep selling kevlar jackets).
>
> Tell the people that died from it that it's "great".
>

It is "great" for the people that get a patch -- bad for the people that
didn't have a chance to. But who do you blame, the kevlar jacket company?






--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Pathway Communications (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          23-Sep-99 14:48:16
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:02
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: "Tim Mayer" <[e-mail]>

Mayor Of R'lyeh <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:JlXqNxOCb4t=[e-mail]...
> On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 12:08:06 -0400, "Tim Mayer"
> <[e-mail]> chose to bless us with this bit of wisdom:
>
> >
> >Steve Mading <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> >news:7sc10n$rhq$[e-mail]...
> >>
> >> If someone sells a 'safe' kevlar jacket that is advertised to protect
> >> you from a bullet and it turns out it doesn't work at all then you
should
> >> damn well get mad at the company that made it.  If the reason you found
> >> out about the flaw was because of someone shooting you on the street,
then
> >> you should get mad at the gunman as well, but this doesn't remove any
> >blame
> >> from the company that made the jacket.  Now, if the reason you found
out
> >> about it was that some consumer advocacy group performed a bunch of
tests
> >> and then published the results would you get angry at the consumer
group
> >> and call them 'fucking bastards' for telling all the criminals that the
> >> jacket is unsafe?  The people who get pissed at those who find MS's
holes
> >> by exploiting them are forgetting that that's the *only* way to get MS
> >> to actually do anything about them.  If you tell them about a
theoretical
> >> hole it won't get fixed.  You have to show how to exploit it, and
announce
> >> to the world how to do it (to give them the incentive to do something
> >> besides just sweeping it under the rug.)
> >>
> >
> >Isn't it more like someone buys a kevlar jacket, then someone else,
invents
> >an illegal bullet that can penetrate it.
>
> Why do you think it would be illegal?

Why would they be legal?

>
> > Now who do you get mad at, the
> >maker of the kevlar jacket or the maker of the illegal bullet?
>
> Plenty of perfectly legal bullets can go  through a kevlar jacket
> right now.
>

Perhaps. I guess my argument is a bit weak considering that in the
real-world kevlar jackets are not all that effectiv. So, instead consider a
hypothetical world which has been significantly simplified. In this world
there is a perfect kevlar jacket that is impermeable to all forms of
bullets. 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?

Tim
[SNIP]


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Pathway Communications (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             23-Sep-99 15:05:26
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:02
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: "Brian Lewis" <[e-mail]>

Nate <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
> On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 21:40:18 -0400, "Brian Lewis"
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> >Troll rating : 2.5 / 10
> >
> >Pros : Lots of sarcasm
> >Cons : Too many words. Not enough swearing.
> >
> >Penalties : 15-yard penalty for cross posting, replay third down.
>
> Shouldn't you penalize him 5 more yards for not parroting the apple
> line?

It's a tough call, though after viewing the instant replay, the play stands.
However, if the troll had been originated in a *.windows newsgroup, I could
see adding on the extra 5 yards.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               23-Sep-99 15:50:14
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:02
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Tim Mayer wrote:
>
> Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> news:[e-mail]...
> > Tim Mayer wrote:
> > >
> > > Steve Mading <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> > > news:7sc10n$rhq$[e-mail]...
> > > > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Kelly Robinson <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > > >
> [SNIP]
> > > >
> > > > If someone sells a 'safe' kevlar jacket that is advertised to protect
> > > > you from a bullet and it turns out it doesn't work at all then you
> should
> > > > damn well get mad at the company that made it.  If the reason you
> found
> > > > out about the flaw was because of someone shooting you on the street,
> then
> > > > you should get mad at the gunman as well, but this doesn't remove any
> > > blame
> > > > from the company that made the jacket.  Now, if the reason you found
> out
> > > > about it was that some consumer advocacy group performed a bunch of
> tests
> > > > and then published the results would you get angry at the consumer
> group
> > > > and call them 'fucking bastards' for telling all the criminals that
> the
> > > > jacket is unsafe?  The people who get pissed at those who find MS's
> holes
> > > > by exploiting them are forgetting that that's the *only* way to get MS
> > > > to actually do anything about them.  If you tell them about a
> theoretical
> > > > hole it won't get fixed.  You have to show how to exploit it, and
> announce
> > > > to the world how to do it (to give them the incentive to do something
> > > > besides just sweeping it under the rug.)
> > > >
> > >
> > > Isn't it more like someone buys a kevlar jacket, then someone else,
> invents
> > > an illegal bullet that can penetrate it. Now who do you get mad at, the
> > > maker of the kevlar jacket or the maker of the illegal bullet? If the
> maker
> > > of the kevlar jacket comes out with a special patch that prevents this
> new
> > > illegal bullet from penetrating the kevlar jacket, and offer it as a
> free
> > > patch then great (considering that their motivation for doing so is that
> > > they want to keep selling kevlar jackets).
> >
> > Tell the people that died from it that it's "great".
> >
>
> It is "great" for the people that get a patch -- bad for the people that
> didn't have a chance to. But who do you blame, the kevlar jacket company?

Those that didn't get a chance to have likely suffered catastrophic loss
and would have much preferred that more care was taken or research was
conducted in the first place.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          23-Sep-99 19:55:16
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:02
Subj: Re: Anti-Windows t-shirts at www.dumbentia.com

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>"ccondon" <[e-mail]>
>Do you hate Windows? Do you dislike Microsoft with a vengeance? Then take a
>look at the new anti-Windows t-shirts now available at Dumbentia.

In light of how foolishly OS/2 advocates have "bent over" to allow IBM
executives to exploit them and then toss them away when they're no
longer needed by IBM, I think that we should market t-shirts for OS/2
users that read:

"IBM with stupid" and an arrow pointing up at the shirt wearer's head

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                  23-Sep-99 14:48:29
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:02
Subj: Re: Anti-Windows t-shirts at www.dumbentia.com

From: "Joe Malloy" <[e-mail]>

David H. McCoy <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...

> >> Do you hate Windows? Do you dislike Microsoft with a vengeance? Then
take a
> >> look at the new anti-Windows t-shirts now available at Dumbentia.
> >>
> >> The designs include:
> >>
> >>  - Just Say NO to Windows
> >>  - Windows Sucks
> >>  - Friends Don't Let Friends Do Windows
> >>  - I think, therefore I run Linux
> >>  - Where does Microsoft want you to go today?
> >
> >Why not just make shirts that say, "Kick me," "Mug me," or "I'm a
computer
> >dork"?
> >
> >- Marty
> >
>
> Hate an OS? Dislike with vengeance? Sounds like people who want those
shirts
> just need mental help.

But it's to be expected from an OS/2 "Advocate!"

- Joe



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                           23-Sep-99 19:02:01
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:02
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: [e-mail] (Nate)

On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 21:40:18 -0400, "Brian Lewis"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

>Troll rating : 2.5 / 10
>
>Pros : Lots of sarcasm
>Cons : Too many words. Not enough swearing.
>
>Penalties : 15-yard penalty for cross posting, replay third down.

Shouldn't you penalize him 5 more yards for not parroting the apple
line?


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Airnews.net! at Internet America (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          23-Sep-99 19:46:03
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:02
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>Richard A Crane
>To accuse someone of not knowing what their doing because they have a problem

>with something that you apparently haven't is merely insulting.

Tell that to Tholen. When anyone complains about having a problem with
OS/2, his standard rhetoric is to point out that he has never had that
problem and therefore it can't really be a problem.

That's the thing with OS/2 Advocacy as practiced by the kooks who hang
out here. It's so fanatical that it is its own worst enemy.

>People's equipment varies and the problems they can have do also

I install Windows upon a *variety* of equipment, and don't have all of
the problems reported by hapless sorts like Bennie. On the occasion
when sometime doesn't go as I planned it, I fix it.

On the other hand, judging by reports by people like Bennie concerning
all of the problems that they have installing Windows, I easily deduce
that they have neither my skill/expertise nor qualified experience. In
short, they obviously don't know what they're doing to so badly, and
so often, bungle the installation of Windows

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               23-Sep-99 15:52:17
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:02
Subj: Re: Anti-Windows t-shirts at www.dumbentia.com

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Joe Malloy wrote:
>
> David H. McCoy <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> news:[e-mail]...
>
> > >> Do you hate Windows? Do you dislike Microsoft with a vengeance? Then
> take a
> > >> look at the new anti-Windows t-shirts now available at Dumbentia.
> > >>
> > >> The designs include:
> > >>
> > >>  - Just Say NO to Windows
> > >>  - Windows Sucks
> > >>  - Friends Don't Let Friends Do Windows
> > >>  - I think, therefore I run Linux
> > >>  - Where does Microsoft want you to go today?
> > >
> > >Why not just make shirts that say, "Kick me," "Mug me," or "I'm a
> computer
> > >dork"?
> > >
> > >- Marty
> > >
> >
> > Hate an OS? Dislike with vengeance? Sounds like people who want those
> shirts
> > just need mental help.
>
> But it's to be expected from an OS/2 "Advocate!"

The T-shirt guy himself sounds like a Linux guy.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            23-Sep-99 19:42:04
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: New OS/2 client not to be

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 16:13:32, Marty <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Karel Jansens wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 10:16:37, [e-mail] (M.P. van Dobben de
> > Bruijn) wrote:
> >
> > > > Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks for the info. I'll try to look into
> > > MagicDesk later on. On the subject of
> > > WPS and the Linux file-system we had a
> > > small thread one or one-and-a-half month
> > > ago in this newsgroup, I think. Karel was al-
> > > so involved and it contained some info on the
> > > filesystem of Linux which might get in the way.
> > >
> > <sticking nose into discussion>
> > I remember that. I figure, the way EA's are implemented in OS/2,
> > OOUI's could be hooked up onto practically any filesystem. Heck, if
> > IBM managed to do it smoothly with FAT, ext2fs shouldn't be that big a
> > problem.
>
> I don't really feel that it was done (or can be done) smoothly with
> FAT.  They way it was implemented was to hack it on top of the
> filesystem.  While it functions quite well inside of OS/2, when you boot
> another operating system that also recognizes FAT partitions, your OS/2
> EAs are easily lost, corrupted, or orphaned.  To prove my point, change
> the icon on a program on one of your FAT drives.  Then boot a non-OS/2
> operating system and delete the file.  Then come back to OS/2 and run
> CHKDSK /f on the drive.
>
But I don't _want_ to run other OS's. Sure, I have to sometimes, but
always as a last resort and very grudgingly. I wanna have my WPS. If
IBM had to hack EA's on top of ext2fs to be able to port the WPS to
Linux, I think I can jolly well live with that.

> If EAs are not built into the filesystem spec, then implementing them on
> top of a filesystem is a hack which is subject to break down under
> certain conditions.
>
So they'll just have to make it so's that it don't break. I want my
WPS!

Of course, they can always bring OS/2 up to date and make it the
world's No 1 operating system. Should IBM do that, I promise I won't
wine (good pun actually, considering...) about WPS for X anymore.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net
=======================================================
If we could have our cake _and_ eat it,
people would start whining about seconds.
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          23-Sep-99 20:14:05
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: NS 4.61GA  Was: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Buddy Donnelly)

On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 17:34:18, "Mark L. Kahnt" <[e-mail]> a
┌crit dans un message:
>
> Joe is accurate, though, if you are looking for the 128-bit security
> edition - that requires a password bundled into the web-based download
> procedure, while the international version is freely available via ftp
> et al.

I believe that has just changed, and that the only "weak" security version
is the one that the French are required by French law to use.

In any case, the file I d/l'ed from the FTP site passes the Security
testing at

    http://verisign.netscape.com/advisor/index.html

as 128-bit, etc.


My guess is we can thank Sen. Bill Bradley for this. I'd be willing to bet
that his strong showing in the polls caused Gore to do some serious market
research, for the first time, and it revealed strong attitudes against him
about this NSA stuff, and that's why the Clinton administration changed the
rules.

Now, what about forcing Louis Freeh to make an official apology to Phil
Zimmerman, I want to ask? (Before they fire his ass.)


Good luck,

Buddy

Buddy Donnelly
[e-mail]


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: RoadRunner - TampaBay (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                 23-Sep-99 22:53:00
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: NS 4.61GA  Was: Why blame IBM?

From: peter volsted <[e-mail]>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------2890248FEF0E5CE81DCA58D2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

hi

> Buddy Donnelly wrote:

> I believe that has just changed, and that the only "weak" security version
> is the one that the French are required by French law to use.
>

I also downloaded via ftp but from Denmark, although it was en_us version.
Testing encryption via:
   https://www.fortify.net/cgi-bin/ssl
I get: RC4-Export cipher, 40 bit key.
>
> Now, what about forcing Louis Freeh to make an official apology to Phil
> Zimmerman, I want to ask? (Before they fire his ass.)
>
I most certainly agree on that, but possibly a bit to early.

kind regards

peter
--------------2890248FEF0E5CE81DCA58D2
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
 name="pvolsted.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for peter volsted
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename="pvolsted.vcf"

begin:vcard
n:volsted pedersen;peter
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
adr:;;hostrups have 22 1.t.h.;frederiksberg c;;dk-1954;denmark
version:2.1
email;internet:[e-mail]
title:visitkort
tel;fax:[phone]
tel;home:[phone]
note:peters visitkort
x-mozilla-cpt:;0
fn:peter volsted pedersen
end:vcard

--------------2890248FEF0E5CE81DCA58D2--

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                    23-Sep-99 21:28:18
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: Borland C++

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

The last issue date was in 1995 for Borland C++ 2 for OS/2.  Any proof for
a more recent release date?

In article <8hwG3.268$[e-mail]>,
Paul Fedorenko <[e-mail]> wrote:
>: > Incidentally, Borland released the most recent version of it's C++
>: > compiler for OS/2 just this past August.  yep, August '99.  So there IS
>
>: What's that you say?  Borland release a new version of their compiler?
>:  I haven't heard anything about this.  I'll have to check this out.
>
>
>Actually, there's a chance I had misread the date on the article that I read.
 I
>went back there, and I couldn't find anything about an August '99 release.
So
>either I misread the date, or I got it confused with another product...
>
>Sorry 'bout that...
>
>Paul
>
>---
>
>
>--
>
>Paul Fedorenko                        [e-mail]
>Internet Direct Tech Support
>
>"ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp or what is a heaven for"
>
>                                         -- Robert Browning,
>                                                        "Andrea Del Sarto"
>                                                        1895
> ----------------------------------------------------
> : Come play Realms of Despair! http://www.game.org :
> ----------------------------------------------------


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               23-Sep-99 17:25:27
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Tim Mayer wrote:
>
> Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> news:[e-mail]...
> > Tim Mayer wrote:
> > >
> > > Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> > > news:[e-mail]...
> > > > Tim Mayer wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Steve Mading <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:7sc10n$rhq$[e-mail]...
> > > > > > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Kelly Robinson <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > [SNIP]
> > > > >
> > > > > Isn't it more like someone buys a kevlar jacket, then someone else,
> > > invents
> > > > > an illegal bullet that can penetrate it. Now who do you get mad at,
> the
> > > > > maker of the kevlar jacket or the maker of the illegal bullet? If
> the
> > > maker
> > > > > of the kevlar jacket comes out with a special patch that prevents
> this
> > > new
> > > > > illegal bullet from penetrating the kevlar jacket, and offer it as a
> > > free
> > > > > patch then great (considering that their motivation for doing so is
> that
> > > > > they want to keep selling kevlar jackets).
> > > >
> > > > Tell the people that died from it that it's "great".
> > > >
> > >
> > > It is "great" for the people that get a patch -- bad for the people that
> > > didn't have a chance to. But who do you blame, the kevlar jacket
> company?
> >
> > Those that didn't get a chance to have likely suffered catastrophic loss
> > and would have much preferred that more care was taken or research was
> > conducted in the first place.
>
> But within the domain of the initial threat of conventional bullets,
> research could be considered to be complete. Expecting research to yeild a
> perfect solution for all current and future threats might be expecting too
> much. I certainly hope that research into kevlar vests considered
> alternative bullets, in the same way that I hope OS developers considered
> both conventional and alternative methods of hacking. At what point to you
> consider their research to be adequate? PERFECT?

Certainly not.  It's not a matter of perfection of coverage.  It's a
matter of trust and confidence.  If I wore my kevlar jacket and never
got shot at, I'd be fairly neutral about it.  If I wore it, took a few
bullets, and it saved my life, I'd be very favorably disposed towards
it.  If I wore it, got shot, and had to have part of my lung removed, I
would look into alternative forms of protection (such as not hanging
around gun-toting types).  That's precisely what has happened with many
former windoze users.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                 23-Sep-99 20:53:27
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: The Linux agenda revealed...

From: [e-mail] (The Ghost In The Machine)

On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 18:23:14 GMT, [e-mail]
<[e-mail]> wrote:
>Put up the shields, the LinoNuts are coming out of the woodwork.

Hmm...I thought that was "LinoType" myself, that old but
much-vaunted process (at least at one point) used for
typesetting newspapers --

Oh wait...this isn't alt.typesetting.folklore, is it?  :-)

Anyway, Linux is definitely a popular operating system, and people
have become very attached and happy with it, but I will say
that Microsoft Windows is far more profitable.

At least for Microsoft. :-)

Similar things happened with the Amiga, a highly capable (but quite
doomed, at the time) computer system, complete with multitasking OS,
and I will note with some sadness that it's dead -- for now -- and
it's quite obvious that zealotry -- represented by Linux, or at least
a small number of its followers -- almost always loses to rank pragmatism,
which is what Windows represents -- at the moment.

History may repeat itself.  (I hope not -- I like Linux and
find it useful.)

(Side point: Microsoft wants to know where you want to go today.
It is obvious that a company must know what its customers want
to do in order to market a product that allows them to do it.
It is also possible that Microsoft is interested in suggesting
where a customer may want to go in the future, and  attempting
to curtail competitors (such as Netscape) from talking with
customers...) :-)

>
>time2leave
>
>
>On 23 Sep 1999 16:23:59 GMT, "Stephen S. Edwards II"
><[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>>ccondon <[e-mail]> writes:
>>
>>: Dumbentia - http://www.dumbentia.com
>>
>>: Do you hate Windows? Do you dislike Microsoft with a vengeance? Then take
a
>>: look at the new anti-Windows t-shirts now available at Dumbentia.
>>
>>: The designs include:
>>
>>:  - Just Say NO to Windows
>>:  - Windows Sucks
>>:  - Friends Don't Let Friends Do Windows
>>:  - I think, therefore I run Linux
>>:  - Where does Microsoft want you to go today?
>>
>>I think I understand...
>>
>>Microsoft markets products...
>>
>>The Linux community markets "emotions"...
>>
>>Now you tell me which one is without substance.

----
[e-mail]

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Verio (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               23-Sep-99 16:58:00
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: New OS/2 client not to be

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Karel Jansens wrote:
>
> On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 16:13:32, Marty <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> > Karel Jansens wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 10:16:37, [e-mail] (M.P. van Dobben de
> > > Bruijn) wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the info. I'll try to look into
> > > > MagicDesk later on. On the subject of
> > > > WPS and the Linux file-system we had a
> > > > small thread one or one-and-a-half month
> > > > ago in this newsgroup, I think. Karel was al-
> > > > so involved and it contained some info on the
> > > > filesystem of Linux which might get in the way.
> > > >
> > > <sticking nose into discussion>
> > > I remember that. I figure, the way EA's are implemented in OS/2,
> > > OOUI's could be hooked up onto practically any filesystem. Heck, if
> > > IBM managed to do it smoothly with FAT, ext2fs shouldn't be that big a
> > > problem.
> >
> > I don't really feel that it was done (or can be done) smoothly with
> > FAT.  They way it was implemented was to hack it on top of the
> > filesystem.  While it functions quite well inside of OS/2, when you boot
> > another operating system that also recognizes FAT partitions, your OS/2
> > EAs are easily lost, corrupted, or orphaned.  To prove my point, change
> > the icon on a program on one of your FAT drives.  Then boot a non-OS/2
> > operating system and delete the file.  Then come back to OS/2 and run
> > CHKDSK /f on the drive.
> >
> But I don't _want_ to run other OS's. Sure, I have to sometimes, but
> always as a last resort and very grudgingly. I wanna have my WPS. If
> IBM had to hack EA's on top of ext2fs to be able to port the WPS to
> Linux, I think I can jolly well live with that.

Well the problem is, even within the Linux environment itself,
applications which don't use an API which supports EAs could make such a
hack fall apart on e2fs.  That is to say, every current application.

> > If EAs are not built into the filesystem spec, then implementing them on
> > top of a filesystem is a hack which is subject to break down under
> > certain conditions.
> >
> So they'll just have to make it so's that it don't break. I want my
> WPS!

So do something about it.  ;-P

> Of course, they can always bring OS/2 up to date and make it the
> world's No 1 operating system. Should IBM do that, I promise I won't
> wine (good pun actually, considering...) about WPS for X anymore.

Yes you will wine, and so will many others.  Perfection is impossible to
attain, but the closer you are, the closer you want to be.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                         23-Sep-99 21:09:14
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: FW: Response from IBM

From: [e-mail] (Anecdoter)

My response was very different, and was definetly a form letter - notice the
dates for the release of Java 1.1.8 and WSEB

--------------------------------------------
I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for your interest in IBM's
OS/2 family of products and to assure you of IBM's continuing commitment to
OS/2.

Our top priority is our customers - protecting their IBM investments and
leveraging those investments to build a network computing environment for the
future.  Network computing offers long term benefits including the potential
of
reducing the total cost of computing.  Our second priority is IBM's network
computing strategy:  e-business and 100% pure Java.  OS/2 allows our customers
to transition to network computing while continuing to support legacy
applications.  Let me summarize our current plans and strategy for OS/2.

Our strategy for client support is focused on OS/2 Warp v4 and WorkSpace
On-Demand and the migration of applications to 100% pure Java.  WorkSpace
On-Demand v2 became available last October and offers support for a broader
range of hardware devices, DHCP Boot, TCP/IP 4.1 enhancements, additional
machine classes, a machine class creation tool, Network Station support and an
application installation tool.  A new Windows client feature, called WorkSpace
On-Demand 2.0 Feature for Windows Clients is planned for release in May.

A new release of OS/2 Warp Server, called OS/2 Warp Server for e-business, is
planned for release in May.  We expect that it will provide you with new
levels
of performance and scalability compared with prior releases of OS/2 Warp
Server.

We are enabling the latest versions of Java on OS/2 with OS/2's Java Virtual
Machine (JVM).  Java 1.1.7 is currently available and 1.1.8 is planned for
release in July.

We are continuing to provide updates to both the OS/2 Warp client and server
products via our Internet delivery site called Software Choice at:

     http://www.software.ibm.com/os/warp/swchoice/

Our continued hardware support is based on customer requirements that depend
on
OS/2 for mission critical applications.  We continue to work with key hardware
manufacturers to provide technical support for their development efforts and
to
negotiate support for device drivers that our customers request.  We also
continue to develop device drivers as part of our OS/2 development work.  To
provide support to customers that request specialized device support, we
accept
requests for price quotations to develop those device drivers.  We will make
every attempt to accommodate such requests, but we must note that such support
may not be possible under all circumstances.

Thank you for your support of IBM and OS/2 and your interest in future
software
strategies and plans.

Sincerely,




Thanks,
Marie [e-mail]
Network Computing Software Division
Customer Satisfaction
512-838-9403  T/L 678-9403

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: AOL http://www.aol.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                   23-Sep-99 20:42:22
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: Borland C++

From: [e-mail] (Paul Fedorenko)

: > Incidentally, Borland released the most recent version of it's C++
: > compiler for OS/2 just this past August.  yep, August '99.  So there IS

: What's that you say?  Borland release a new version of their compiler?
:  I haven't heard anything about this.  I'll have to check this out.


Actually, there's a chance I had misread the date on the article that I read.
I
went back there, and I couldn't find anything about an August '99 release.  So
either I misread the date, or I got it confused with another product...

Sorry 'bout that...

Paul

---


--

Paul Fedorenko                        [e-mail]
Internet Direct Tech Support

"ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp or what is a heaven for"

                                         -- Robert Browning,
                                                        "Andrea Del Sarto"
                                                        1895
 ----------------------------------------------------
 : Come play Realms of Despair! http://www.game.org :
 ----------------------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: ComputerLink Internet Direct. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             24-Sep-99 12:10:24
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: "Stuart Fox" <[e-mail]>

jeff nee wrote in message ...
>In article <9ryG3.9750$[e-mail]>, "Earl Malmrose"
><[e-mail]> wrote:
>

>>
>> Unfortunately it doesn't always work that way. I've ended up with
multiple
>> applications launched by drag-n-dropping a document onto an already
running
>> application's alias.
>
>on a macintosh? that's not possible. if you have an app open an you drag
>and drop a file onto that app's icon, you simply open that file in the
>already open application. i don't know how you could possibly have more
>than one instance of a mac app running. it doesn't really happen.
>
I'm always interested in these sorts of discussion, where one person denies
that something that happened to another person could happen.  It always
seems a bit strange to me.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Wave Internet Services (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                            23-Sep-99 19:21:07
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

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...
>> >> >
>> >> >Just a little aside here FWIW.  On my same given system, I run Warp 4,
and
>> >> >used to run NT 4.0.  With the same hardware configuration, I
benchmarked
>> >> >the latest versions (at the time) of the RC5-64 clients in OS/2 and NT.
 On
>> >> >the same hardware, the OS/2 client got 15K keys/sec higher than the NT
one
>> >> >did (for my machine, that's about a 5% speed difference).  The OS/2
client
>> >> >version was older than the NT client by about a week.  I realize this
is
>> >> >not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison, as the RC5 client software
was
>> >> >"different," but I think it's as close as you can get for pure
>> >> >number-crunching benchmark comparison.
>> >> >
>> >> >- Marty
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> So what? First, let's say it is apples to apple? So what? 5% is nothing.
>> >
>> >Well... on the same hardware, I thought it was a bit odd.  It's very
>> >reproducable.  I didn't just run the benchmark until it went "my way" and
>> >then call it quits.  I took the average of 5 runs for each platform.  The
>> >5%, as I said before, equates to 15K keys/sec.  To (possibly) put things
in
>> >perspective, a SparcStation II maxes out at around 15K keys/sec.
>>
>> Again, it is difficult to get excited about 5%.
>
>It's enough to make a difference in my key rate.  It's just a curiosity I
>had.  I'm not claiming that I'd notice a 5% difference in performance, but
>it's reproducible and it's definitely there.

Fine. I say that we don't know what caused the difference, so the comparision
is moot.

>> >> Second, how were they compiled? Were they optimized? Do you know?
>> >
>> >Yes.  Both were optimized and I was using the K6 MMX optimized cores in
>> >both cases.
>>
>> What compiler optimizations?
>
>I don't know.  I haven't built it.  I think the win32 CLI client was made
>with MSVC and the OS/2 client was made with GCC.  Both cores contain the
>same hand-assembled code, however, which is where all of the number
>crunching occurs.

That is my point. You don't know. Since you don't know and I don't know how
the
thing was built, it is difficult to draw any meaningful conclusions. The only
thing we have is a "feel-good" competition. "OS/2 is 5% better. I feel good."

>> >> What was running on both machines?
>> >
>> >Firstly, it was the same machine.  Secondly, the Win32 system was running
>> >NT 4.0 with no networking installed and no apps in the Systray or started
>> >in any manner that I knew about.  In OS/2, I had full networking, FTP
>> >daemon, and Apache web server running, though I don't think they were
being
>> >accessed during the benchmark.  No foreground applications were running,
>> >nor did I even touch the keyboard or mouse while the benchmark was being
>> >conducted.
>>
>> Taskmanager on NT? Did the screensave kick in on OS/2?
>
>Neither.  The benchmark only takes about a minute or so to run anyway.
>
>> >> It is a bad number-crunching comparsion, and all but meaningless as a
standard
>> >> of comparsion.
>> >
>> >How so?  Everything is identical except for the OS, the software running
on
>> >it at the time (which should have biased it towards NT), and the frontend
>> >to the RC5 client (though the optimized cores are the same code).
>>
>> But are were they optimized using the same compiler? Do they start at the
same
>> default priorities?
>
>The crunching cores are hand-optimized assembly which is common to both
>clients.  They both ran at default "normal" process priority.

Normal priority doesn't mean equal priority.

>> >> Heck, for SETI, I've got a friend who has the same overclocked
>> >> CPU running Win2k and a very similar application mix and yet his SETI
clocked
>> >> 14 hours and mine did 9.5.
>> >>
>> >> Does this mean that my machine is 1.5 times faster? No.
>> >
>> >Right, but weren't you both using your machines over that time?  I'm
>> >talking about a pure benchmark where the "benchmarking software" is all
>> >that is running without disturbance.
>>
>> No. We both left the machines idle. In fact, I have more stuff running on
mine
>> in the systray, yet it took his almost 50% longer to finish.
>
>Same exact hardware?  Perhaps the difficulty of the block being analyzed
>was different.  Does it happen this way in a repeatable fashion?  Are your
>block sizes the same? (if that's applicable to SETI)

It is the same program and all CPU intensive. Almost no I/O or graphics(when
the GUI is not in use). And it has happened every single time we've run the
application, so I would say, that is repeatable.

I got roughly 10.5 hours everytime until a I made sure I shutdown the
taskmanager which runs at a high priority compared to SETI's low. After doing
that, the time dropped to rough 9.5. My friend's time is consistently in the
14
hour area.

Totally repeatable and consistent and ultimately meaningless. My machine is
not
50% faster than his.

>- Marty
>

--
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                      24-Sep-99 00:20:04
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: NS 4.61GA Was: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail]

In article <c1.2b8.2SHP3R$[e-mail]>,
  [e-mail] (Joe Kovacs) wrote:

<snip>

> >ftp://service5.boulder.ibm.com/software/asd/ns40/en_us/comm461.exe
>
> Not so.  You get NS 4.61GA from Software Choice, here and
> drill in...
>
> http://www.software.ibm.com/os/warp/swchoice/
>
> When you're downloading NS 4.61, you might see that it's
> coming from the Boulder site above.  But that is closed to you
> and you cannot get to that site directly, you must get to it
> through the Software Choice page.

Ummm, not true... Just copy that URL into a browser or use your
favorite FTP program... Hell, you can even get the 128bit secure
version if you're clever enough.

--
-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]                           23-Sep-99 19:31:19
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: And another thing...

From: Kevin Salisbury <[e-mail]>

"David T. Johnson" wrote:

> > Esther Schindler wrote:
>
> [big snip]
> > I think this may be a case
> > of "those who know, can't say, and those who say, don't know."
> >
> You have described all of this secrecy and mystery surrounding a piece
> of software that has a tiny share of the market, that many (including
> you) have pronounced to be dead or dying, that IBM is supposedly going
> to discontinue, and which is supposedly a commercial failure.  Can't you
> see the absurdity of this?

Hi Dave,

Can't you see the absurdity of your statements? I can see your point of
view, and I feel the exact same concerns. But I think that it is obvious
that none of us can come to any sort of conclusion at this point, because
it's obvious that no one knows what the _hell_ is going on. It's also
painfully obvious that no one is going to find the answers immediately from
this news group.

Brad and Stardock were in intense negotiations for months with IBM. Very
quickly, it seemed to all fall apart on Stardock for all the wrong reasons.
This must have been a turbulent emotional ride - to say the least. I don't
buy into the notion that Brad said what he did for business reasons, because
Stardock still sells and supports OS/2 software. Why kill off an entire
product line, and isolate yourself from and seriously anger thousands of
paying customers with a false statement like that? He obviously thought it
was over. I've been guilty of saying things that I probably should not have
when I'm under extreme stress, and I would bet that you have also. Sure,
maybe Stardock could have kept mum for another few weeks, but we're human
beings remember?  We make mistakes. Please also remember that another group
is trying to work with the help and blessing of Stardock on another client
deal. Why stir things up at a delicate time? No one knows what will happen
to OS/2 right now, and no one knows everything that happened with the
Stardock deal.

You won't find the answers your looking for here, Dave, at least not right
now. So go ahead and shout all you want - you're just adding to the anger
and confusion that we are all experiencing. Please don't take this as a
flame either - from your posts it sounds like you are misunderstanding the
good people who are preaching patience.

Kevin Salisbury

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Salisbury Electronics (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                              24-Sep-99 00:38:01
  To: [e-mail]                                  24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: Anti-Windows t-shirts at www.dumbentia.com

To: [e-mail]
From: Amiga User <[e-mail]>

In article <7sbve5$528$[e-mail]>,
  "ccondon" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> Dumbentia - http://www.dumbasscondon.com
>
> Do you hate Windows? Do you dislike Microsoft with a vengeance? Then take a
> look at the new anti-Windows t-shirts now available at Dumbentia.

Another secure.net spammer.


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]                           23-Sep-99 19:37:17
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: Am I a lamb heading to the slaughter house?

From: Kevin Salisbury <[e-mail]>

Kim,

Thank you. Good Luck.

You have one person behind you 120% in any case. :)

Kevin Salisbury

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Salisbury Electronics (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                            23-Sep-99 20:14:07
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: Anti-Windows t-shirts at www.dumbentia.com

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>Mental help, John?
>
>
>Regards,
>Tim

Sorry, I am not qualified to give you any. May a suggest an asylum?

>"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
>> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>> >ccondon wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Dumbentia - http://www.dumbentia.com
>> >>
>> >> Do you hate Windows? Do you dislike Microsoft with a vengeance? Then
take a
>> >> look at the new anti-Windows t-shirts now available at Dumbentia.
>> >>
>> >> The designs include:
>> >>
>> >>  - Just Say NO to Windows
>> >>  - Windows Sucks
>> >>  - Friends Don't Let Friends Do Windows
>> >>  - I think, therefore I run Linux
>> >>  - Where does Microsoft want you to go today?
>> >
>> >Why not just make shirts that say, "Kick me," "Mug me," or "I'm a computer
>> >dork"?
>> >
>> >- Marty
>> >
>>
>> Hate an OS? Dislike with vengeance? Sounds like people who want those
shirts
>> just need mental help.
>>
>> --
>> ---------------------------------------
>> David H. McCoy
>> dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
>> ---------------------------------------
>
>

--
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                    23-Sep-99 20:33:27
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: [e-mail] (tinman)

In article <9ryG3.9750$[e-mail]>, "Earl Malmrose"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> George Graves <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> news:[e-mail]...
> > Sorry Mr. Troll, If you actually knew more about Macs you would realize
> > that not only does attempting to start a second instance of an application
> > not crash a Mac EVER, but you actually CANNOT make such an attempt. When
> > an app is open on the Mac, its icon becomes a greyed-out outline. Double
> > clicking it a second time merely dumps the user out of the finder and back
> > into that app.
>
> Unfortunately it doesn't always work that way. I've ended up with multiple
> applications launched by drag-n-dropping a document onto an already running
> application's alias.

Ok, now it's my turn to say I've _never_ seen that!

What application/version and what level OS? I want to try to replicate
this one.....

--
______
tinman

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: little, if any (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          24-Sep-99 01:08:12
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>Bennie Nelson
>Is it hapless to have to install a patch to the Win 95 so that it
>will run on a K6-III 400 mhz?

Is it hapless to have to patch the OS/2 install disk so that it can
operate with a hard drive > 8.4 gig?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                            23-Sep-99 20:13:11
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: Anti-Windows t-shirts at www.dumbentia.com

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>David H. McCoy <[e-mail]> wrote:
>: In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>:>ccondon wrote:
>
>:>> Do you hate Windows? Do you dislike Microsoft with a vengeance? Then take
a
>:>> look at the new anti-Windows t-shirts now available at Dumbentia.
>
>:>Why not just make shirts that say, "Kick me," "Mug me," or "I'm a computer
>:>dork"?
>
>: Hate an OS? Dislike with vengeance? Sounds like people who want those
shirts
>: just need mental help.
>
>I think people who spend a considerable chunk of time on Usenet attacking
>an OS they don't use, but disklike, need more mental help then people who
>buy shirts that make people laugh.  And trust me a lot of people laugh
>over making fun of Microsoft, mostly people who use Windows.
>
>-Jason
>

And I think that people who spend a considerable chunk of their time telling
people that they spend a considerable chunk of their time doing whatever are
clowns, especially if they believe for a moment that a "Linux Rulez" t-shirt
would make anyone laugh.


--
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               23-Sep-99 20:00:17
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: OS/2 Users Must Read

From: [e-mail]

>I would not agree to that as "irresponsible".   This is very common with
>ISVs that got drag through the mud.   Brad invested significant amount of
>energy and resource on this issue.

In the last analysis, Stardock does not have the capability or the
corporate culture to maintain OS2.  -- A few years back Brad was on CIS
whining like a spoiled 10 year old that OS2 uses weren't buying his
wonderful games and he wasn't going to make anymore.

From everything I can see now, there is no change in his attitude.   He is
not out for the good of the OS2 users. I for one, would not buy a client
with his name on it.

Everyone is also ignoring the fact that there is an ongoing anti-trust
trial -- where the main issue is a windows monopoly -- It is not the time
to release or promise to release a new version of OS2.

_____________
Ed Letourneau <[e-mail]>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          24-Sep-99 01:21:07
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: Anti-Windows t-shirts at www.dumbentia.com

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>Marty
>I'd like to point out that not all OS/2
>advocates worship IBM.

I certainly didn't when I used OS/2. In fact, I sort of got into the
product *in spite of* IBM, not having thought very highly of the
company prior to that (and not ever a fan of the company even while
using OS/2. IBM just made too many mistakes with OS/2, and remained
largely a faceless bureaucracy that just couldn't seem to do anything
beyond sell exorbitantly convoluted and expensive "solutions" to
Fortune 500 companies).

(And I also wasn't a Commodore fan when I was an Amiga user. I tend to
be very critical of what I feel are inefficiently/poorly run companies
who pursue policies that I find to be short-sighted,
counterproductive, inconvenient, or in some way unpalatable to me as a
customer)

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                24-Sep-99 00:25:10
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: Who to believe?  [follow-up]

From: [e-mail] (rj friedman)

On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 16:40:21, Marty <[e-mail]>
wrote:


ε> It seems to me that Brad Wardell acted irresponsibly and
ε> vindictively - ok, if they're not going to give me what I
ε> want, I'll just pull the house down on my way out (so to
ε> speak).

εThat would be a very childish activity for a millionare business owner,
εdon't you think?

Yes, I do. However, we have seen just how petty and
vindictive he can be toward those that cross him right here
in cooa. Maybe being vindictive when crossed is part of the
baggage of being a `boy' millionaire - look at the `boy'
billionaire Bill Gates for vindictive childishness on the
part of a billionaire business owner.



εOne doesn't become a successful entreprenuer or
εexecutive by behaving in such a way...

That's flat out not true.


εSure Brad may have personal
εfeelings about what's going on, but he wouldn't let those feelings get
εin the way of his business.

Nonsense - all we have to do is look at his behavior in cooa
to know that your assertion is flat out incorrect.



________________________________________________________

[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]                                23-Sep-99 21:09:11
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: "Tim Mayer" <[e-mail]>



Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
> Tim Mayer wrote:
> >
> > Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> > news:[e-mail]...
[SNIP]
> > >
> > > Those that didn't get a chance to have likely suffered catastrophic
loss
> > > and would have much preferred that more care was taken or research was
> > > conducted in the first place.
> >
> > But within the domain of the initial threat of conventional bullets,
> > research could be considered to be complete. Expecting research to yeild
a
> > perfect solution for all current and future threats might be expecting
too
> > much. I certainly hope that research into kevlar vests considered
> > alternative bullets, in the same way that I hope OS developers
considered
> > both conventional and alternative methods of hacking. At what point to
you
> > consider their research to be adequate? PERFECT?
>
> Certainly not.  It's not a matter of perfection of coverage.  It's a
> matter of trust and confidence.  If I wore my kevlar jacket and never
> got shot at, I'd be fairly neutral about it.  If I wore it, took a few
> bullets, and it saved my life, I'd be very favorably disposed towards
> it.  If I wore it, got shot, and had to have part of my lung removed, I
> would look into alternative forms of protection (such as not hanging
> around gun-toting types).  That's precisely what has happened with many
> former windoze users.
>
> - Marty

Considering the millions of windoze users, what quantity does "many" imply.
I highly doubt that a large percentage of windoze users have switched to a
more secure alternative. If they did, what alternative did the "many" adopt?

Keep in mind that windoze is the target of one of the more organized hacker
groups called the "Cult of the Dead Cow" with products like "Back Orifice
2000" (http://www.microsoft.com/security/bulletins/ms98-010.asp). If
Microsofts security appears to be the weakest, it may be because it is one
of the most attacked (and hated).

Tim

---

"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious.
  It is the source of all true art and science."

             Albert Einstein, What I believe, 1930



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Pathway Communications (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          23-Sep-99 21:35:27
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: [e-mail] (Charles Bouldin)

In article <7sbsog$[e-mail]>, "Kelly Robinson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

[snip all of it!]

Nothing worth commenting on. Troll. Not even a good troll.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               23-Sep-99 21:00:21
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: Who to believe?  [follow-up]

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Kim Cheung wrote:
>
> On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 18:32:10 -0400, Marty wrote:
>
> >Kim Cheung wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 12:40:21 -0400, Marty wrote:
> >>
> >> >That would be a very childish activity for a millionare business owner,
> >> >don't you think?  One doesn't become a successful entreprenuer or
> >> >executive by behaving in such a way.  Sure Brad may have personal
> >> >feelings about what's going on, but he wouldn't let those feelings get
> >> >in the way of his business.
> >>
> >> Until I get drag through the mud too, I wouldn't know what mud taste
like.
> >
> >What are you trying to say here?  That perhaps Brad has acted vindictively?
> >
>
> I definitely did not say that.

Sorry... I misunderstood.  What were you trying to say?

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               23-Sep-99 21:18:14
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: Who to believe?  [follow-up]

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

rj friedman wrote:
>
> On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 16:40:21, Marty <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
> ÿ> It seems to me that Brad Wardell acted irresponsibly and
> ÿ> vindictively - ok, if they're not going to give me what I
> ÿ> want, I'll just pull the house down on my way out (so to
> ÿ> speak).
>
> ÿThat would be a very childish activity for a millionare business owner,
> ÿdon't you think?
>
> Yes, I do. However, we have seen just how petty and
> vindictive he can be toward those that cross him right here
> in cooa.

The way he conducts himself in cooa is not the way he conducts himself in
the business world.

> Maybe being vindictive when crossed is part of the
> baggage of being a `boy' millionaire - look at the `boy'
> billionaire Bill Gates for vindictive childishness on the
> part of a billionaire business owner.

Wrath and emotion are secondary to business sense and the bottom line in
the business world.  All of Bill's "vindictive" behavior has had major
positive impacts on his bottom line.  Brad's alleged "vindictiveness" would
have no effect on his bottom line.

> ÿOne doesn't become a successful entreprenuer or
> ÿexecutive by behaving in such a way...
>
> That's flat out not true.

Wrath and emotion are secondary to business sense and the bottom line in
the business world.

> ÿSure Brad may have personal
> ÿfeelings about what's going on, but he wouldn't let those feelings get
> ÿin the way of his business.
>
> Nonsense - all we have to do is look at his behavior in cooa
> to know that your assertion is flat out incorrect.

The way he conducts himself in cooa is not the way he conducts himself in
the business world.  Wrath and emotion are secondary to business sense and
the bottom line in the business world.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                23-Sep-99 22:06:10
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: "Tim Mayer" <[e-mail]>

Steve Mading <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:7sebvb$pvs$[e-mail]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Tim Mayer <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>
> : Perhaps. I guess my argument is a bit weak considering that in the
> : real-world kevlar jackets are not all that effectiv. So, instead
consider a
> : hypothetical world which has been significantly simplified. In this
world
> : there is a perfect kevlar jacket that is impermeable to all forms of
> : bullets. However, following the introduction of this perfect Kevlar
jacket,
> : someone develops a bullet capable of piercing this perfect Kevlar
jacket -
> : rendering it useless.
>
> [snip]
>
> Yes, an interesting analogy.  One which has no connection to the
> point at hand.  Microsoft's 'jackets' fail to protect from the
> already-known bullets at the time of manufacture.

I don't think so. Regardless, security patches are release so quickly and
are made to be easily and automatically installed using the automatic update
feature. Are you saying that known security holes exist that cannot be
patched/closed?




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Pathway Communications (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          23-Sep-99 17:22:18
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: "Earl Malmrose" <[e-mail]>

jeff nee <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
> In article <9ryG3.9750$[e-mail]>, "Earl Malmrose"
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> > George Graves <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> > news:[e-mail]...
> > > Sorry Mr. Troll, If you actually knew more about Macs you would
realize
> > > that not only does attempting to start a second instance of an
application
> > > not crash a Mac EVER, but you actually CANNOT make such an attempt.
When
> > > an app is open on the Mac, its icon becomes a greyed-out outline.
Double
> > > clicking it a second time merely dumps the user out of the finder and
back
> > > into that app.
> >
> > Unfortunately it doesn't always work that way. I've ended up with
multiple
> > applications launched by drag-n-dropping a document onto an already
running
> > application's alias.
>
> on a macintosh? that's not possible. if you have an app open an you drag
> and drop a file onto that app's icon, you simply open that file in the
> already open application. i don't know how you could possibly have more
> than one instance of a mac app running. it doesn't really happen.

It's not *supposed* to happen. It happens. It's unusual, but it happens. It
may have to do with using an alias as the drop point.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                              24-Sep-99 02:22:02
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: NS 4.61GA  Was: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Harald Portig)

Buddy,

According to http://verisign.netscape.com/advisor/index.html I also
had the 128-bit version, however going to
https://www.fortify.net/cgi-bin/ssl (see Peter Volsted's post)
indicated that I had the 40-bit version.  I forthwith downloaded the
128-bit version from Software Choice,

http://www-4.ibm.com/software/os/warp/netscape/ns461.html

or

http://service.boulder.ibm.com/asd-bin/doc/en_us/ns40xr/f-feat.htm

and both verisign and fortify come up with the same answer: 128-bit.
It appears that verisign is not always accurate!

The downloaded filenames were (after applying zip -o):

9-16-99  6:39p    10,015,456      0 a---  comm461.exe    (40-bit)
9-16-99  6:43p    10,015,428      0 a---  comm46xr.exe  (128-bit)

Actually, inside Communicator, doing Help-About Communicator...
indicates the correct security state of the program.

Regards, Harald Portig
Remove the letters NOSPAM from my address to reply.

On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 20:14:10, [e-mail] (Buddy
Donnelly) wrote:

> On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 17:34:18, "Mark L. Kahnt" <[e-mail]> a
> ┌crit dans un message:
> >
> > Joe is accurate, though, if you are looking for the 128-bit security
> > edition - that requires a password bundled into the web-based download
> > procedure, while the international version is freely available via ftp
> > et al.
>
> I believe that has just changed, and that the only "weak" security version
> is the one that the French are required by French law to use.
>
> In any case, the file I d/l'ed from the FTP site passes the Security
> testing at
>
>     http://verisign.netscape.com/advisor/index.html
>
> as 128-bit, etc.
>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                23-Sep-99 22:35:23
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: OS/2 Users Must Read

From: [e-mail]

[e-mail] said:

>Everyone is also ignoring the fact that there is an ongoing anti-trust trial

Oh, I don't think anybody is ignoring anything.  I think a lot of us are just
seeing it as the latest in a very long line of excuses.

Jim L
Remove XX from address to Email
Crooks and kooks will get guns regardless of laws.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                 23-Sep-99 22:41:14
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: [e-mail] (The Lord Of Lemmings)

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (jeff nee) wrote:

>In article <9ryG3.9750$[e-mail]>, "Earl Malmrose"
><[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> George Graves <[e-mail]> wrote in message
>> news:[e-mail]...
>> > Sorry Mr. Troll, If you actually knew more about Macs you would realize
>> > that not only does attempting to start a second instance of an
application
>> > not crash a Mac EVER, but you actually CANNOT make such an attempt. When
>> > an app is open on the Mac, its icon becomes a greyed-out outline. Double
>> > clicking it a second time merely dumps the user out of the finder and
back
>> > into that app.
>>
>> Unfortunately it doesn't always work that way. I've ended up with multiple
>> applications launched by drag-n-dropping a document onto an already running
>> application's alias.
>
>on a macintosh? that's not possible. if you have an app open an you drag
>and drop a file onto that app's icon, you simply open that file in the
>already open application. i don't know how you could possibly have more
>than one instance of a mac app running. it doesn't really happen.
>
>jeff

It can happen in some cases if there is more than one copy of the app on
the computer.  I've done it with ICQ, since I can't figure out a way to
have two accounts active in a single "instance" of ICQ.  I don't do it
anymore since I don't use ICQ anymore.

--
|        Scientia Claus, Lord Of Lemmings <[e-mail]>          |
|"The Library is a sphere whose exact center is any one of its hexagons|
|   and whose circumference is inaccessible." -- Jorge Luis Borges     |
|"One feels as if one is dissolved and merged into nature." -- Einstein|

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Cornell University (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                  23-Sep-99 17:03:08
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: ndk <[e-mail]>

Kelly Robinson wrote:
>
> Let's assume I'm a typical 95/98/NT user (I use more than windows but let's
> stick to what the majority uses for my damning point:)
>
> If I, as an uninformed typical computer user who doesn't know the
> behind-the-scenes stuff, and heard that someone created a virus or trojan or
> lifestyles or whatever sort of nasty which would exterminate my computer, I
> would more likely blame the fucking bastards who created these things (who
> claim they want to point of MS bugs but are merely TERRORIZING THE FRIGGING
> PUBLIC by their despicable acts).
>
snip (it's the caffeine talking)

> Fair enough?   See you in hell, hackers, I'll bribe the devil to give you a
> nasty punishment.

Hackers that build virae have and will always be around. MS knows this.
Logic: Making a defective and vulnerable product available, charging an
arm and a leg every time a patch comes out, is hardly an excuse to
develop and manufacture said product. Especially when it is supposed to
be used for mission critical circumstances. Period.

Nicolas krinis

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Xlywyfb (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               23-Sep-99 21:49:10
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

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...
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Just a little aside here FWIW.  On my same given system, I run Warp
4, and
> >> >> >used to run NT 4.0.  With the same hardware configuration, I
benchmarked
> >> >> >the latest versions (at the time) of the RC5-64 clients in OS/2 and
NT.  On
> >> >> >the same hardware, the OS/2 client got 15K keys/sec higher than the
NT one
> >> >> >did (for my machine, that's about a 5% speed difference).  The OS/2
client
> >> >> >version was older than the NT client by about a week.  I realize this
is
> >> >> >not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison, as the RC5 client
software was
> >> >> >"different," but I think it's as close as you can get for pure
> >> >> >number-crunching benchmark comparison.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >- Marty
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> So what? First, let's say it is apples to apple? So what? 5% is
nothing.
> >> >
> >> >Well... on the same hardware, I thought it was a bit odd.  It's very
> >> >reproducable.  I didn't just run the benchmark until it went "my way"
and
> >> >then call it quits.  I took the average of 5 runs for each platform.
The
> >> >5%, as I said before, equates to 15K keys/sec.  To (possibly) put things
in
> >> >perspective, a SparcStation II maxes out at around 15K keys/sec.
> >>
> >> Again, it is difficult to get excited about 5%.
> >
> >It's enough to make a difference in my key rate.  It's just a curiosity I
> >had.  I'm not claiming that I'd notice a 5% difference in performance, but
> >it's reproducible and it's definitely there.
>
> Fine. I say that we don't know what caused the difference, so the
comparision
> is moot.

The comparison tells me that when I want to crack keys, I'll do it in OS/2.

> >> >> Second, how were they compiled? Were they optimized? Do you know?
> >> >
> >> >Yes.  Both were optimized and I was using the K6 MMX optimized cores in
> >> >both cases.
> >>
> >> What compiler optimizations?
> >
> >I don't know.  I haven't built it.  I think the win32 CLI client was made
> >with MSVC and the OS/2 client was made with GCC.  Both cores contain the
> >same hand-assembled code, however, which is where all of the number
> >crunching occurs.
>
> That is my point. You don't know. Since you don't know and I don't know how
the
> thing was built, it is difficult to draw any meaningful conclusions.

I do know that the "business" part of the code is verbatim exactly the same
hand optimized assembly.  That is the CPU intensive part of the code.  That
is the part that's doing all of the work.  The function calls leading up to
calling this loop are negligible in that they take a few milliseconds to
execute (at worst) while the loop executes for about 1.5 minutes.  They are
certainly not enough to account for a 5% difference.

I would theorize that the difference could have been caused by one of the
following:
1] NT doing "something" else that I didn't know about
2] NT's task switching being marginally less efficient
3] Inaccurate timing or calculation causing the difference

I feel that 1 is unlikely since I had a minimal set of device drivers
installed, no networking, and no processes running other than the benchmark
and the shell (with the taskbar hidden so it doesn't have to update the
screen).  I feel that 3 is unlikely since the backend processing is the
same and it takes place on the same hardware.

> The only
> thing we have is a "feel-good" competition. "OS/2 is 5% better. I feel
good."

I didn't say (and wouldn't say) "OS/2 is x% better".  I said the RC5
benchmark runs 5% better in OS/2 than in Win32 on my same machine and I'm
trying to figure out why.

> >> >> What was running on both machines?
> >> >
> >> >Firstly, it was the same machine.  Secondly, the Win32 system was
running
> >> >NT 4.0 with no networking installed and no apps in the Systray or
started
> >> >in any manner that I knew about.  In OS/2, I had full networking, FTP
> >> >daemon, and Apache web server running, though I don't think they were
being
> >> >accessed during the benchmark.  No foreground applications were running,
> >> >nor did I even touch the keyboard or mouse while the benchmark was being
> >> >conducted.
> >>
> >> Taskmanager on NT? Did the screensave kick in on OS/2?
> >
> >Neither.  The benchmark only takes about a minute or so to run anyway.
> >
> >> >> It is a bad number-crunching comparsion, and all but meaningless as a
standard
> >> >> of comparsion.
> >> >
> >> >How so?  Everything is identical except for the OS, the software running
on
> >> >it at the time (which should have biased it towards NT), and the
frontend
> >> >to the RC5 client (though the optimized cores are the same code).
> >>
> >> But are were they optimized using the same compiler? Do they start at the
same
> >> default priorities?
> >
> >The crunching cores are hand-optimized assembly which is common to both
> >clients.  They both ran at default "normal" process priority.
>
> Normal priority doesn't mean equal priority.

If nothing else is running, the process gets 100% of the CPU no matter what
its priority is.

> >> >> Heck, for SETI, I've got a friend who has the same overclocked
> >> >> CPU running Win2k and a very similar application mix and yet his SETI
clocked
> >> >> 14 hours and mine did 9.5.
> >> >>
> >> >> Does this mean that my machine is 1.5 times faster? No.
> >> >
> >> >Right, but weren't you both using your machines over that time?  I'm
> >> >talking about a pure benchmark where the "benchmarking software" is all
> >> >that is running without disturbance.
> >>
> >> No. We both left the machines idle. In fact, I have more stuff running on
mine
> >> in the systray, yet it took his almost 50% longer to finish.
> >
> >Same exact hardware?  Perhaps the difficulty of the block being analyzed
> >was different.  Does it happen this way in a repeatable fashion?  Are your
> >block sizes the same? (if that's applicable to SETI)
>
> It is the same program and all CPU intensive. Almost no I/O or graphics(when
> the GUI is not in use). And it has happened every single time we've run the
> application, so I would say, that is repeatable.

Then I would say your friend's hardware is different than yours or he was
running something else on the box at the time.  I ask again, were the
"blocks" being worked on the same size/difficulty?

> I got roughly 10.5 hours everytime until a I made sure I shutdown the
> taskmanager which runs at a high priority compared to SETI's low. After
doing
> that, the time dropped to rough 9.5. My friend's time is consistently in the
14
> hour area.
>
> Totally repeatable and consistent and ultimately meaningless. My machine is
not
> 50% faster than his.

Obviously not, but why would NT be giving your friend's SETI client less
CPU time?  Is the taskbar not hidden (making it update the clock display)
or some such thing?

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               23-Sep-99 22:02:25
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Tim Mayer wrote:
>
> Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> news:[e-mail]...
> > Tim Mayer wrote:
> > >
> > > Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> > > news:[e-mail]...
> [SNIP]
> > > >
> > > > Those that didn't get a chance to have likely suffered catastrophic
> loss
> > > > and would have much preferred that more care was taken or research was
> > > > conducted in the first place.
> > >
> > > But within the domain of the initial threat of conventional bullets,
> > > research could be considered to be complete. Expecting research to yeild
> a
> > > perfect solution for all current and future threats might be expecting
> too
> > > much. I certainly hope that research into kevlar vests considered
> > > alternative bullets, in the same way that I hope OS developers
> considered
> > > both conventional and alternative methods of hacking. At what point to
> you
> > > consider their research to be adequate? PERFECT?
> >
> > Certainly not.  It's not a matter of perfection of coverage.  It's a
> > matter of trust and confidence.  If I wore my kevlar jacket and never
> > got shot at, I'd be fairly neutral about it.  If I wore it, took a few
> > bullets, and it saved my life, I'd be very favorably disposed towards
> > it.  If I wore it, got shot, and had to have part of my lung removed, I
> > would look into alternative forms of protection (such as not hanging
> > around gun-toting types).  That's precisely what has happened with many
> > former windoze users.
> >
> > - Marty
>
> Considering the millions of windoze users, what quantity does "many" imply.
> I highly doubt that a large percentage of windoze users have switched to a
> more secure alternative. If they did, what alternative did the "many" adopt?

It applies to those that have switched (aka the <former> users).  "Many"
people have switched to other OS's, but of those, many <of them> have had
an analogous situation to what I have described.

> Keep in mind that windoze is the target of one of the more organized hacker
> groups called the "Cult of the Dead Cow" with products like "Back Orifice
> 2000" (http://www.microsoft.com/security/bulletins/ms98-010.asp). If
> Microsofts security appears to be the weakest, it may be because it is one
> of the most attacked (and hated).

Or it may be because it is.  Perhaps the reason h4x0r groups for other OS's
aren't so organized is because they're having a much more difficult time.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                23-Sep-99 22:02:23
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: "Tim Mayer" <[e-mail]>


Mayor Of R'lyeh <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:Ya=[e-mail]...
> On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 14:48:32 -0400, "Tim Mayer"
> <[e-mail]> chose to bless us with this bit of wisdom:
>
> >
> >Mayor Of R'lyeh <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> >news:JlXqNxOCb4t=[e-mail]...
> >> On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 12:08:06 -0400, "Tim Mayer"
> >> <[e-mail]> chose to bless us with this bit of wisdom:
> >>
> >> >
[SNIP]
> >> >
> >> >Isn't it more like someone buys a kevlar jacket, then someone else,
> >invents
> >> >an illegal bullet that can penetrate it.
> >>
> >> Why do you think it would be illegal?
> >
> >Why would they be legal?
>
> Why not? Almost any rifle cartridge and a few of the larger pistol
> cartridges can go through a kevlar jacket as easily as it goes through
> a cotton one. Kevlar was never meant to be effective against anything
> but small to mid sized pistols.

Interesting! I have to confess that I did not know this, which is why I
proposed my simplified alternative.

> >>
> >> > Now who do you get mad at, the
> >> >maker of the kevlar jacket or the maker of the illegal bullet?
> >>
> >> Plenty of perfectly legal bullets can go  through a kevlar jacket
> >> right now.
> >>
> >
> >Perhaps. I guess my argument is a bit weak considering that in the
> >real-world kevlar jackets are not all that effectiv. So, instead consider
a
> >hypothetical world which has been significantly simplified. In this world
> >there is a perfect kevlar jacket that is impermeable to all forms of
> >bullets. 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?
>
> The guy that fired the shot.
>

Consider that the person who makes the bullet is for example the "cDc", the
person who fires the shot is the hacker and the kevlar vest is the security
system built into the OS. Does this mean that the hacker is totally to blame
in this scenario?

Tim


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Pathway Communications (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                24-Sep-99 03:05:04
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: Anti-Windows t-shirts at www.dumbentia.com

From: Jeff Hall <[e-mail]>

Chris,

I like your stuff.  My kinds and I play Quake, and so I printed off your
parody "Quake IV: Quaker" and showed it around.   (I've actually visited
dumentia many times in the past.  In fact, I have a directory of 9 Dumentia
pdf files)

Its amazing the lack of sense of humor of some of the others on these boards
who responded to your posting!

Thanks,

ccondon wrote:

> Dumbentia - http://www.dumbentia.com
>
> Do you hate Windows? Do you dislike Microsoft with a vengeance? Then take a
> look at the new anti-Windows t-shirts now available at Dumbentia.
>
> The designs include:
>
>  - Just Say NO to Windows
>  - Windows Sucks
>  - Friends Don't Let Friends Do Windows
>  - I think, therefore I run Linux
>  - Where does Microsoft want you to go today?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                 24-Sep-99 03:10:13
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: Bennie Nelson <[e-mail]>

Jeff Glatt wrote:
>
> >Bennie Nelson
> >Is it hapless to have to install a patch to the Win 95 so that it
> >will run on a K6-III 400 mhz?
>
> Is it hapless to have to patch the OS/2 install disk so that it can
> operate with a hard drive > 8.4 gig?

Jeff,

No, it isn't hapless.  But I didn't say that it is hapless to have to
install a patch to the Win 95 so that it will run on a K6-III 400 mhz.
I asked if it is.  I wanted to make the point that Windows 95 has its
share of problems with newer hardware, since a number of posts in this
newsgroup have been putting OS/2 v4 down because large drive support
(i.e., > 8.4 gb) requires replacing a few files.

Actually, OS/2 v4 will install on hard drive that's larger than 8.4
gb, but only within the first 1023 cylinders.  The replacement files
are required to access the rest of the drive.

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to point that out.

Bennie Nelson

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                    23-Sep-99 20:15:11
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: [e-mail] (jeff nee)

>  Unfortunately it doesn't always work that way. I've ended up with
> multiple
> >> applications launched by drag-n-dropping a document onto an already
> running
> >> application's alias.
> >
> >on a macintosh? that's not possible. if you have an app open an you drag
> >and drop a file onto that app's icon, you simply open that file in the
> >already open application. i don't know how you could possibly have more
> >than one instance of a mac app running. it doesn't really happen.
> >
> I'm always interested in these sorts of discussion, where one person denies
> that something that happened to another person could happen.  It always
> seems a bit strange to me.

this isn't subjective. you can't run the same app in two instances on a
macintosh. i don't know why it would be necessary. but it's not possible
unless they are different versions of an app. in which case, that's not
what we're talking about.

jeff

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: house (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               23-Sep-99 23:29:23
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> "David H. McCoy" wrote:
>
> >> >It's enough to make a difference in my key rate.  It's just a curiosity
I
> >> >had.  I'm not claiming that I'd notice a 5% difference in performance,
but
> >> >it's reproducible and it's definitely there.
> >>
> >> Fine. I say that we don't know what caused the difference, so the
comparision
> >> is moot.
>
> >The comparison tells me that when I want to crack keys, I'll do it in OS/2.
>
> It doesn't tell me that. I don't think that 5% advantage is worth enduring
> OS/2, IMO.  I'd rather eat the 5% and get better advantages in things I do
more
> often.

Well... we both know we differ there.

> > >> >> Second, how were they compiled? Were they optimized? Do you know?
> > >> >
> > >> >Yes.  Both were optimized and I was using the K6 MMX optimized cores
in
> > >> >both cases.
> > >>
> > >> What compiler optimizations?
> > >
> > >I don't know.  I haven't built it.  I think the win32 CLI client was made
> > >with MSVC and the OS/2 client was made with GCC.  Both cores contain the
> > >same hand-assembled code, however, which is where all of the number
> > >crunching occurs.
> >
> > That is my point. You don't know. Since you don't know and I don't know
how the
> > thing was built, it is difficult to draw any meaningful conclusions.
>
> >I do know that the "business" part of the code is verbatim exactly the same
> >hand optimized assembly.  That is the CPU intensive part of the code.  That
> >is the part that's doing all of the work.  The function calls leading up to
> >calling this loop are negligible in that they take a few milliseconds to
> >execute (at worst) while the loop executes for about 1.5 minutes.  They are
> >certainly not enough to account for a 5% difference.
>
> >I would theorize that the difference could have been caused by one of the
> >following:
> >1] NT doing "something" else that I didn't know about
>
> >2] NT's task switching being marginally less efficient
>
> >3] Inaccurate timing or calculation causing the difference
>
> >I feel that 1 is unlikely since I had a minimal set of device drivers
> >installed, no networking, and no processes running other than the benchmark
> >and the shell (with the taskbar hidden so it doesn't have to update the
> >screen).  I feel that 3 is unlikely since the backend processing is the
> >same and it takes place on the same hardware.
>
> Without having the code in front of us, we don't know why it is happening.
> Perhaps the person working on the Win32 client doesn't know how to optimize
or
> didn't select the right compiler options. That is my point. I'm not saying
it
> isn't running 5% faster, but that this doesn't mean that OS/2 is necessarily
> doing anything better, which is what it seems you are trying to imply.

Well what I'm trying to get across is that the "tight loop" of the code is,
in fact, identical on both platforms.  This code was not "compiled" it was
parsed from x86 assembly language to machine bytecodes without further
optimization.

> >> The only
> >> thing we have is a "feel-good" competition. "OS/2 is 5% better. I feel
good."
>
> >I didn't say (and wouldn't say) "OS/2 is x% better".  I said the RC5
> >benchmark runs 5% better in OS/2 than in Win32 on my same machine and I'm
> >trying to figure out why.
>
> From your first post:
> "but I think it's as close as you can get for pure
> number-crunching benchmark comparison."
>
> Why would you say this if not to imply one is better than the other?

Because I'm trying to establish that the comparison is as close as apples
to apples as one could hope to get.

> > >The crunching cores are hand-optimized assembly which is common to both
> > >clients.  They both ran at default "normal" process priority.
> >
> > Normal priority doesn't mean equal priority.
>
> >If nothing else is running, the process gets 100% of the CPU no matter what
> >its priority is.
>
> But other things *are* running, on both platforms,
> explorer.exe,pmshell.exe,winlogon.exe,csrss.exe(high priority, btw). I can't
> name all process running on both from memory, but on clean install, I'll bet
> you have easily 10 processes on both doing things. The priority of some
would
> affect have others run.

Certainly.  And in this fashion, I believe it was biased toward NT because
OS/2 had more device drivers installed, had networking enabled, and had
several daemons and processes running.

> >> >Same exact hardware?  Perhaps the difficulty of the block being analyzed
> >> >was different.  Does it happen this way in a repeatable fashion?  Are
your
> >> >block sizes the same? (if that's applicable to SETI)
> >>
> >> It is the same program and all CPU intensive. Almost no I/O or
graphics(when
> >> the GUI is not in use). And it has happened every single time we've run
the
> >> application, so I would say, that is repeatable.
>
> >Then I would say your friend's hardware is different than yours or he was
> >running something else on the box at the time.  I ask again, were the
> >"blocks" being worked on the same size/difficulty?
>
> That doesn't make sense. If this were the case, I would have test cases for
> SETI that would take a much longer of much shorter amount of time.

True, but the clients might be set up to grab different block sizes and do
so consistently.  I think I can trust, however, that you'd be astute enough
to notice this though.  So we'll rule that out.

> You download
> the data from SETI. My time, and his are consistent. Also, as I said, our
> hardware is not identical, but similar, certainly not different enough to
> account for the vast and consistent time different.

Ah.. I must have misread you a while back.  I thought you said that it
<was> identical.  My mistake.

> There is something causing the different, but that is my point. We don't
know,
> just like we don't know why NT ran 5% slower. I know my machine, with the
same
> CPU, same 128megs of ram, is not 50% faster.

Agreed.

> >> I got roughly 10.5 hours everytime until a I made sure I shutdown the
> >> taskmanager which runs at a high priority compared to SETI's low. After
doing
> >> that, the time dropped to rough 9.5. My friend's time is consistently in
the 14
> >> hour area.
> >
> >> Totally repeatable and consistent and ultimately meaningless. My machine
is not
> >> 50% faster than his.
>
> >>Obviously not, but why would NT be giving your friend's SETI client less
> >>CPU time?  Is the taskbar not hidden (making it update the clock display)
> >>or some such thing?
>
> Win2k actually, but we are looking into it, however. We've had a competition
> going for years about many things, including computer benchmarking.
>
> This is driving him crazy. And believe, I am turning the screws. :-)

heheh

> Actually, on a side note, what amazed me was the time for the P166. After 18
> hours, it was only about 20% done. I'm looking into that.

Well, with older machines, you also get architectural differences, such as
memory caching, pipelining, super-scalar vs. standard, bus speeds, ... that
make the clock rating less meaningful.

> And on a side, side note, since I am running a 366 overclocked to 550, I
would
> love to get some numbers on a true P3 550, just to see how close I am
running.

Likely the "true" 550 will beat you marginally.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                23-Sep-99 22:37:10
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: Mayor Of R'lyeh <[e-mail]>

On 23 Sep 1999 17:39:37 GMT, "Stephen S. Edwards II"
<[e-mail]> chose to bless us with this bit of wisdom:

>mlw <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>: Kelly Robinson wrote:
>: >
>: [snipped]
>
>: Some of the decaffeinated brands are just as flavorful as the
>: caffeinated ones.
>
>: Also, lets look at this:
>
>: The man that shoots the gun is guilty of murder. Yes.
>: The gun shop that does not exercise judgment, while perfectly legal to
>: do so, is IMHO partially to blame. People that buy guns for the purpose
>: of killing are usually obvious.
>
>Ever been to a gun show, Mark?  Talk about scary.
>
>I've actually been to one here in the AZ Civic Center where they were
>selling (get this) an _anti-aircraft cannon_ (20mm I think)!

And what was the price? Usually guys bring those things as more of a
draw to their booths and any price they have on them is ridiculously
high. IOW they aren't really interested in selling them.

> When I asked
>the person selling it if it was filled with cement, he said "nah, most
>folks wouldn't know where to get ammo anyway"... I was astounded... I
>mean, what about people who _DO_ know where to get ammo?

I've got 6 live 37mm shells sitting on my shelf in front of me. I use
them as bookends.
>
>Anyone wanna go hunting for assault choppers?

And they can't just like big guns without being some kind of
subversive?
>
>: The gun manufacturer who lobbies against a waiting period for handgun
>: purchase also has some responsibility.
>
>: As for the Virus writers.
>
>: Have you ever written a virus? I have, it is fun. It is challenging.
>: have I ever released my viruses? No, that would be wrong.
>
>Besides, who says that viruses are bad just by their very being?  Some can
>actually be used to recover data from frizzled systems, from what I've
>been told.
>
>: Operating systems must, in this day and age, be designed with the
>: reasonable expectation that security is an issue. There will always be
>: vandals in every aspect of society. An OS manufacturer has the
>: reasonable expectation that their OS must protect the customers
>: computer.
>
>I agree (for once).  :-)

--

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: City Of R'lyeh (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                  23-Sep-99 23:50:11
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: Peter Ammon <[e-mail]>

jeff nee wrote:
>
> >  Unfortunately it doesn't always work that way. I've ended up with
> > multiple
> > >> applications launched by drag-n-dropping a document onto an already
> > running
> > >> application's alias.
> > >
> > >on a macintosh? that's not possible. if you have an app open an you drag
> > >and drop a file onto that app's icon, you simply open that file in the
> > >already open application. i don't know how you could possibly have more
> > >than one instance of a mac app running. it doesn't really happen.
> > >
> > I'm always interested in these sorts of discussion, where one person
denies
> > that something that happened to another person could happen.  It always
> > seems a bit strange to me.
>
> this isn't subjective. you can't run the same app in two instances on a
> macintosh. i don't know why it would be necessary. but it's not possible
> unless they are different versions of an app. in which case, that's not
> what we're talking about.
>

I bet that he opened up the not-default SimpleText, then he double
clicked on a text file and the default SimpleText opened as well.
SimpleTexts seem to multiply and reproduce on your hard drive.

-Peter

> jeff

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Cornell University (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               23-Sep-99 22:56:14
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: The Kim Cheung Challenge

From: "Christian Gustafson" <[e-mail]>

Kim Cheung <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
> It isn't easy to get PCs with OS/2 preloads. So, putting a
> complete OS/2 desktop on a PC usually starts from scratch.
> How long should you allow to take a new PC, load OS/2,
> create a desktop with 100 native OS/2 programs, activate
> Merlin's Voice Type dictation, and "turn on" OS/2
> multi-media so you can listen to WAV files, MIDI files ..
> and ... whatever?
>
> If I were to play ... Beat the Clock with you ... how many
> hours, minutes, and seconds would you give me? What if I
> said I could do all this in less than hour, would you
> believe me? How about less than 10 minutes? Still with me?
> What if I said I could get it done before your 3 minute egg
> was half cooked?
>
> Here's the Kim Cheung Challenge: Come to Warp Expo West
> this Saturday ... bring your minute timer ... let's have a
> race! If you don't have a minute timer ... bring the words
> to the Minute Waltz ... but nothing longer than that.


So how did you make out?


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                 23-Sep-99 20:44:27
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: [e-mail] (George Graves)

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (jeff nee) wrote:

>In article <9ryG3.9750$[e-mail]>, "Earl Malmrose"
><[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> George Graves <[e-mail]> wrote in message
>> news:[e-mail]...
>> > Sorry Mr. Troll, If you actually knew more about Macs you would realize
>> > that not only does attempting to start a second instance of an
application
>> > not crash a Mac EVER, but you actually CANNOT make such an attempt. When
>> > an app is open on the Mac, its icon becomes a greyed-out outline. Double
>> > clicking it a second time merely dumps the user out of the finder and
back
>> > into that app.
>>
>> Unfortunately it doesn't always work that way. I've ended up with multiple
>> applications launched by drag-n-dropping a document onto an already running
>> application's alias.
>
>on a macintosh? that's not possible. if you have an app open an you drag
>and drop a file onto that app's icon, you simply open that file in the
>already open application. i don't know how you could possibly have more
>than one instance of a mac app running. it doesn't really happen.


He's talking about an app like Drop Stuff or Stuffit Expander which
launches when you drop a file on it, does its 'thing' and then closes
itself. It will keep doing this cyle as long as you continue to drop files
on the icon. The key here is that it quits itself, all by itself, as soon
as its task is done. So there are no multiple instances of the program
open, even though it might look as if that's what's going on to the casual
observer.

--
George Graves
Senex Nequissime

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Graves Associates (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                  23-Sep-99 21:54:10
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: [e-mail] (Steve White)

In article <7sbsog$[e-mail]>, "Kelly Robinson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> So, Mac losers, do you want us to wait for Apple to finish wiping
> its rear, having finished using the toilet...


And deprive you of dinner?


> So, in conclusion, and I hope every single one of you has tuned in,
> you Mac people need to get real.


I have. I own a bunch of Macs. I use them all in my work. They do their
job flawlessly, they're easier to maintain, and they last longer than any
PC you care to name.

I use Macs because they work. I wouldn't use NT in my work if you paid me.


> Apple hasn't a prayer (or a penis) to grab a hold on.


Please don't bring your personal life into the newsgroup. We don't care,
really we don't.


>  But then, you're mac people and hubris is natural to you.


Damn straight, asshole, and smile when you say that.






steve



Reply to:  stevewhite at ce dot mediaone dot net

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: MediaOne Express -=- Central Region (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                  23-Sep-99 21:56:07
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: [e-mail] (Steve White)

In article <7sbsog$[e-mail]>, "Kelly Robinson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> ... frequent system crashes because you did somtehing with an app
> such as attempting to start a second instance of it ...



Not true. Can't happen on a Mac, because the Mac is smart enough to know
that the application is already open, so that double-clicking it simply
returns you to said application.

You're not even a smart troll. Rating: 1.5






steve



Reply to:  stevewhite at ce dot mediaone dot net

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: MediaOne Express -=- Central Region (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                            23-Sep-99 23:12:13
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: OS/2 *still* is my OS Champ!!

From: David H. McCoy <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
"David H. McCoy" wrote:

>> >It's enough to make a difference in my key rate.  It's just a curiosity I
>> >had.  I'm not claiming that I'd notice a 5% difference in performance, but
>> >it's reproducible and it's definitely there.
>>
>> Fine. I say that we don't know what caused the difference, so the
comparision
>> is moot.

>The comparison tells me that when I want to crack keys, I'll do it in OS/2.

It doesn't tell me that. I don't think that 5% advantage is worth enduring
OS/2, IMO.  I'd rather eat the 5% and get better advantages in things I do
more
often.

> >> >> Second, how were they compiled? Were they optimized? Do you know?
> >> >
> >> >Yes.  Both were optimized and I was using the K6 MMX optimized cores in
> >> >both cases.
> >>
> >> What compiler optimizations?
> >
> >I don't know.  I haven't built it.  I think the win32 CLI client was made
> >with MSVC and the OS/2 client was made with GCC.  Both cores contain the
> >same hand-assembled code, however, which is where all of the number
> >crunching occurs.
>
> That is my point. You don't know. Since you don't know and I don't know how
the
> thing was built, it is difficult to draw any meaningful conclusions.

>I do know that the "business" part of the code is verbatim exactly the same
>hand optimized assembly.  That is the CPU intensive part of the code.  That
>is the part that's doing all of the work.  The function calls leading up to
>calling this loop are negligible in that they take a few milliseconds to
>execute (at worst) while the loop executes for about 1.5 minutes.  They are
>certainly not enough to account for a 5% difference.

>I would theorize that the difference could have been caused by one of the
>following:
>1] NT doing "something" else that I didn't know about

>2] NT's task switching being marginally less efficient

>3] Inaccurate timing or calculation causing the difference

>I feel that 1 is unlikely since I had a minimal set of device drivers
>installed, no networking, and no processes running other than the benchmark
>and the shell (with the taskbar hidden so it doesn't have to update the
>screen).  I feel that 3 is unlikely since the backend processing is the
>same and it takes place on the same hardware.


Without having the code in front of us, we don't know why it is happening.
Perhaps the person working on the Win32 client doesn't know how to optimize or

didn't select the right compiler options. That is my point. I'm not saying it
isn't running 5% faster, but that this doesn't mean that OS/2 is necessarily
doing anything better, which is what it seems you are trying to imply.

>> The only
>> thing we have is a "feel-good" competition. "OS/2 is 5% better. I feel
good."

>I didn't say (and wouldn't say) "OS/2 is x% better".  I said the RC5
>benchmark runs 5% better in OS/2 than in Win32 on my same machine and I'm
>trying to figure out why.

From your first post:
"but I think it's as close as you can get for pure
number-crunching benchmark comparison."

Why would you say this if not to imply one is better than the other?


> >The crunching cores are hand-optimized assembly which is common to both
> >clients.  They both ran at default "normal" process priority.
>
> Normal priority doesn't mean equal priority.

>If nothing else is running, the process gets 100% of the CPU no matter what
>its priority is.

But other things *are* running, on both platforms,
explorer.exe,pmshell.exe,winlogon.exe,csrss.exe(high priority, btw). I can't
name all process running on both from memory, but on clean install, I'll bet
you have easily 10 processes on both doing things. The priority of some would
affect have others run.

>> >Same exact hardware?  Perhaps the difficulty of the block being analyzed
>> >was different.  Does it happen this way in a repeatable fashion?  Are your
>> >block sizes the same? (if that's applicable to SETI)
>>
>> It is the same program and all CPU intensive. Almost no I/O or
graphics(when
>> the GUI is not in use). And it has happened every single time we've run the
>> application, so I would say, that is repeatable.

>Then I would say your friend's hardware is different than yours or he was
>running something else on the box at the time.  I ask again, were the
>"blocks" being worked on the same size/difficulty?

That doesn't make sense. If this were the case, I would have test cases for
SETI that would take a much longer of much shorter amount of time. You
download
the data from SETI. My time, and his are consistent. Also, as I said, our
hardware is not identical, but similar, certainly not different enough to
account for the vast and consistent time different.

There is something causing the different, but that is my point. We don't know,

just like we don't know why NT ran 5% slower. I know my machine, with the same

CPU, same 128megs of ram, is not 50% faster.

>> I got roughly 10.5 hours everytime until a I made sure I shutdown the
>> taskmanager which runs at a high priority compared to SETI's low. After
doing
>> that, the time dropped to rough 9.5. My friend's time is consistently in
the 14
>> hour area.
>
>> Totally repeatable and consistent and ultimately meaningless. My machine is
not
>> 50% faster than his.

>>Obviously not, but why would NT be giving your friend's SETI client less
>>CPU time?  Is the taskbar not hidden (making it update the clock display)
>>or some such thing?


Win2k actually, but we are looking into it, however. We've had a competition
going for years about many things, including computer benchmarking.

This is driving him crazy. And believe, I am turning the screws. :-)


Actually, on a side note, what amazed me was the time for the P166. After 18
hours, it was only about 20% done. I'm looking into that.

And on a side, side note, since I am running a 366 overclocked to 550, I would

love to get some numbers on a true P3 550, just to see how close I am running.

- Marty


--
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                     24-Sep-99 03:08:04
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail]

Bennie Nelson writes:

> Jeff Glatt wrote:

>> Tell that to Tholen. When anyone complains about having a problem with
>> OS/2, his standard rhetoric is to point out that he has never had that
>> problem and therefore it can't really be a problem.

> Is it hapless to have to install a patch to the Win 95 so that it
> will run on a K6-III 400 mhz?  This is a well-documented flaw in
> Win 95.  It cannot handle such modern equipment as an AMD processor
> running at 400MHZ or faster.

The above comment by Glatt is another well-documented flaw.  He
obviously can't keep track of what I've written, so he makes it
up as he goes.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                     24-Sep-99 03:05:16
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: New OS/2 client not to be

From: [e-mail]

Marty writes:

> If EAs are not built into the filesystem spec, then implementing them on
> top of a filesystem is a hack which is subject to break down under
> certain conditions.

That's not my idea of a hack.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          23-Sep-99 21:43:27
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:04
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: [e-mail] (Buddy Donnelly)

On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 23:22:08, [e-mail] a ┌crit dans un
message:

> In article <[e-mail]>,
>   Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > All staff members have installed and use OS/2 as their operating
> > system. Windows (including WinOS2) is banned by company policy.
> > None of us has WinOS2 or DOS installed on our systems.
>
> Mein F─hrer, klingt wie eine gute Politik zum Zerst╣ren der schlechten
> freien denker. Alle hageln den F─hrer!
>

Using my favorite new web toy, AltaVista's Babelfish translation site,
cutting and pasting that turns it into this English:

"My leader, sounds like a good policy for destroying the bad free
philosophers. All hail the leader!"

Not bad at all, to my eye. Lots easier than straining the brain to get even
halfway close:

    http://babelfish.altavista.com



Good luck,

Buddy

Buddy Donnelly
[e-mail]


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: RoadRunner - TampaBay (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          23-Sep-99 21:53:22
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:04
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Buddy Donnelly)

On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 15:23:07, [e-mail] a ┌crit dans un message:

> [e-mail] (Raphael Tennenbaum) said:
>
> > Failing that, in any case, I
> >believe you'll be doing yourself and everyone else a favor
> >by simply ignoring him, or killfiling him.
>
> Amen - Hallelujah!!
>

However, what do we do about the folks who continue to quote him?

Think about trying one of these possible courses of action:

1. Follow-up all such to comp.os.os2.advocacy, since I don't subscribe.
This is the best way for all of us, since TM appears to read that one
first, and I never do.

2. Place a little [OT] at the beginning of the subject line in your
followup, indicating "Off Topic". I can filter on that [OT], you see, and
never see it.

3. Place a little [TM] at the beginning of the subject line in your
followup, indicating that it's an ad hominem article I personally don't get
anything out of reading. I can filter on that [TM], and never see it.


(All of these suggestions are to benefit me, Al Franken.)


Good luck,

Buddy

Buddy Donnelly
[e-mail]


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: RoadRunner - TampaBay (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                24-Sep-99 05:19:05
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:36:17
Subj: Re: Judgement Day ... Stardock and OS/2

From: [e-mail] (Jack Troughton)

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 17:57:57, [e-mail] (Jason
Bowen) wrote:

ΩIn article <[e-mail]>, Mooo <[e-mail]>
wrote:
Ω>[e-mail] (Jason Bowen) wrote:
█
ΩTell me about Warp 4 out of the box on a 10 gig hard drive.
ΩI just couldn't get 1024x768 at 75 hz, only 43 interlaced on a S3 Trio64v+
Ωbased card.  That was the last straw for me.

Jason, including download it takes maybe twenty minutes.  If you have
to do a lot, it takes a lot less time per machine... BFD.

ΩWhy should you have to do this?  You are letting IBM dictate to you what
Ωyou should and shouldn't own hardware wise?

Like new versions of windows don't?  My P200/64MB RAM is still
effective with warp... try that with win2k.

Ω>I don't consider patching the boot diskettes much of a hassle as far
Ω>as installation goes.
█
ΩYeah most new users wouldn't mind doing that.  Apparently IBM doesn't care
Ωeither as they won't provide a new updated client.  That sure says a lot
Ωto the marketplace.

New home users, yes.  Business users (ie - PHBs) can't do win95
either; they hire people like me to do it for them.  Hell, I've
installed a lot of windows for home users that couldn't handle it
either.  IBM doesn't care about home users because they cost too much.

Depends on your priorities.  For me, games are not a priority.  If
games are a priority, don't use warp.

But then, you should know this.  You've used warp for years, IIRC.

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]                                       24-Sep-99 21:19:06
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 10:53:12
Subj: Re: OS/2 Users Must Read

From: "nospam" <[e-mail]>

Kim Cheung <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
> On 23 Sep 1999 14:59:52 GMT, rj friedman wrote:
>
> >Brad Wardell's irresponsible
> >declaration that OS/2 was dead because of that decision.
>
> I would not agree to that as "irresponsible".   This is very common with
ISVs
> that got drag through the mud.   Brad invested significant amount of
energy
> and resource on this issue.
>
> He got "burnt" - beyond recognition: if I may add.
>
> Since you spent some time in Taiwan, you should understand the Chinese
pharse
> of "Two faces and three daggers".   He got stabed by that third dagger.
>
Not neccessarily, his company stood to make a considerable profit from a
client if the bid was succesful, and also
he would not have released od 2.0 if he was going to make a loss.  In
business you make calculated decisions if it goes your way great if not you
move on, that's what he has done developing win32 software.
The fact of the matter is that Brad's opinion is just that an opinion he has
no authority on Warp product and as far as his
credibility is concerned well judge for yourself.  Read his SDS online
September Issue newsletter.

stan...


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                              24-Sep-99 05:48:09
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 10:53:13
Subj: Re: OS/2 Users Must Read

From: Dennis Peterson <[e-mail]>

That's the way I remember it too.

Jason Bowen wrote:
>
> Except you're being dishonest,  Brad didn't declare OS/2 dead, he repeated
> what everybody knows, IBM won't commit to a new client.
>
> In article <M3mPvLdzxX1t-pn2-ZCJRIdDU6FVd@localhost>,
> rj friedman <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >I came across an article "IBM, Forests, and Trees," at Tom
> >Nadeau's OS/2 Headquarters site (http://ww.os2hq.com) that
> >is a MUST READ for any OS/2 user concerned with the future
> >of OS/2 in the aftermath of IBM's decision that they didn't
> >want Stardock as a third party distributor of their OS/2
> >operating system, and Brad Wardell's irresponsible
> >declaration that OS/2 was dead because of that decision.
> >
> >IMO, it is the most succint, clear, and cogent, exposition
> >of the topic that I have seen yet (including my own <g>).
> >
> >
> >
> >________________________________________________________
> >
> >[RJ]                 OS/2 - Live it, or live with it.
> >rj friedman          Team ABW
> >Taipei, Taiwan       [e-mail]
> >
> >To send email - remove the `yyy'
> >________________________________________________________
> >


--

dp --

                 Support Eddie Kieger III at http://eddiekieger.com

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: I'm not organized at all (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                            24-Sep-99 13:54:20
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 10:53:13
Subj: Re: NS 4.61GA  Was: Why blame IBM?

From: Steve Drewell <[e-mail]>

On 24 Sep 1999, rj friedman wrote:

ε I believe that it has `changed' but the change hasn't gone
ε through the mill as yet. In any event, I was not allowed to
ε dl the strong encrypted version. The message on the web page
ε that denied me the dl stated that the strong version was
ε only available for dl to the US of A and Canada.

I'm not in the USA or Canada and found access to the 128-bit version
extremely simple. A certain piece of software which is freely available to
everyone provided me with the full url of the file, including the userid
and password required. Of course, being an honest chap, I didn't download
a copy of the file :-)

Steve

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Western Geophysical, Houston, TX (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          24-Sep-99 08:37:27
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 10:53:13
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: "Tim Mayer" <[e-mail]>

Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
> Tim Mayer wrote:
> >
> > Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> > news:[e-mail]...
[SNIP]
> >
> > Considering the millions of windoze users, what quantity does "many"
imply.
> > I highly doubt that a large percentage of windoze users have switched to
a
> > more secure alternative. If they did, what alternative did the "many"
adopt?
>
> It applies to those that have switched (aka the <former> users).  "Many"
> people have switched to other OS's, but of those, many <of them> have had
> an analogous situation to what I have described.

But can you quantify many? What OS did they turn to?

> > Keep in mind that windoze is the target of one of the more organized
hacker
> > groups called the "Cult of the Dead Cow" with products like "Back
Orifice
> > 2000" (http://www.microsoft.com/security/bulletins/ms98-010.asp). If
> > Microsofts security appears to be the weakest, it may be because it is
one
> > of the most attacked (and hated).
>
> Or it may be because it is.  Perhaps the reason h4x0r groups for other
OS's
> aren't so organized is because they're having a much more difficult time.
>

Unlikely. I would expect that organization is directly proportional to the
difficulty of the task. Consider the cDc, they have actually written and
publish software. Have they done this because it was easy -- I doubt it. I
think that they did it out of dislike for windoze regardless of the
difficulty. IMHO, windoze security has been more tested than any other OS,
which might give the false impression of it being less secure.

Tim





--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Pathway Communications (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          24-Sep-99 13:14:02
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 10:53:13
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Glatt)

>>>Jeff Glatt
>>>Tell that to Tholen. When anyone complains about having a problem with
>>>OS/2, his standard rhetoric is to point out that he has never had that
>>>problem and therefore it can't really be a problem.

>[e-mail]
>The above comment by Glatt is another well-documented flaw.

Yes, it is indeed a well-documented flaw that you exhibit, along with
numerous other faulty, misguided statements of yours that I have
documented well in my digest of the idiotic nonsense that you post to
COOA.

>He obviously can't keep track of what I've written

How ironic given that I have maintained a digest of your foolishness
posted to this newsgroup.

>so he makes it up as he goes.

So you erroneously presume, but then, that's what you typically do

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                   24-Sep-99 06:21:11
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 10:53:13
Subj: Re: Judgement day - time to reach for your wallets OS/2 people (large)

From: [e-mail] (Tim Smith)

Tim Martin  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>The public site (the brick wall entry point) is located in
>San Francisco.  It is the site most members never
>go to but considered our public site.  It consists of one
>primary web page (although we do provide several
>publicly accessible web pages on that server like
>John *Aloha* Twelker's OS/2-Aptiva Install guide).
>That particular server uses FreeBSD because quite
>frankly, its free and a fine server software and it is the
>only server we use in San Francisco.

Uhmmm...that site appears to be a virtual host, so wouldn't a more accurate
statement be it runs BSD because the hosting company that owns the server
wants to run that?

What I don't understand is *why* you have a site on a virtual host on
a server you don't own when all it has is a few pages.  Why not move that
site over to one of your own servers?  You can keep the IP address separate
so that it wouldn't give away the address of your private server.

--Tim Smith

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Institute of Lawsonomy (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                     24-Sep-99 06:57:20
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 10:53:13
Subj: Re: SAP dumps Java client

From: Joseph <[e-mail]>


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

On 9-20-99, 3:41:59 AM, Brad Barclay <[e-mail]> wrote
regarding Re: SAP dumps Java client:


> Christian Gustafson wrote:

> > My old copy of Netscape 4 hangs loading the mySAP.com page, dunno why.
 If
> > Netscape doesn't keep pace with MSIE supporting the new standards like
CSS
> > and XML, then OS/2 users won't have a suitable platform for
sophisticated
> > thin-client browser e-commerce.

>     "mysap.com" loads fine here under Communicator v4.61 preview 2 for
OS/2.
> And last I checked, it supported CSS rather nicely.

>     As for XML (a technology which I'm getting into in a big way these
> days...), if Netscape doesn't support it (and IIRC there is some
rudimentary
> support in v4.61 that was left out of some of the previews, although I
could be
> remembering incorrectly) than there exists XML validators, parsers,
and
> pre-processors which can be used to convert incoming XML documents
which
> contain both a suitable DTD and a CSS to convert them into HTML which
Netscape
> can display.  The conversion is nearly trivial.

>     Thus, in this regard I see nothing to fear.

I'm not sure who's got more to fear?  If a browser and HTML is the
means by which client accesses is provided, then who needs to buy,
install and maintain a client like W2K?

I'd welcome a race to implement standards, MSIE vs Netscape/Mozilla.
That race to provide networked services however discounts the need for
a new OS client and a new office suite.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                24-Sep-99 05:28:21
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:04
Subj: Re: NS 4.61GA  Was: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (rj friedman)

On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 20:14:10, [e-mail]
(Buddy Donnelly) wrote:


εI believe that has just changed, and that the only "weak" security version
εis the one that the French are required by French law to use....

εMy guess is we can thank Sen. Bill Bradley for this. I'd be willing to bet
εthat his strong showing in the polls caused Gore to do some serious market
εresearch, for the first time, and it revealed strong attitudes against him
εabout this NSA stuff, and that's why the Clinton administration changed the
εrules.

I believe that it has `changed' but the change hasn't gone
through the mill as yet. In any event, I was not allowed to
dl the strong encrypted version. The message on the web page
that denied me the dl stated that the strong version was
only available for dl to the US of A and Canada.



________________________________________________________

[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]                                   24-Sep-99 05:38:01
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:04
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Richard Steiner) writes:
|Here in comp.os.os2.misc, [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)
|spake unto us, saying:
|
||I've heard that OS/2 users have to patch their install disks to install
||Warp on new hardware.
|
|Feh.  Real machines use SCSI.    :-)
|
|--
|    -Rich Steiner  >>>--->    [e-mail]  >>>---> Bloomington, MN
|      OS/2 + Linux + BeOS + FreeBSD + Solaris + WinNT4 + Win95 + DOS
|       + VMWare + Fusion + vMac + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven! :-)
|                  "Look at all the indians!" - G. Custer

Baby Bowen should grow up and join the real world. I had to patch
the NT 4 install to use my 2940u2w _at_all_ . OS/2 OTOH, just had
to be patched to see the whole 9gb on all of my disks. Linux is the
only one that recognized the 2940u2w without coertion; but, lilo
didn't like the size of the disks, and to be coaxed into finding
the right place to put the boot loader.

Perhaps he should stick to Nintendo.

:) Guido

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          24-Sep-99 06:49:21
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:04
Subj: Re: NS 4.61GA  Was: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Buddy Donnelly)

On Fri, 24 Sep 1999 02:22:04, [e-mail] (Harald Portig) a ┌crit
dans un message:

> Buddy,
>
> According to http://verisign.netscape.com/advisor/index.html I also
> had the 128-bit version, however going to
> https://www.fortify.net/cgi-bin/ssl (see Peter Volsted's post)
> indicated that I had the 40-bit version.

This one says 40-bits, too.


>I forthwith downloaded the
> 128-bit version from Software Choice,
>
> http://www-4.ibm.com/software/os/warp/netscape/ns461.html
>
> or
>
> http://service.boulder.ibm.com/asd-bin/doc/en_us/ns40xr/f-feat.htm

I actually got mine from the Software Choice site but maybe should have
looked a bit further for a choice of security. I don't think I was given
one.


>
> and both verisign and fortify come up with the same answer: 128-bit.
> It appears that verisign is not always accurate!
>
> The downloaded filenames were (after applying zip -o):
>
> 9-16-99  6:39p    10,015,456      0 a---  comm461.exe    (40-bit)

This appears to be the same version for FTP at the peak1 site.

> 9-16-99  6:43p    10,015,428      0 a---  comm46xr.exe  (128-bit)
>
> Actually, inside Communicator, doing Help-About Communicator...
> indicates the correct security state of the program.

Thanks for the headsup.

>
> Regards, Harald Portig
> Remove the letters NOSPAM from my address to reply.
>
> On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 20:14:10, [e-mail] (Buddy
> Donnelly) wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 17:34:18, "Mark L. Kahnt" <[e-mail]> a
> > ┌crit dans un message:
> > >
> > > Joe is accurate, though, if you are looking for the 128-bit security
> > > edition - that requires a password bundled into the web-based download
> > > procedure, while the international version is freely available via ftp
> > > et al.
> >
> > I believe that has just changed, and that the only "weak" security version

> > is the one that the French are required by French law to use.
> >
> > In any case, the file I d/l'ed from the FTP site passes the Security
> > testing at
> >
> >     http://verisign.netscape.com/advisor/index.html
> >
> > as 128-bit, etc.
> >
>

Good luck,

Buddy

Buddy Donnelly
[e-mail]


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: RoadRunner - TampaBay (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                  24-Sep-99 07:57:04
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:04
Subj: Re: OS/2 Users Must Read

From: [e-mail] (Stan Goodman)

On Fri, 24 Sep 1999 02:35:46, [e-mail] wrote:

> [e-mail] said:
>
> >Everyone is also ignoring the fact that there is an ongoing anti-trust
trial
>
> Oh, I don't think anybody is ignoring anything.  I think a lot of us are
just
> seeing it as the latest in a very long line of excuses.

..and maybe they're right. On the other hand, if you place yourself in the
position of IBM, would you jeopardize your potential claim to an enormous
damage claim by demonstrating that you could indeed make a splash in the
market that you have asserted is locked by Microsoft?

But why think? It's far easier to just bash IBM.

-------------
Stan Goodman
Qiryat Tiv'on
Israel

Spammers are getting smarter; email sent to [e-mail] will not reach
me. Sorry.
Send E-mail to: domain: hashkedim dot com, username: stan.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Verio (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                  24-Sep-99 00:12:27
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: [e-mail] (ZnU)

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:

> jeff nee wrote:
> >
> > >  Unfortunately it doesn't always work that way. I've ended up with
> > > multiple
> > > >> applications launched by drag-n-dropping a document onto an already
> > > running
> > > >> application's alias.
> > > >
> > > >on a macintosh? that's not possible. if you have an app open an you
drag
> > > >and drop a file onto that app's icon, you simply open that file in the
> > > >already open application. i don't know how you could possibly have more
> > > >than one instance of a mac app running. it doesn't really happen.
> > > >
> > > I'm always interested in these sorts of discussion, where one person
denies
> > > that something that happened to another person could happen.  It always
> > > seems a bit strange to me.
> >
> > this isn't subjective. you can't run the same app in two instances on a
> > macintosh. i don't know why it would be necessary. but it's not possible
> > unless they are different versions of an app. in which case, that's not
> > what we're talking about.
> >
>
> I bet that he opened up the not-default SimpleText, then he double
> clicked on a text file and the default SimpleText opened as well.
> SimpleTexts seem to multiply and reproduce on your hard drive.

Yeah, but he claims it caused a crash. When's the last time you heard of
SimpleText doing that? Only time I've ever seen a Mac act like that is if
it has some damaged hardware or a corrupted drive. I'm not having any
trouble, and I just started up 12 copies of SimpleText :-)

--
This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a
means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us.
        - Western Union internal memo, 1876.

ZnU <[e-mail]>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: . (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             24-Sep-99 04:21:27
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[e-mail]>

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hobbyist_=A9?= <[e-mail]> writes:

: On comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy, Stephen S. Edwards II posted :

: >  If you do, make sure the motherboard is either Genuine Intel, ASUS, or
: >  Tyan... most others are substandard.

: Is this your order of preference?

Nah.  All three of these manufacturers make very good motherboards...
however, I will admit that I prefer Tyan... check out their site sometime
for kicks...

http://www.tyan.com/
--
.-----.
|[_] :| Stephen S. Edwards II | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
| =  :| "Humans have the potential to become irrational... perhaps
|     |  you should attempt to access that part of your psyche."
|_..._|                    -- Lieutenant Commander Data

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Anamorphic 3-D Graphics Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             24-Sep-99 04:31:14
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: The Linux agenda revealed...

From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[e-mail]>

Donovan Rebbechi <[e-mail]> writes:

: On 23 Sep 1999 16:23:59 GMT, Stephen S. Edwards II wrote:
: >ccondon <[e-mail]> writes:
: >

: >I think I understand...
: >
: >Microsoft markets products...
: >
: >The Linux community markets "emotions"...

: Since when was this idiot a spokesperson for the "Linux community"
: anyway ? What are his credentials ? Is he a significant developer or an
: insignificant worm ?

Apologies if I offended you, Donovan, but it's tripe like this that
makes Linux look bad, not responses like mine.  Yes, I would consider
anyone who takes it upon themselves to speak out about Linux to at
least be affiliated with the Linux Community.  That's why it's
important to make sure you're actually doing some good by speaking
out... come on... posting "do you hate Windows?" in a Windows advocacy
group?... what did you expect from us... "oh boy, good one there,
buddy!"?...

: Take a look at what the linux developers say from time to time. AFAICT,
: they are not marketting emotions.

No, they're not... now take a look at some of the ads in Linux journal...
take a look at what many advocates say... much of it is "emotional" in
varying degrees, from what I can see.

I didn't post that to make you or anyone else angry, and I apologize if I
did... I posted what I posted to point out how stupid the premise and the
target of that post was.
--
.-----.
|[_] :| Stephen S. Edwards II | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
| =  :| "Humans have the potential to become irrational... perhaps
|     |  you should attempt to access that part of your psyche."
|_..._|                    -- Lieutenant Commander Data

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Anamorphic 3-D Graphics Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               23-Sep-99 23:35:29
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hobbyist_=A9?= <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy, jeff nee posted :

>  on a macintosh? that's not possible. if you have an app open an you drag
>  and drop a file onto that app's icon, you simply open that file in the
>  already open application. i don't know how you could possibly have more
>  than one instance of a mac app running. it doesn't really happen.

That's a limitation of the Mac that is hardly worth being proud
of. Let's just say that it's this way because most Mac users
don't have the need to run multiple instances of a particular
program.

Not all windows programs allow the running of more than one
instances but some in fact do.

--
-=Ali=-

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                 23-Sep-99 20:41:16
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: [e-mail] (George Graves)

In article <9ryG3.9750$[e-mail]>, "Earl Malmrose"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

>George Graves <[e-mail]> wrote in message
>news:[e-mail]...
>> Sorry Mr. Troll, If you actually knew more about Macs you would realize
>> that not only does attempting to start a second instance of an application
>> not crash a Mac EVER, but you actually CANNOT make such an attempt. When
>> an app is open on the Mac, its icon becomes a greyed-out outline. Double
>> clicking it a second time merely dumps the user out of the finder and back
>> into that app.
>
>Unfortunately it doesn't always work that way. I've ended up with multiple
>applications launched by drag-n-dropping a document onto an already running
>application's alias.

Sorry, that's not what's happening. Some drag-and-drop enabled Mac apps
(like drop-Stuff from Alladin, for instance) launch when you drop a file
on them, do their thing, and then close themselves. What you are doing is
continually recycling this action. Macs do not allow for multiple
instances of the same app (unless you clone it. Then you can open both the
original and the clone - if you want to.

--
George Graves
Senex Nequissime

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Graves Associates (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                      23-Sep-99 20:48:10
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: "Chad Mulligan" <[e-mail]>

Tim Mayer wrote in message <7sdrnj$jtv$[e-mail]>...
>

>> > patch then great (considering that their motivation for doing so is
that
>> > they want to keep selling kevlar jackets).
>>
>> Tell the people that died from it that it's "great".
>>
>
>It is "great" for the people that get a patch -- bad for the people
that
>didn't have a chance to. But who do you blame, the kevlar jacket
company?
>
>
>

Assuming whoever shot at you hit that patch.

--
--
"Can't we go back on topic and bash computer languages we don't know
based on anecdotal misinformation instead of bashing people we don't
know based onanecdotal misinformation?"  *** Olaf Appelt 990920

>
>
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Hipcrime Vocabulary Organization (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                 23-Sep-99 20:46:04
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: [e-mail] (George Graves)

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (The Lord Of Lemmings) wrote:

>In article <[e-mail]>,
>[e-mail] (jeff nee) wrote:
>
>>In article <9ryG3.9750$[e-mail]>, "Earl Malmrose"
>><[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>> George Graves <[e-mail]> wrote in message
>>> news:[e-mail]...
>>> > Sorry Mr. Troll, If you actually knew more about Macs you would realize
>>> > that not only does attempting to start a second instance of an
application
>>> > not crash a Mac EVER, but you actually CANNOT make such an attempt. When
>>> > an app is open on the Mac, its icon becomes a greyed-out outline. Double
>>> > clicking it a second time merely dumps the user out of the finder and
back
>>> > into that app.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately it doesn't always work that way. I've ended up with multiple
>>> applications launched by drag-n-dropping a document onto an already
running
>>> application's alias.
>>
>>on a macintosh? that's not possible. if you have an app open an you drag
>>and drop a file onto that app's icon, you simply open that file in the
>>already open application. i don't know how you could possibly have more
>>than one instance of a mac app running. it doesn't really happen.
>>
>>jeff
>
>It can happen in some cases if there is more than one copy of the app on
>the computer.  I've done it with ICQ, since I can't figure out a way to
>have two accounts active in a single "instance" of ICQ.  I don't do it
>anymore since I don't use ICQ anymore.

Yes, that's how you get multiple instances on a Mac, if you need to!!??
You clone the app.

--
George Graves
Senex Nequissime

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Graves Associates (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                24-Sep-99 04:47:17
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: Who to believe?  [follow-up]

From: [e-mail] (rj friedman)

On Fri, 24 Sep 1999 01:18:28, Marty <[e-mail]>
wrote:

ε> Yes, I do. However, we have seen just how petty and
ε> vindictive he can be toward those that cross him right here
ε> in cooa.

εThe way he conducts himself in cooa is not the way he conducts himself in
εthe business world.

How would someone like you know that, Marty?
________________________________________________________

[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]                               23-Sep-99 23:06:20
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: Am I a lamb heading to the slaughter house?

From: "Christian Gustafson" <[e-mail]>

Kevin Salisbury <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
> Kim,
>
> Thank you. Good Luck.
>
> You have one person behind you 120% in any case. :)
>
> Kevin Salisbury


You mean you're buying some of Kim's spiffy managed clients?  Or a CTI
system?


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]               23-Sep-99 21:02:24
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: Who to believe?  [follow-up]

From: "Kim Cheung" <[e-mail]>

On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 21:00:43 -0400, Marty wrote:

>> >> Until I get drag through the mud too, I wouldn't know what mud taste
like.
>> >
>> >What are you trying to say here?  That perhaps Brad has acted
vindictively?
>> >
>>
>> I definitely did not say that.
>
>Sorry... I misunderstood.  What were you trying to say?

I don't know that my words were that unclear:  Unless we went through the
"process" like Brad did - courageously, if I may add, none of us can "judge"
his view point at this time.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                23-Sep-99 23:09:00
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: Mayor Of R'lyeh <[e-mail]>

On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 22:02:47 -0700, "Tim Mayer" <[e-mail]>
chose to bless us with this bit of wisdom:

>
>
>Mayor Of R'lyeh <[e-mail]> wrote in message
>news:Ya=[e-mail]...
>> On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 14:48:32 -0400, "Tim Mayer"
>> <[e-mail]> chose to bless us with this bit of wisdom:
>>
>> >
>> >Mayor Of R'lyeh <[e-mail]> wrote in message
>> >news:JlXqNxOCb4t=[e-mail]...
>> >> On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 12:08:06 -0400, "Tim Mayer"
>> >> <[e-mail]> chose to bless us with this bit of wisdom:
>> >>
>> >> >
>[SNIP]
>> >> >
>> >> >Isn't it more like someone buys a kevlar jacket, then someone else,
>> >invents
>> >> >an illegal bullet that can penetrate it.
>> >>
>> >> Why do you think it would be illegal?
>> >
>> >Why would they be legal?
>>
>> Why not? Almost any rifle cartridge and a few of the larger pistol
>> cartridges can go through a kevlar jacket as easily as it goes through
>> a cotton one. Kevlar was never meant to be effective against anything
>> but small to mid sized pistols.
>
>Interesting! I have to confess that I did not know this, which is why I
>proposed my simplified alternative.
>
>> >>
>> >> > Now who do you get mad at, the
>> >> >maker of the kevlar jacket or the maker of the illegal bullet?
>> >>
>> >> Plenty of perfectly legal bullets can go  through a kevlar jacket
>> >> right now.
>> >>
>> >
>> >Perhaps. I guess my argument is a bit weak considering that in the
>> >real-world kevlar jackets are not all that effectiv. So, instead consider
>a
>> >hypothetical world which has been significantly simplified. In this world
>> >there is a perfect kevlar jacket that is impermeable to all forms of
>> >bullets. 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?
>>
>> The guy that fired the shot.
>>
>
>Consider that the person who makes the bullet is for example the "cDc", the
>person who fires the shot is the hacker and the kevlar vest is the security
>system built into the OS. Does this mean that the hacker is totally to blame
>in this scenario?
>
>Tim
>
Let's write about this directly. If I write a devasting virus but keep
it to myself I've done no wrong. If I show it to someone and they
swipe it without my permission or knowledge and release it themselves
I've still done no wrong. All of the blame goes with the person who
initiated the wrongful action. Just because he got the tools from me
doesn't make me responsible for his actions.
 Even if I gave him the virus knowing he would release I would still
argue that I've done no wrong. It was his releasing it not my giving
it to him that caused the troubles. The onus should be on the
particular people who directly caused the problem. We can chase
tertiary parties as far as we want to. The question is at what point
does that get silly. I say it gets silly at the point where you get
past the directly involved parties. Others have different points.


--

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: City Of R'lyeh (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                24-Sep-99 05:13:05
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: Am I a lamb heading to the slaughter house?

From: [e-mail] (rj friedman)

On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 11:32:25, "Kim Cheung"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

εI feel compelled to be on record with what I believe is a positive,
εaccurate, and realistic business message.

An excellent post - very well put.


________________________________________________________

[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]                               24-Sep-99 01:23:28
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: Who to believe?  [follow-up]

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

rj friedman wrote:
>
> On Fri, 24 Sep 1999 01:18:28, Marty <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
> ÿ> Yes, I do. However, we have seen just how petty and
> ÿ> vindictive he can be toward those that cross him right here
> ÿ> in cooa.
>
> ÿThe way he conducts himself in cooa is not the way he conducts himself in
> ÿthe business world.
>
> How would someone like you know that, Marty?

Who is "someone like me" RJ?

The very fact that his business still exists and prospers tells me all I
need to know.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               24-Sep-99 00:06:17
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hobbyist_=A9?= <[e-mail]>

On comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy, Stephen S. Edwards II posted :

>  =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hobbyist_=A9?= <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>  : On comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy, Stephen S. Edwards II posted :
>
>  : >  If you do, make sure the motherboard is either Genuine Intel, ASUS, or
>  : >  Tyan... most others are substandard.
>
>  : Is this your order of preference?
>
>  Nah.  All three of these manufacturers make very good motherboards...
>  however, I will admit that I prefer Tyan... check out their site sometime
>  for kicks...
>
>  http://www.tyan.com/

I've already been there. My last board was an ASUS. Mt present is
a genuine Intel. I think that this Intel board is great. I
haven't tried a Tyan but they seem to be nice.
--
-=Ali=-

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]               23-Sep-99 22:24:16
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: The Kim Cheung Challenge

From: "Kim Cheung" <[e-mail]>

On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 22:56:28 -0500, Christian Gustafson wrote:

>So how did you make out?

One guy came with his egg timer - he had to chuckle and said: My timer's up!
 - that was seconds before the system was up and running.

How can you not be stunt?   Come to see it at WarpStock.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]               23-Sep-99 22:35:23
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: OS/2ezine??

From: "Kim Cheung" <[e-mail]>

On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 22:17:48 GMT, Stephen Eickhoff (remove the - to reply)
wrote:

>That was a lame self-plug from a bitter ex-Warper.
>
>Ronny Ko wrote:
>
>> David T. Johnson ([e-mail]) wrote:
>>
>> : Mirage Media wrote:
>> : >
>> : > Does anyone know it's status? Is it ever coming back?
>> : >
>> : My guess is that it's belly up...the postage costs became too great.
>>
>> As far as I can see, even their last writer, Bob St. John has moved to
>> 32BitsOnline after a failed attempt by now dead e-Zine to kidnap Timmy.
>>
>> It all back fired badly; then again desparate people call for desparate
>> measures and certainly that measured back fired royally.
>>
>> Check out Bob and Timmy at 32BitsOnline.com.
>

My partner Bob St. John wrote the article at 32BitsOnline.com per invitation
by Ronny Ko.   We support all effort to provide information to the world
about OS/2.    It has nothing to do with e-Zine or any other matter in this
thread.   We will continue contributing OS/2 related articles to the e-Zine -
and all other publications.

We have no intention to be used as pawns in a dirty war.  Our interest is in
OS/2's success.




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]               23-Sep-99 22:56:24
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: The Kim Cheung Challenge

From: "Kim Cheung" <[e-mail]>

On 23 Sep 1999 22:24:33 PDT, Kim Cheung wrote:

>On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 22:56:28 -0500, Christian Gustafson wrote:
>
>>So how did you make out?
>

Incidentally, you can see it at
http://www.scoug.com/warpexpowest/pictures/album2/album.html



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                  23-Sep-99 21:09:03
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: Tony Wright <[e-mail]>

ZnU wrote:

> In article <7sbtci$[e-mail]>, "Kelly Robinson"
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> >
> [snip]
>
> --
> This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a
> means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us.
>         - Western Union internal memo, 1876.
>

Amazing! - that sounded supernaturally familiar, so I rummaged thru some
old papers and found:

This 'personal computer' has too many shortcomings to be seriously
considered as a means of vertically expanding our markets downwards to
include the small business user.  The ongoing development project XXXXXX
is therefore of no significant relative value to us and should.......
- International Business Machines Armonk - Internal Use Only 1981

A rather faded and yellowed photocopy of something that was apparently
originally a Profs memo that was possibly also faxed in the interim and
who's authenticity can no longer be verified but just in case, I burnt
it.... :-(

> ZnU <[e-mail]>

 ;-)

--
Rgds Tony W   Email: [e-mail]

"humanum est errare: To err is human
.... and to fail is to be a Project Manager...
...but to foul things up completely needs a computer!"


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Equi-Tek CompCon (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                       24-Sep-99 01:32:23
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Trancser <[e-mail]>

--------------B20FAB59DDB44A6286150917
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

>
>
> You got it!  OS/2 continues to be THE Killer OS today.  No other
> desktop operating system on the market today can equal the
> power, stability and quality of OS/2.  NONE!
>
> Tim Martin
> The OS/2 Guy
> Warp City
> http://warpcity.com
> "E-ride the wild surf to Warp City!"

And with this statment, I'd like to slide in a li'l question, its kinda off
topic, but
I thought this would be the (or one at least - of the os2 ng's out there) to
ask it in,
but, since the (supposed) leak of the OS/2 kernel, hpfs driver and multimedia
support,
depending on who all knows about it yet?? Well, if you DO know about it, I was
wondering if anyone plans on doing anything with it?    If merely patching
would be
(obviously?) illegal, then a total re-write ....whichever way you'd do it....

Anyway, the only reason for wasting my time by asking this question, is
because I
myself use and really like the OS as well....have for many years, and since
hearing the
source has suddently become available thought this might give an opportunity
for some
programmers out there to do some creative things w/ Os/2

    I know also that if and when another fixpack would come out, that the
modifications
you made with the kernel source thats available would or might come in
conflict with
what changes IBM would've made to whatever...but I'm not sure that IBM
actually
modifies to much (if anything) with OS/2's kernel, as far as the current and
(possibly)
last client version of OS/2 goes? I think its mostly the DLL's that get
modified? I'm
not 100% sure, but again ...just thought I'd ask.

[e-mail]



--------------B20FAB59DDB44A6286150917
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML>

<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE><A HREF="http://pages.infinit.net/exovede"></A>

<P>You got it!  OS/2 continues to be THE Killer OS today.  No
other
<BR>desktop operating system on the market today can equal the
<BR>power, stability and quality of OS/2.  NONE!

<P>Tim Martin
<BR>The OS/2 Guy
<BR>Warp City
<BR><A HREF="http://warpcity.com">http://warpcity.com</A>
<BR>"E-ride the wild surf to Warp City!"</BLOCKQUOTE>
And with this statment, I'd like to slide in a li'l question, its kinda
off topic, but I thought this would be the (or one at least - of the os2
ng's out there) to ask it in, but, since the (supposed) leak of the OS/2
kernel, hpfs driver and multimedia support, depending on who all knows
about it yet?? Well, if you DO know about it, I was wondering if anyone
plans on doing anything with it?    If merely patching would
be (obviously?) illegal, then a total re-write ....whichever way you'd
do it....

<P>Anyway, the only reason for wasting my time by asking this question,
is because I myself use and really like the OS as well....have for many
years, and since hearing the source has suddently become available thought
this might give an opportunity for some programmers out there to do some
creative things w/ Os/2

<P>    I know also that if and when another fixpack would
come out, that the modifications you made with the kernel source thats
available would or might come in conflict with what changes IBM would've
made to whatever...but I'm not sure that IBM actually modifies to much
(if anything) with OS/2's kernel, as far as the current and (possibly)
last client version of OS/2 goes? I think its mostly the DLL's that get
modified? I'm not 100% sure, but again ...just thought I'd ask.

<P>[e-mail]

<P> </HTML>

--------------B20FAB59DDB44A6286150917--


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: EarthLink Network, Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                  23-Sep-99 20:14:05
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: (1/2) Re: Judgement day Revelation - blind optometrist refuses eyesight

From: Tony Wright <[e-mail]>

Jason Bowen wrote:

> ... And all of what Tim writes is a lie unless he lied to
> [e-mail].  Thank you for providing even more evidence Tim.

Sorry Jason, I shouldn't comment on whether it's a lie as he may well
genuinely believe the statements he makes are factually
accurate,consistent, unambiguous and in context?
Circumstantially it not very plausible to believe this explanation all
the time as his reaction to being criticised,challenged or corrected
demonstrates...... neither would it be arguably fair to say he's totally
devoid of any sincerity and willingness to "un-selfishly" assist others
....?

Where he limits his advice to "pointers" to other sources without
superfluous political rhetoric or restricts his advice to area's of
expertise that do not require too much exhaustive diagnostic ability<g>
then his contribution is most valuable and welcomed....no doubt....

> In article <[e-mail]>,
> Tim Martin  <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >[e-mail] wrote:
> >
> >> In <[e-mail]>, "D=
> >arin McBride" <[e-mail]> writes:
> >> >On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 16:37:53 -0700, Tim Martin wrote:
> >> snip
> >
> >Actually we've got several servers in several locations.
> >Warp City is *framed* because web pages are constantly
> ...... further blatant advertisement snipped....
> >....     All staff members
> >have installed and use OS/2 as their operating system.
> >Windows (including WinOS2) is banned by company policy.
> >None of us has WinOS2 or DOS installed on our systems.

Ahhh....   this explains some of the technical "inaccuracies" offered up
by the same person as "authoritative" fact.....   (assuming of course
his above "quoted comment" also  wasn't a lie or misrepresented as
alleged or possibly implied by some?).
This "restrictive" and (IMO totally) short-sighted methodology is akin
to equipping the company car fleet and banning the installation/use of
reverse gear!
Ones mobility and flexibility (particularly parking) is therefore
severely limited and one's conceptual mindset cannot envisage any
"direction" or manoeuvre except with a "forward" bias.
Hence the marked lack of "lateral" thinking..... this most convenient
analogy explains a lot.....

Literally interpreted how does it affect (supporting) the following I
wonder?:
1. Absence of DOS (vdm) regarding installing,initialising Video bios
registers, changing some video drivers?
2. Absence of WINOS2 for "legitimately" using say "Wordview" to
ensure/verify that the output of say Lotus SSOS2 Wordpro to a MS
Office97 customer/client whatever is correctly formatted?.
3. Absence of WinOS2 resulting in say (e.g.) some specific "fonts" not
being installed that subsequently cause problems with some OS/2
applications/Video combinations (like certain specific Netscape and
Matrox examples perhaps).?
4. Unfamiliarity with concepts and propogative effects of both DOS based
and Macro (word) virus's on various file systems etc....
5. With progressive amounts of absurdity, does one not use filters to
export items etc. in MS compliant formats?  Does one patch/remove all
vestiges or references to MS/dos/windows "hooks" in the OS/2 kernel,
dll's, device drivers etc. even though DOS/win is not "allegedly"
loaded?

How far does one go to "sanitize" one's system in pursuit of this
counter-productive and obtuse ideology? Taken to the extreme (which the
proponent would not have the knowledge to do anyway without external
assistance) I doubt whether the eventual system would be sufficiently
viable to be able to reproduce,evaluate or advise other(non winos2/dos)
users effectively anyway.... let alone to feasibly apply fixpacks or use
Open32 ports like Smartsuite (assuming the company Inquisitor allowed a
SS97 windows derivative) <g>

Is this impractical and "narrow " mindset based on anything MS connected
or just Dos/Windows specifically?
If's it's the former then ultimately "practising" what one preaches and
removing all direct or indirectly MS "tainted" parts of OS/2 and it's
preferred IFS will leave a completely non-functioning system anyway!

Any such artificially inhibited  "stance" even if not that extreme does
therefore imply that any "member"  of that illustrious Website that is
having difficulties related (in)directly with any of the above is most
likely to receive very "dubious" technical assistance from practically
"inexperienced staff"...... and thus far too frequently simply receives
erroneous information judging from some posts on these external Usenet
fora .

Of course any "professionally" competent person with any ethical
"awareness" would determine their customers configuration / usage /
problem and add a suitable "caveat" to any "information" offered to
reflect the potential inadequacies caused by this  self imposed
restriction.
Again to be scrupulously fair  where the question is obvious (and
therefore requires minimal diagnostic initiative), a caveat of "I don't
of course use any windows applications myself....but you might
try...."etc is often (most commendably) added....
....but uncharitably perhaps more for "effect" than to actually assist
or warn the user about the advisors lack of credentials / experience?
:-(

It's interesting (but not relevant either) to speculate that perhaps the
"limited" membership of the much maligned Website is also the deliberate
and direct result of only wishing to support those users with same
"restrictive" system configuration or similarly  jaundiced view of
global IT as it's administrator.
Of course for a large majority (or at least a significant number) of
users that are compelled for business (or other) reasons to communicate
with or assist others that are utilising diverse OS's and applications
in the "real" world then the potential usefulness and credibility of
this site (at least via it's "staff" technical support)  is
unfortunately becoming far too limited. :-(

Thus conversely, if a more diverse and commercially representative
variety of OS/2 users were encouraged and not subliminally intimidated
by a closed and secret "Freemason" society to not "rock the boat" with
ackward technical questions then the "short comings" or limitations of
the "sites" indigenous OS/2 technically puritanical doctrine would
become all too readily and obviously apparent.

Regrettably such discerning observations as these also unfairly perhaps
tend to denigrate the credibility of the sites otherwise most worthy and
useful information in other (unaffected) area's.   :-(

> >The company provides each staffer with their own individual
> >machines preloaded with OS/2 usually from such dealers
> >as Indelible Blue, Diamond Flower or other familiar hardware
> >vendors who preload OS/2.

Obviously these "alleged" pre-loads are to specific customer order or
DOS/WINOS2 is alternatively selectively  and immediately uninstalled
upon receipt?
Presumably if the latter, within such an autocratic and severe regime,
the person responsible for this odious task is required to undertake
some form of "de-contamination" process afterwards..... in order to
prove they have not deliberately or inadvertently retained any vestiges
of a "banned" process?
Sort of OS/2 equivalent of a "Dope" test for dopes ...... or an "Audit"
for apes....<g>
If the inference is correct in that the use of such "banned" emulation
processes is potentially a "disciplinary offence" then such a
supposition may not be as fatuous or puerile as it first seems?

Lets also examine the practicalities of the "alleged" vendor supplying a
"build to order" configuration such as this? 3 Vendors at least are
intimated and no doubt each one would "customise" an individual machine
on a one off basis "at a price".
Now a PC Vendor/Retailer if he's adding value add by installing an OS
himself(and not via manufacturer) will want to minimise his
testing,support,administration costs,and order complexity by only
offering a generic install that by definition ideally cater's for all
potential customers and thus includes DOS/WINOS2.
This is irrespective on whether an install is cloned from tape,via CD or
server image, on the basis it's far easier for customer to ignore or be
instructed to selectively de-install unwanted components than vice
versa.
There may therefore be a significant "price differential" to a "special
order" depending on the customers buying potential.......

>From the "companies" perspective they would wish to maximise their capital
investment and delay ordering "individual" systems (blanket call off orders
notwithstanding) in order to leverage any volume discounts...... particularly
if there is an additional "penalty" for non standard orders?
Of course some "professional reviewers" are granted "complimentary" (or
heavily discounted) systems but as WarpCity constantly advocates it's
"ethics" in not accepting advertising or being anyway perceived as
"accountable" or biased in favour of any third party then one must
equally discount this type of order<pun intended> as well<g>.

On that premise only two likely scenario's appear feasible:
1. There's a significant amount of PCs that are ordered for new staff
(high staff attrition rate  as result of inter personnel friction
perhaps?<g>) and/or existing PCs are regularly upgraded(very
possibly).?      ....OR
2. There's relatively very few staff/renewals and therefore volume price
breaks whether for standard or "special" orders are inapplicable
anyway(more probably).

A third unlikely(?) possibility that new PC's conveniently "fall off"
the back of a lorry already pre-installed w/o DOS/WINOS2 is discarded as
too amusingly ironic to be true...<vbg>

As regards a "ban" I cannot perceive any "pragmatic" business orientated
company enforcing that "alleged" rule unilaterally without providing a
mechanism for allowing some deviation for "justifiable" circumstances
(Like more effectively and competently supporting ones customers
perhaps<g>).
Such an literally enforced regime implies that the individual is not
"professionally" trustworthy to follow the companies business
objectives/goals (and judging by the individuals attitude and remarks
publicly then one is also forced to reach the inevitable conclusion
regarding that anyway.....).
Similar to a "company" enforcing a "no diskettes" nor removable media be
brought in from "external unauthorised" sources without following a
prescribed AV procedure, while allowing certain IT support and
development staff to "adapt"<g> this procedure if circumstances warrant
it, on the basis that invariable(hopefully) they are more likely to know
what they are doing and the risks involved than the average user(but G*d
help them if anything "nasty" escapes into a  production / business
environment<vbg>).

Additionally I suppose "competitive analysis" is another "abstract"
concept that is totally lost along with the previous futile attempts by
others at imparting "business" and "marketing" basics in this persons
unrealistic and inflexible mindset...?
I wonder if he also really naively believes that his much revered IBM
(employees) did not have multiple copies of Windows (and other OS's)
outside of their development & CA labs in the 80's early 90's and even
(albeit only a few cases) BEFORE the first Windows V1 was publicly
released? (Perhaps his most "reliable" IBM "insiders" told him
differently?<vbg> and of course the ratio has obviously totally reversed
thru the years and the point is moot now anyway......).

Of course with our self appointed OS/2 "experts" previously demonstrated
ineptitude and lack of understanding regarding "virus's, he would no
doubt claim that removing DOS/WINOS2 is also purely a defensive posture
designed to "eliminate" the risk of any viral infection....
Rather like the "ill informed" and ignorant person's excuse of:
"I refuse to recommend treatment at the hospital because there are far
too many sick people there in close proximity and I wouldn't want you to
catch AIDs a second time...."<g>.

>  We can access the servers from
> >a company 800 number or through individual dialup ISP
> >accounts (paid for by the company).

Oh Gee Whiz...... how envious we poor disadvantaged mortals are supposed
to be in light of that "gratuitous" boasting of "Look what the company
gives me"......
Modest appreciation and restrained acknowledgement of what your employer
"provides" for you is one thing but blatantly "flaunting" the obvious
while ingeniously omitting the "company tricycle" because  you're could
potentially be under the minimum age to sit upright on one unsupported
or reach the pedals, is something else...<g>

.....methinks he forgot the two "crates" of Cheval & Co's  Chateau Neuf
Du Prat at Christmas and birthdays along with the monthly incremental
pay rise and free tickets to Disneyland as well...... but one must be
thankful for at least a partial reprieve..... and also not to appear
unduly "envious" (of the DisneyLand tickets) of course...<g>

> >
> >I have never owned or used a Windows application (but
> >I have seen them)........

Meaning "I can spell Windows(if I remember how to use my spell
checker<g>)......and therefore  consider myself eminently qualified to
misrepresent myself as technically authoritative to any unsuspecting
naive user that has a problem (in)directly related to it's use in order
to satisfy my own inflated ego yet remain faithful to my pseudo
religious OS bigotry"....... say what?......  ok try it another way:-

Humility,tolerance, understanding (and compassion for non-OS/2 sinners)
towards the OS impure is only for the meek and mild, thus has no place
in the fervent puritanical zeal of practising and preaching ones chosen
OS religion  from within the safety of ones own secluded cloisters
untainted by the evil temptations outside in the real world and thus
ones actions are considered unaccountable to ones peers?

> >
> >Tim Martin
> >The OS/2 Guy

Time to consider a name change again perhaps?

How about "The one eyed myopic OS/2 hypocritical Gasbag"?:
aka  a parody of OS/2's own Lord Nelson-
"I see no Winos2 ships but I'll outmanoeuvre and defeat any other OS
navy in the world whatever the odds! Whoops did I accidentally sink your
row-boat?.
Don't challenge the Admiral of the Fleet, sailor as it's your own fault

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Equi-Tek CompCon (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                  23-Sep-99 20:14:05
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: (2/2) Re: Judgement day Revelation - blind optometrist refuses eyesight

for relying on DOS oars -  you should have been using an OS/2 sail
instead!......
It's the only way you can get up the creek and traverse the mud flats
without a MS Windows paddle...."     Q.E.D

> >Warp City

"Impulse City".....  as one has now deliberately "de-tuned" the
potential of the OS's go-faster integrating "warp speed" functionality
and thus also reflects one's predilection for answering too many
questions without adequate preparation,thought &/or knowledge....... :-(
However, to be fair, a "Maserati" is still a Maserati even if you choose
only to drive it in 2nd gear or fuel it with kerosene. ...

But consider how "hamstrung" a self professed "arrogant" mechanic would
be trying to diagnose a customers problem relating to speeds in excess
of 110mph in 3rd gear if he deliberately restricted his working
knowledge of gearbox theory and had no way to "road test" his potential
fix?....(not withstanding a Californian State speed limit of
55/65mph<g>).
He may "arrogantly" and "purportedly knowledgeably" advise the customer
to change the tyre profile which may appear to temporarily resolve the
problem by masking or altering the inherently more dangerous vibration
caused by a defective or non-optimised component within say the gearbox?

The naive (and initially most grateful) customer fully expecting a
professionally competent service based on the undeniably excellent
"valetting" and routine oil changes/basic tuning the customer and others
received in the past,  may well incur "expensive" repairs or unnecessary
breakdowns much later and thus not immediately or easily relate this now
recent mishap to that original (erroneous at best, or incompetent at
worst,) mis-diagnosis.

One can (pointlessly) conjecture on how many "gullible" followers have
thus suffered but still "loyally" avidly devour and believe every word
of his "gospel" (technical or political) and valiantly leap to the
"disciples" defence when he's challenged by the perceived "heretical"
utterings of "non believers"...agnostics,atheists or whatever....

>http://warpcity.com

> >"E-ride the wild surf to Warp City!"

ergo the legend should now more topically read:
"Eee-Aww ride a silly half blind ass to Cloud Cuckoo City...."

> >
> >

Again this sort of inter-personal defamation does very little to further
OS/2 apart from some minimal amusement and "labouring" the continual
"shortcomings" of one isolated, intolerant, arrogant, unprofessional,
misguided, bigoted and vindictively divisive individual....
As such it's value to "advocacy"  groups is questionable but why in
hells teeth must it be continually disseminated to "apps" and
"programmers" as well?

After all those respective incumbents are actually trying to
productively offer assistance rather than waste their precious time
maligning an ISV for having the courage to take some not insignificant
political as well as financial risk to promote OS/2 further for the
average individual user?  ....and incidentally the ISV naturally, not
being completely altruistic or philanthropic, had the not totally
unreasonable expectation of actually making a profit if it succeeded  as
well. <g>

So, if these hysterical ill informed speculative nonsense's, witch
hunts, kangaroo courts and mutual character assassinations have to be
"spewed" forth let's at least have the minimal decency to try and keep
them within the confines of these Advocacy "asylum's"... "play pen's"
whatever....

 --
Rgds Tony W   Email: [e-mail]

"humanum est errare: To err is human
.... and to fail is to be a Project Manager...
...but to foul things up completely needs a computer!"


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Equi-Tek CompCon (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                      24-Sep-99 03:05:05
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: Anti-Windows t-shirts at www.dumbentia.com

From: Jason <[e-mail]>

David H. McCoy <[e-mail]> wrote:
: In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
:>David H. McCoy <[e-mail]> wrote:
:>: In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
:>:>ccondon wrote:
:>
:>:>> Do you hate Windows? Do you dislike Microsoft with a vengeance? Then
take a
:>:>> look at the new anti-Windows t-shirts now available at Dumbentia.
:>
:>:>Why not just make shirts that say, "Kick me," "Mug me," or "I'm a computer
:>:>dork"?
:>
:>: Hate an OS? Dislike with vengeance? Sounds like people who want those
shirts
:>: just need mental help.
:>
:>I think people who spend a considerable chunk of time on Usenet attacking
:>an OS they don't use, but disklike, need more mental help then people who
:>buy shirts that make people laugh.  And trust me a lot of people laugh
:>over making fun of Microsoft, mostly people who use Windows.
:>
:>-Jason
:>

: And I think that people who spend a considerable chunk of their time telling

: people that they spend a considerable chunk of their time doing whatever are

: clowns,

Damnit David, you've caught Timartianitis.  You're calling people
clowns while making irrational statements.  Okay, I'll one up you, I
think that people who spend a considerable chunk of their time telling
people who spend a considerable chunk of their time telling people that
they spend a considerable chunk of their time doing whatever either have
a very good sense of irony, or are very obtuse.

: especially if they believe for a moment that a "Linux Rulez" t-shirt
: would make anyone laugh.

A "Linux Rulez" t-shirt wouldn't make anyone laugh, which is probably why
they don't sell "Linux Rulez" t-shirts and instead opts for "Windows
Sucks" t-shirts, "I think, therefore I run Linux" t-shirts, "Just say no
to windows" t-shirts and "Where does microsoft want to take you today"
t-shirts, which would make a lot of people laugh.

-Jason

P.S. I'm not a clown, damnit, I'm a lying clown.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               24-Sep-99 07:23:27
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: FW: Response from IBM

From: [e-mail] (M.P. van Dobben de Bruijn)

> So LVG lied to us in 1997 when he promised 10 years of support.
> This message only supports 5 from that date. We need to remind
> him that Watson's original company rule requires IBM to
> keep its promises.

I think that it would be difficult for anyone to set out a strategy
for a desktop OS for a period beyond the end of 2002. Unless of
course <VBG> you regard delivering a keynote speech lining out
your newest vaporware OS now and we all know it will be delive-
red years later as such. Serious now, who had heard about W2000
two years ago. Even W98 and its obsolence two years later were un-
know to us at that point. We are not discussing long term predictions
at this time, we are discussing if and when  an upgrade should be done.

On the matter did LvG lie to us? Did he promise 10 years of support.
Don't remember it that way. I think that what he said was that there was
a place for OS/2 in IBM's plans for the transition to the networked world.

And that if you want to earn your money on supporting OS/2 users
(if I remember it correct) you would certainly have 10 more years to
earn your income that way. That is something quite different than him
promising that OS/2 would be improved / renewed for 10 more years.

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]                        24-Sep-99 01:01:21
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: [e-mail] (Alan Baker)

In article <9ryG3.9750$[e-mail]>, "Earl Malmrose"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

>George Graves <[e-mail]> wrote in message
>news:[e-mail]...
>> Sorry Mr. Troll, If you actually knew more about Macs you would realize
>> that not only does attempting to start a second instance of an application
>> not crash a Mac EVER, but you actually CANNOT make such an attempt. When
>> an app is open on the Mac, its icon becomes a greyed-out outline. Double
>> clicking it a second time merely dumps the user out of the finder and back
>> into that app.
>
>Unfortunately it doesn't always work that way. I've ended up with multiple
>applications launched by drag-n-dropping a document onto an already running
>application's alias.

I think the polite phrase is: "I doubt you"

What app?

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall to that
wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you sit in the
bottom of that cupboard."

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bakerMEDIA (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                24-Sep-99 11:26:29
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: OS/2 Users Must Read

From: "OS/2 Fan" <[e-mail]>

I think it's no surprize that IBM won't play OS/2 with a much smaller
firm.  In the final analysis, - and for different reasons, I concede
- they ended up parting with a firm much larger than Stardoc but
still small compared to them (even today!): Microsoft.  I look at it
this way:  If they couldn't work it out with MS, whom they did have a
stronge relationship with, why anyone else even smaller?  Although
realistically I've heard loud complaints about the buginess of SD
products and who knows, they may rival MS's in that respect, MS still
has more $$ and more programmers (many of high quality, no doubt) and
IBM split with them too.  And it's no great loss for OS/2, though I
am disappointed since I wanted a client for an Xmas gift.  However,
thanks to previous posts, all we have to do is get certain filez and
experiment with a hybrid system, which should be fun for at least a
few months!  Maybe these could be liberated from a beta CD, and they
will certainly appear as a package somewhere if the pioneers in the
field think it's working well for them (just like the TCPIP 4.1 stuff
or the HPFS386 stuff, of which there are multiple variants heroically
offered here and there)...  We should be OK for the forseeable future
(I hope).

Regards,
Xtralarge OS/2 fan

Opinions expressed are mine only.  Ignore them and
killfile me.  Leave the University and/or my ISP alone,
I don't speak for them, they have nothing to do with it,
and they probably have more lawyers than you anyway.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: An OTEnet S.A. customer (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                24-Sep-99 04:51:29
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: OS/2ezine??

From: "Christopher B. Wright" <[e-mail]>

On 21 Sep 1999 20:04:05 GMT, Mirage Media wrote:

>Does anyone know it's status? Is it ever coming back?
>

For the last few months, OS/2 e-Zine! has been in the process of changing the
way it publishes everything. Every issue Chris Wenham (Senior Editor) had
been essentially creating static HTML pages to display the articles, and it
was getting to be much too time consuming. So he's in the process of
implementing a database-driven site that will make it a lot easier for the
staff to post articles, and decrease the time it takes to push an article
through from conception to publication.

Consequentially, this will probably change OS/2 e-Zine!'s publication
schedule from "monthly" to the more common "whenever" net format.

Alas, as with all technology, it never happens as fast as we'd like, so OS/2
e-Zine! has been in limbo for a few months. However, we are planning to
release a standard "static" issue at the end of this month (September).

As for Mr. Ronny Ko's assertions that we're belly up, and that 32BitsOnline
has somehow taken our last "employee", I'd like to point out a few things:

1. Mr. Ko has some strange hatred of our publication that he's never cared to
explain to me,

2. Bob St. John was never an employee of OS/2 e-Zine! He works for Serenity
Systems. He's written a few articles for OS/2 e-Zine! because they were
interesting and informative. Note, however, that OS/2 e-Zine! doesn't claim
the rights to any articles written for us -- we're just given permission by
the authors to publish them on our pages. We don't require anyone to give us
exclusive publishing rights of any kind, that's just silly. In fact, I see no
reason my Bob St. John _shouldn't_ be writing articles for 32BitsOnline.

3. And I have no idea what he's talking about when he says we tried to kidnap
"Timmy".

Regards,

Christopher B. Wright ([e-mail])
Senior Editor, OS/2 e-Zine! (http://www.os2ezine.com)


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                   24-Sep-99 21:23:27
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: Craig Benbow <[e-mail]>

So who is lobbying the other six?????
If anyone has friends in high places it appears now is a good time to call in
a few favours!!!

Craig

[e-mail] wrote:

> In <[e-mail]>, on 09/19/99
>    at 05:04 PM, [e-mail] (Dan Casey) said:
>
> Unfortunalely I walked into Steven King's ( manager of development)
> presentation late At Warp Expo late. What He did say was that IBM could
> not deliver a client was of an IBM policy requiring the client to be
> delivered in 32 languages. A meet will be held next month to decide if a
> third party will be permitted to produce a client. He said he would vote
> yes, but that he is one of seven votes. RJF
>
> >In article <[e-mail]>,
> >Tim Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>
> >>And yet an IBM official attending Warp Expo West
> >>stated publicly yesterday that no such meeting
> >>took place - and he should know, he is on the
> >>committee.   He said it was cancelled due to travel
> >>problems.  He also said Brad was wrong.  AND he
> >>said IBM has made no decision on whether or not
> >>they will release a Warp 5 client 'this year'.
> >>
> >>Stardock has a vested financial interest in all this
> >>free publicity.  Brad does not and cannot speak for IBM.
> >>
> >>> I wish there would be a new client, but I think it unlikely.
> >>
> >>And I see the glass as half full.  I say there will be a
> >>Warp 5 client.  Just not in 1999.
>
> >Here's the explanation for the non-meeting "meeting". This is in response
> >to a question regarding the  report at os2.org stating that no meeting
> >took place. The following  is the answer I received from an IBMer close
> >to the proceedings:
>
> >==================================================
>
> >Brad's statement and this one are not inconsistent.
>
> >The meeting didn't take place because there was a meeting ahead of the
> >meeting,
> >at which it was decided there wasn't any need to have a meeting because
> >IBM was
> >not going to pursue Stardock's proposal (and the "agreement in principle"
> >between IBM and Stardock).  (You see, you only have *that* meeting to
> >*approve*
> >agenda items.)
>
> >IBM hasn't ruled any third party out of offering a new client, but it
> >hasn't
> >ruled any third party (or itself) *in*, either.  (IBM almost never rules
> >anything out.)  Brad's statement was accurate; Stardock anticipates no
> >change in
> >IBM's stance.
>
> >Brad's statement was also accurate that IBM has received more than one
> >offer.
> >Thus far IBM has rejected all of them "at this time."
>
> >======================================================
>
> >--
> >************************************************************** *  Dan
> >Casey                                                 * *  President
> >*
> >*  V.O.I.C.E. (Virtual OS/2 International Consumer Education * *
> >http://www.os2voice.org                                   * *  Abraxas on
> >IRC                                            * *
> >http://members.iquest.net/~dcasey                         * *  Charter
> >Associate member, Team SETI                       * *  Warpstock 99 in
> >Atlanta  http://www.warpstock.org         *
> >************************************************************** *  E-Mail
> >(subject: Req. PGP Key) for Public Key             *
> >**************************************************************
>
> --
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> [e-mail]
> -----------------------------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                24-Sep-99 10:04:25
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: Who to believe?  [follow-up]

From: [e-mail] (rj friedman)

On Fri, 24 Sep 1999 05:23:57, Marty <[e-mail]>
wrote:

ε> How would someone like you know that, Marty?

εWho is "someone like me" RJ?

Someone who has nothing to do with Stardock, and has never
sat in on a business meeting of Stardock's.


εThe very fact that his business still exists and prospers tells me all
εneed to know.

The fact that you think that is all you need to know, tells
me all I need to know about you.



________________________________________________________

[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]                                    24-Sep-99 06:11:19
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 12:10:05
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: [e-mail] (tinman)

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:
[snip]

> >
> Let's write about this directly. If I write a devasting virus but keep
> it to myself I've done no wrong. If I show it to someone and they
> swipe it without my permission or knowledge and release it themselves
> I've still done no wrong. All of the blame goes with the person who
> initiated the wrongful action. Just because he got the tools from me
> doesn't make me responsible for his actions.

Borderline. If you bring something dangerous into the world, IMO you're
morally responsible for making some efforts at keeping it out of the hands
of others who might use it to harm others out of malice or ignorance.

>  Even if I gave him the virus knowing he would release I would still
> argue that I've done no wrong. It was his releasing it not my giving
> it to him that caused the troubles. The onus should be on the
> particular people who directly caused the problem. We can chase
> tertiary parties as far as we want to. The question is at what point
> does that get silly. I say it gets silly at the point where you get
> past the directly involved parties. Others have different points.
>
I think you're wrong here, even legally. With foreknowledge of the other
person's intent to do harm, wouldn't your actions be considered
conspiratorial (under Ricco?)? Certainly on the moral plane you are aiding
his actions, and thus partially responsible.

--
______
tinman

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: little, if any (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          24-Sep-99 14:20:15
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 13:22:29
Subj: Re: Borland C++

From: [e-mail]

Don't waste your time.  the Borland Compiler for OS/2 was the ultimate pile of
crap.

the debugger crashed the system.  OTOH, VACPP has always been rock solid
and a joy to use in comparison.

chris



In <8hwG3.268$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Paul Fedorenko)
writes:
>: > Incidentally, Borland released the most recent version of it's C++
>: > compiler for OS/2 just this past August.  yep, August '99.  So there IS
>
>: What's that you say?  Borland release a new version of their compiler?
>:  I haven't heard anything about this.  I'll have to check this out.
>
>
>Actually, there's a chance I had misread the date on the article that I read.
 I
>went back there, and I couldn't find anything about an August '99 release.
So
>either I misread the date, or I got it confused with another product...
>
>Sorry 'bout that...
>
>Paul
>
>---
>
>
>--
>
>Paul Fedorenko                        [e-mail]
>Internet Direct Tech Support
>
>"ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp or what is a heaven for"
>
>                                         -- Robert Browning,
>                                                        "Andrea Del Sarto"
>                                                        1895
> ----------------------------------------------------
> : Come play Realms of Despair! http://www.game.org :
> ----------------------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Louisville (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               24-Sep-99 10:11:09
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 13:22:29
Subj: Re: Who to believe?  [follow-up]

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

rj friedman wrote:
>
> On Fri, 24 Sep 1999 05:23:57, Marty <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
> ε> How would someone like you know that, Marty?
>
> εWho is "someone like me" RJ?
>
> Someone who has nothing to do with Stardock, and has never
> sat in on a business meeting of Stardock's.

Do you honestly envision Brad conducting a Stardock business meeting and
saying, "Ok folks... how can I destroy OS/2 today?"

I know enough about business to know that petty revenge has no place in
it.  Brad is not the only one in with influence at Stardock.  He would
have one heck of a time convincing others that enacting his evil
vendetta was a good idea.

How would someone like you, RJ, know that Brad is out to get OS/2?

> εThe very fact that his business still exists and prospers tells me all
> εneed to know.
>
> The fact that you think that is all you need to know, tells
> me all I need to know about you.

Right.  It tells you I have business sense and know how businesses run.

Your conspiracy senarios are amusing, but utterly absurd.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                        24-Sep-99 14:11:05
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 13:22:29
Subj: Re: The Linux agenda revealed...

From: "Edwin Young" <[e-mail]>

>I think I understand...
>
>Microsoft markets products...
>
>The Linux community markets "emotions"...
>
>Now you tell me which one is without substance.


I think this is quite interesting. I use Linux at home primarily because,
well, it's fun. Which I guess is an emotional reason rather than a technical
one. However since I don't actually *have* to accomplish anything using it,
surely fun is as good a reason as any other. I don't think there is a
monolithic "Linux community" in the sense that you suggest, but certainly
there's an emotional component to many people's attachment to Linux -
rooting for the underdog, etc. On the other hand, I've nothing against
Microsoft and would generally consider anyone wearing one of those T-shirts
to be an idiot.

--
Edwin Young


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                    24-Sep-99 14:52:20
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 13:22:29
Subj: Re: Why blame IBM?

From: [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)

In article <[e-mail]>,  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Richard Steiner) writes:
>|Here in comp.os.os2.misc, [e-mail] (Jason Bowen)
>|spake unto us, saying:
>|
>||I've heard that OS/2 users have to patch their install disks to install
>||Warp on new hardware.
>|
>|Feh.  Real machines use SCSI.    :-)
>|
>|--
>|    -Rich Steiner  >>>--->    [e-mail]  >>>---> Bloomington, MN
>|      OS/2 + Linux + BeOS + FreeBSD + Solaris + WinNT4 + Win95 + DOS
>|       + VMWare + Fusion + vMac + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven! :-)
>|                  "Look at all the indians!" - G. Custer
>
>Baby Bowen should grow up and join the real world. I had to patch
>the NT 4 install to use my 2940u2w _at_all_ . OS/2 OTOH, just had
>to be patched to see the whole 9gb on all of my disks. Linux is the
>only one that recognized the 2940u2w without coertion; but, lilo
>didn't like the size of the disks, and to be coaxed into finding
>the right place to put the boot loader.
>
>Perhaps he should stick to Nintendo.

And you should stick to satisfying your wife so that the mailman doesn't
make those special deliveries of his.  I wasn't talking about NT or Linux,
the requirements of either don't have anything to do with OS/2's
requirements.

>
>:) Guido
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                24-Sep-99 10:02:02
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 13:22:29
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: Mayor Of R'lyeh <[e-mail]>

On Fri, 24 Sep 1999 06:11:38 -0400, [e-mail] (tinman) chose to
bless us with this bit of wisdom:

>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:
>[snip]
>
>> >
>> Let's write about this directly. If I write a devasting virus but keep
>> it to myself I've done no wrong. If I show it to someone and they
>> swipe it without my permission or knowledge and release it themselves
>> I've still done no wrong. All of the blame goes with the person who
>> initiated the wrongful action. Just because he got the tools from me
>> doesn't make me responsible for his actions.
>
>Borderline. If you bring something dangerous into the world, IMO you're
>morally responsible for making some efforts at keeping it out of the hands
>of others who might use it to harm others out of malice or ignorance.

Why? We can realistically be only responsible for our own actions. I
don't know about you but I have neither the time nor the inclination
to be everyone's nanny.
>
>>  Even if I gave him the virus knowing he would release I would still
>> argue that I've done no wrong. It was his releasing it not my giving
>> it to him that caused the troubles. The onus should be on the
>> particular people who directly caused the problem. We can chase
>> tertiary parties as far as we want to. The question is at what point
>> does that get silly. I say it gets silly at the point where you get
>> past the directly involved parties. Others have different points.
>>
>I think you're wrong here, even legally. With foreknowledge of the other
>person's intent to do harm, wouldn't your actions be considered
>conspiratorial (under Ricco?)?

Unfortunately, we've reached the point in this country where the law
runs in fashions. If prosecuting virus writers becomes an in thing to
do then every possible law will be twisted so as to apply. Its for
this very reason that I prefer to talk about right and wrong as
opposed to legal and illegal.

> Certainly on the moral plane you are aiding his actions, and thus partially
responsible.


But where does it end? What If I was making small talk with the
salesman who sold me the computer used to write the virus and I told
him that I wanted it to write virii on? Is he now somehow responsible?
What about the store he worked for? Shouldn't they have taken some
kind of steps to ensure that their salesmen wouldn't sell to a virus
writer? What about the computer maker? Its no secret that there are a
fair number of people of writing virii. Should we hold the
manufacturer partially to blame because he didn't have some kind of
screening system in place to ensure that only upstanding types used
his product? Just how far up the chain are you willing to go?

--

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: City Of R'lyeh (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             24-Sep-99 15:53:25
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 13:22:29
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[e-mail]>

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hobbyist_=A9?= <[e-mail]> writes:

: On comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy, Stephen S. Edwards II posted :

: >  =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hobbyist_=A9?= <[e-mail]> writes:
: >
: >  : On comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy, Stephen S. Edwards II posted :
: >
: >  : >  If you do, make sure the motherboard is either Genuine Intel, ASUS,
or
: >  : >  Tyan... most others are substandard.
: >
: >  : Is this your order of preference?
: >
: >  Nah.  All three of these manufacturers make very good motherboards...
: >  however, I will admit that I prefer Tyan... check out their site sometime
: >  for kicks...
: >
: >  http://www.tyan.com/

: I've already been there. My last board was an ASUS. Mt present is
: a genuine Intel. I think that this Intel board is great. I
: haven't tried a Tyan but they seem to be nice.

One of the determining factors in how well a motherboard will work is
which BIOS it's running... Award BIOS works fairly well, but I have
encountered some quirks with some boards that have caused Windows95
to be unable to properly recognize IDE interfaces.

Phoenix BIOS is also pretty fair, but again, on some motherboards, it
doesn't allow Windows operating systems to properly recognize hardware.

The Intel, ASUS, and Tyan motherboards all use AMIBIOS, which, in my
experience, is clearly a superior BIOS technology.  I've never had a
machine which hosted AMIBIOS ever give me any problems.
--
.-----.
|[_] :| Stephen S. Edwards II | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
| =  :| "Humans have the potential to become irrational... perhaps
|     |  you should attempt to access that part of your psyche."
|_..._|                    -- Lieutenant Commander Data

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Anamorphic 3-D Graphics Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                24-Sep-99 18:23:22
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 13:22:29
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: [e-mail] (C Lund)

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (ZnU) wrote:

> When's the last time you heard of
> SimpleText doing that?

Actually, I have managed to bomb out on Simple Text. But that was when I
tried to open a QD3D file that I suspect was more than a little corrupt...

QD3D files? "Simple" Text?   ;)

--

C Lund
http://www.notam.uio.no/~clund/

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Oslo, Norway (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                24-Sep-99 18:21:25
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 13:22:29
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: [e-mail] (C Lund)

In article <1vzG3.10899$[e-mail]>, "Earl Malmrose"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> It's not *supposed* to happen. It happens. It's unusual, but it happens. It
> may have to do with using an alias as the drop point.

Let's put it like this: Unless you can provide me with a specific example
of this, which I can replicate on my Mac, I won't believe you.

--

C Lund
http://www.notam.uio.no/~clund/

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Oslo, Norway (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                24-Sep-99 13:40:26
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 15:24:08
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: Kevin Hayes <[e-mail]>

> >
> > on a macintosh? that's not possible. if you have an app open an you drag
> > and drop a file onto that app's icon, you simply open that file in the
> > already open application. i don't know how you could possibly have more
> > than one instance of a mac app running. it doesn't really happen.
>
> It's not *supposed* to happen. It happens. It's unusual, but it happens. It
> may have to do with using an alias as the drop point.

Sorry, we don't believe you. It is a technical impossibility. The only way to
run two instances of an application on MacOS is to make a copy of the
application - but then it's not really another instance - it's a completely
separate application.

If you disagree, please provide us with a reproducable example.

Kevin.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: ISINet, Nova Scotia (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             24-Sep-99 09:01:18
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 15:24:08
Subj: Re: And another thing...

From: "David T. Johnson" <[e-mail]>


Kevin Salisbury wrote:

[snip]
> ...Why stir things up at a delicate time? No one knows what will happen
> to OS/2 right now, and no one knows everything that happened with the
> Stardock deal.
>

Another vote for silence, secrecy, and stealth.  Nothing good ever
results from a process like that.  If posts like mine in a forum like
this can 'stir things up' sufficiently to have the kind of effect you
are thinking of, then we are obviously looking at a 'house of cards.'

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               24-Sep-99 12:22:08
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 15:24:08
Subj: Re: OS/2 Users Must Read

From: [e-mail] (Joe Kovacs)

In <[e-mail]>, "OS/2 Fan"
<[e-mail]> writes:
>I think it's no surprize that IBM won't play OS/2 with a much smaller
>firm.  In the final analysis, - and for different reasons, I concede
>- they ended up parting with a firm much larger than Stardoc but
>still small compared to them (even today!): Microsoft.  I look at it
>this way:  If they couldn't work it out with MS, whom they did have a
>stronge relationship with, why anyone else even smaller?  Although
>realistically I've heard loud complaints about the buginess of SD
>products and who knows, they may rival MS's in that respect, MS still
>has more $$ and more programmers (many of high quality, no doubt) and
>IBM split with them too.

IBM never split with Microsoft, of course.  IBM sells seven
times as much MS software as MS does now.

The magic number is 10 million.

IBM has extensive intimate experience with the US Department
of Justice, whom they dealt with 13 years.

In 1991 it was obvious to the IBMs and MSs that MS DOS/Win
was going to be immensely popular, and on top of that MS held
OS/2.  So IBM took over OS/2.  MS held off releasing its new
32-bit Win95 until 10 million copies of 32-bit OS/2 were sold
and later, indeed, in front of the DOJ they could point to
IBM's OS/2 and say they held no monopoly in any sector of the
computer industry.

Later, MS took its remnant of 32-bit OS/2, then called OS/2
v3, finished its development and marketed it, naming it Win
NT.

So IBM and MS are on very good terms, and MS is in no position
to market OS/2.

>  And it's no great loss for OS/2, though I
>am disappointed since I wanted a client for an Xmas gift.  However,
>thanks to previous posts, all we have to do is get certain filez and
>experiment with a hybrid system, which should be fun for at least a
>few months!  Maybe these could be liberated from a beta CD, and they
>will certainly appear as a package somewhere if the pioneers in the
>field think it's working well for them (just like the TCPIP 4.1 stuff
>or the HPFS386 stuff, of which there are multiple variants heroically
>offered here and there)...  We should be OK for the forseeable future
>(I hope).
>
>Regards,
>Xtralarge OS/2 fan
>
>Opinions expressed are mine only.  Ignore them and
>killfile me.  Leave the University and/or my ISP alone,
>I don't speak for them, they have nothing to do with it,
>and they probably have more lawyers than you anyway.

This is what IBM sees.  Legitimate users of OS/2 clients
don't see a real need for a client with five 500MHz CPUs at
this time.

Someone who can't sign his name to his posts, who thinks it's
smart to sign with "OS/2 Fan" <[e-mail]> and
Xtralarge OS/2 fan, who drools over filez, venerates and
promotes piracy and thievery, won't give out money for apps or
even the OS, these things who can only assign all the value of
a solicited Xmas present to an OS/2 v5 client and can post
how they really deserve and should have one, for this IBM and
others should invest several dozen million dollars and several
dozen man-years of top programmers' time in a legitimate OS/2
v5 client.

Who else is there?  Who's being stupid here?

Joe Kovacs
Guelph Ontario Canada



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Water Utilities Hydraulic Analysis (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                     24-Sep-99 13:42:15
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:10
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: [e-mail] (Eric Remy)

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (C Lund) wrote:

>Actually, I have managed to bomb out on Simple Text. But that was when I
>tried to open a QD3D file that I suspect was more than a little corrupt...
>
>QD3D files? "Simple" Text?   ;)

Hey, I want my text editor to read the files to me, view pictures, play
movies, show 3d objects, record sounds and make my lunch.

I don't care about text files >32K.  3d object support is more important :^)

--
Eric Remy.  Chemistry Learning Center Director, Virginia Tech

"But simply by putting my hair into a ponytail I transform into the
coolest guy in the office"- Wally, _Dilbert_

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Va Tech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                24-Sep-99 12:54:26
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:10
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: Mayor Of R'lyeh <[e-mail]>

On Fri, 24 Sep 1999 12:01:46 -0500, "Jake Sink" <[e-mail]>
chose to bless us with this bit of wisdom:

>>
>> Why not? Almost any rifle cartridge and a few of the larger pistol
>> cartridges can go through a kevlar jacket as easily as it goes through
>> a cotton one. Kevlar was never meant to be effective against anything
>> but small to mid sized pistols.
>> >>
>
>Actually, there are spectra fiber (similar to kevlar (but better) but not
>kevlar so maybe this is not on the point) jackets that will stop multiple
>9mm, (you won't feel much) and many high powered rifle shots.(they will stop
>rifles)
>
 I believe you're talking about the ceramic body armor. Its not a
fiber but rather a series of plates. Its very cumbersome to wear as I
understand and is very expensive as well.


--

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: City Of R'lyeh (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               24-Sep-99 17:44:22
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:10
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: [e-mail]


> >
> Let's write about this directly. If I write a devasting virus but keep
> it to myself I've done no wrong. If I show it to someone and they
> swipe it without my permission or knowledge and release it themselves
> I've still done no wrong. All of the blame goes with the person who
> initiated the wrongful action. Just because he got the tools from me
> doesn't make me responsible for his actions.
>  Even if I gave him the virus knowing he would release I would still
                                           ^^^^^

I don't think so. You can go back to the gun analogy here. If a gun
owner gives someone a gun knowing he COULD commit a crime with it then
he is not legally/morally responsible, since people are capable of
anything, and any legal purchase of a gun COULD result in a public
shooting.

By knowing if someone WOULD do this, however, then your action can be
considered to be participatory. Even bartenders can get sued for letting
a guy drive home drunk if he's been drinking in that bar. Foreknowledge
of a crime in itself can sometimes be a legal offense (unless you're
married to the person, or their lawyer or they're priest or through some
other privileged relationship) regardless as to whether or not you
supply the key weapon in the crime.

Or maybe I'm wrong. It's been a while since I've watched "Law & Order".

> argue that I've done no wrong.
> [[snip!]]
> The question is at what point does that get silly. I say it gets silly
> at the point where you get past the directly involved parties.

Actually, considering the way the analogy was headed, I was going to say
that it gets silly when tv-news producers start lobbying for footage of
the bullet going through the kevlar jacket.

> --
>
> Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
>

I have this distinct feeling that you are one of several people I might
know. Are you from Montreal? Do the words "Blue Carrot" mean anything to
you? If not, I apologize and ignore this last remark...

-kitts


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]                               24-Sep-99 17:16:08
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:10
Subj: Re: The Linux agenda revealed...

From: [e-mail]

Amiga users calling ANYONE nuts is pretty funny.

I guees you guys do not know you are generally considered idiots by
the world at large?




On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 18:23:14 GMT, [e-mail] wrote:

>Put up the shields, the LinoNuts are coming out of the woodwork.
>
>time2leave

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Road Runner (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          24-Sep-99 13:47:16
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:10
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: "Tim Mayer" <[e-mail]>

Mayor Of R'lyeh <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:4I=[e-mail]...
> On Fri, 24 Sep 1999 06:11:38 -0400, [e-mail] (tinman) chose to
> bless us with this bit of wisdom:
>
> >In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
wrote:
> >[snip]
> >
> >> >
> >> Let's write about this directly. If I write a devasting virus but keep
> >> it to myself I've done no wrong. If I show it to someone and they
> >> swipe it without my permission or knowledge and release it themselves
> >> I've still done no wrong. All of the blame goes with the person who
> >> initiated the wrongful action. Just because he got the tools from me
> >> doesn't make me responsible for his actions.
> >
> >Borderline. If you bring something dangerous into the world, IMO you're
> >morally responsible for making some efforts at keeping it out of the
hands
> >of others who might use it to harm others out of malice or ignorance.
>
> Why? We can realistically be only responsible for our own actions. I
> don't know about you but I have neither the time nor the inclination
> to be everyone's nanny.

Lets say you develop a very dangerous virus, but opt to keep in the fridge
at your home. Someone, from a radical terrorist group break in and steal
this virus easily because of the unsecured environment. The virus is then
used to taint the water supply of a major city, causing tens of thousands of
deaths. Now, IMO the creator of the virus is partially responsible for the
deaths of the people.

[SNIP]

> > Certainly on the moral plane you are aiding his actions, and thus
partially responsible.
>
>
> But where does it end? What If I was making small talk with the
> salesman who sold me the computer used to write the virus and I told
> him that I wanted it to write virii on? Is he now somehow responsible?
> What about the store he worked for? Shouldn't they have taken some
> kind of steps to ensure that their salesmen wouldn't sell to a virus
> writer? What about the computer maker?

Doesn't it depend on intent. If you make a computer with the intent of
selling and marketing as a tool for creation of computer viruses, then what
you are doing is morally wrong. If you sell this computer with the same
intent...

> Its no secret that there are a
> fair number of people of writing virii. Should we hold the
> manufacturer partially to blame because he didn't have some kind of
> screening system in place to ensure that only upstanding types used
> his product? Just how far up the chain are you willing to go?

But as long as it was not the intended purpose of the product, then no moral
wrong has been committed.

Tim



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Pathway Communications (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                              24-Sep-99 12:01:23
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:10
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: "Jake Sink" <[e-mail]>

>
> Why not? Almost any rifle cartridge and a few of the larger pistol
> cartridges can go through a kevlar jacket as easily as it goes through
> a cotton one. Kevlar was never meant to be effective against anything
> but small to mid sized pistols.
> >>

Actually, there are spectra fiber (similar to kevlar (but better) but not
kevlar so maybe this is not on the point) jackets that will stop multiple
9mm, (you won't feel much) and many high powered rifle shots.(they will stop
rifles)


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               24-Sep-99 18:39:00
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:10
Subj: Re: The Linux agenda revealed...

From: [e-mail] (Aram Iskenderian)

On Fri, 24 Sep 1999 17:16:16 GMT,
In article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] wrote:

>Amiga users calling ANYONE nuts is pretty funny.

There are nuts and zealots on every platform.

>I guees you guys do not know you are generally considered idiots by
>the world at large?

Thanks, I needed to be called that.

But since you're posting your words of wisdom here, across several
newsgroups, remember that you were an Amiga user, and IIRC a rabid one
too.
Either that you add a useful comment to the thread or please refrain
from insulting all users of the whole platform and making such
(s)weeping generalizations.



--

Aram Iskenderian.
Enjoying the speed of ADSL.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Netcom (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          24-Sep-99 14:57:04
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:10
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: "Tim Mayer" <[e-mail]>

> >
> >It is "great" for the people that get a patch -- bad for the people
> that
> >didn't have a chance to. But who do you blame, the kevlar jacket
> company?
> >
>
> Assuming whoever shot at you hit that patch.
>

The idea of the argument assumes that the patch fills a security whole, or a
single whole in the jacket. So, as long as it either hits the jacket or the
patch your OK. I guess that if you know of other holes, you can attempt to
protect that area. Just pray it doesn't hit any existing, but unknown, hole.

Tim


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Pathway Communications (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          24-Sep-99 14:53:19
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:10
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: "Tim Mayer" <[e-mail]>

Pascal Haakmat <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
> Tim Mayer wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> >Doesn't it depend on intent. If you make a computer with the intent of
> >selling and marketing as a tool for creation of computer viruses, then
what
> >you are doing is morally wrong. If you sell this computer with the same
> >intent...
>
> Could you, however, sell and market the computer as a tool for
self-defense?
>

But is that also your intended purpose, or only your "innocent" marketing
plan to conceal your true intent? If you still designed it and intended it
to be used as a tool for virus creation, then it is still morally wrong!

Actually, it's quite funny but Law and Order had an episode on last night
that dealt with a very similar issue: A semi-automatic weapon had a design
flaw that allowed it to be easily converted to an automatic weapon, which
made it a #1 choice amongst criminals. The manufacturer completed a survey
and discovered that if they correct the flaw, that sales would fall
dramatically. So, they chose not to correct the problem in favor of higher
profit. This went to trial, and the jury found the manufacturer guilty of 15
counts of murder in 2nd degree, although the judge over-turned the jury's
ruling since it did not meet the requirements of the law. Morally wrong, but
legally OK.

Tim




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Pathway Communications (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               24-Sep-99 13:32:22
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:10
Subj: Re: The Kim Cheung Challenge

From: "Christian Gustafson" <[e-mail]>

Kim Cheung <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
> On 23 Sep 1999 22:24:33 PDT, Kim Cheung wrote:
>
> >On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 22:56:28 -0500, Christian Gustafson wrote:
> >
> >>So how did you make out?
> >
>
> Incidentally, you can see it at
> http://www.scoug.com/warpexpowest/pictures/album2/album.html

Oh don't be shy:
http://www.scoug.com/warpexpowest/pictures/album1/ta1-010f.jpg

The turnout looks pretty good, lots of activity, certainly a larger affair
than Warpstock was here in Chicago last year.

This must be some sort of Y2K coup, but it looks like even Jesus of Nazareth
came to Warp Expo West:
http://www.scoug.com/warpexpowest/pictures/album3/mvc-370x.jpg

Hmmm ... Warp 5 client internal code name ... Lazarus?

(<giggle> -- apologies to Esther)  :-)



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                   24-Sep-99 18:12:09
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:10
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: [e-mail] (Pascal Haakmat)

Tim Mayer wrote:

[snip]

>Doesn't it depend on intent. If you make a computer with the intent of
>selling and marketing as a tool for creation of computer viruses, then what
>you are doing is morally wrong. If you sell this computer with the same
>intent...

Could you, however, sell and market the computer as a tool for self-defense?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: A2000 Kabeltelevisie en Telecommunicatie (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                 24-Sep-99 11:16:02
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:10
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: [e-mail] (George Graves)

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:

>jeff nee wrote:
>>
>> >  Unfortunately it doesn't always work that way. I've ended up with
>> > multiple
>> > >> applications launched by drag-n-dropping a document onto an already
>> > running
>> > >> application's alias.
>> > >
>> > >on a macintosh? that's not possible. if you have an app open an you drag
>> > >and drop a file onto that app's icon, you simply open that file in the
>> > >already open application. i don't know how you could possibly have more
>> > >than one instance of a mac app running. it doesn't really happen.
>> > >
>> > I'm always interested in these sorts of discussion, where one person
denies
>> > that something that happened to another person could happen.  It always
>> > seems a bit strange to me.
>>
>> this isn't subjective. you can't run the same app in two instances on a
>> macintosh. i don't know why it would be necessary. but it's not possible
>> unless they are different versions of an app. in which case, that's not
>> what we're talking about.
>>
>
>I bet that he opened up the not-default SimpleText, then he double
>clicked on a text file and the default SimpleText opened as well.
>SimpleTexts seem to multiply and reproduce on your hard drive.


That's possible. I just cleaned EIGHT of them off my HD last week.

--
George Graves
Senex Nequissime

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Graves Associates (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                              24-Sep-99 13:33:16
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:10
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: Mike DuFresne <[e-mail]>


Mayor Of R'lyeh wrote:
>
> On Fri, 24 Sep 1999 12:01:46 -0500, "Jake Sink" <[e-mail]>
> chose to bless us with this bit of wisdom:
>
> >>
> >> Why not? Almost any rifle cartridge and a few of the larger pistol
> >> cartridges can go through a kevlar jacket as easily as it goes through
> >> a cotton one. Kevlar was never meant to be effective against anything
> >> but small to mid sized pistols.
> >> >>
> >
> >Actually, there are spectra fiber (similar to kevlar (but better) but not
> >kevlar so maybe this is not on the point) jackets that will stop multiple
> >9mm, (you won't feel much) and many high powered rifle shots.(they will
stop
> >rifles)
> >
>  I believe you're talking about the ceramic body armor. Its not a
> fiber but rather a series of plates. Its very cumbersome to wear as I
> understand and is very expensive as well.
>
>

I think perhaps you should take a look at the videotape of the designer
of the Second Chance kevlar vest shooting himself at point blank range
with various firearms. Not all vests are created equally, and the body
armor that the military uses is not even in the same class as Second
Chance and similar quality vests. So the statement about rifle and
pistol cartridges is pretty silly.

Mike

--
We defeated the enemy with teamwork and the hammer of not bickering.

                    The Shoveller

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: MindSpring Enterprises (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                          24-Sep-99 11:45:21
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:10
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: "Earl Malmrose" <[e-mail]>

tinman <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
> In article <9ryG3.9750$[e-mail]>, "Earl Malmrose"
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> > George Graves <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> > news:[e-mail]...
> > > Sorry Mr. Troll, If you actually knew more about Macs you would
realize
> > > that not only does attempting to start a second instance of an
application
> > > not crash a Mac EVER, but you actually CANNOT make such an attempt.
When
> > > an app is open on the Mac, its icon becomes a greyed-out outline.
Double
> > > clicking it a second time merely dumps the user out of the finder and
back
> > > into that app.
> >
> > Unfortunately it doesn't always work that way. I've ended up with
multiple
> > applications launched by drag-n-dropping a document onto an already
running
> > application's alias.
>
> Ok, now it's my turn to say I've _never_ seen that!
>
> What application/version and what level OS? I want to try to replicate
> this one.....

I've had it happened several times with Code Warrior Pro 4.0, and OS 8.5.
I've upgraded to 8.6 now, and will see if it happens again. Yup, it just
happened again. Here's a long description of how it happened.

I double clicked an alias to a project on my NT server. CW opened it.
I dragged an alias to another project on my Netware server onto the alias
for CW. A new copy of CW was launched, which opened the second project.

So I searched my hard drive for multiple copies of CW, and bingo, yup, two
copies. Mystery solved.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                    23-Sep-99 17:38:08
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:10
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: [e-mail] (Matthias Warkus)

It was the Wed, 22 Sep 1999 19:47:59 -0500...
..and Kelly Robinson <[e-mail]> wrote:
[schnibble]

Just an observation: there were only two follow-ups to this troll
posting
that actually tried finding some point or starting a debate. That's
great. Now if those people had actually ignored Kelly instead of
following up with something largely irrelevant...

(I followed up, too, mea culpa)

mawa
--
I am willing to love all mankind, except an American.
                                                        -- Sam Johnson

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Question Mark Software   /   Royal Space Navy (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]               24-Sep-99 12:08:10
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:10
Subj: Re: The Kim Cheung Challenge

From: "Kim Cheung" <[e-mail]>

On Fri, 24 Sep 1999 13:32:44 -0500, Christian Gustafson wrote:

>> Incidentally, you can see it at
>> http://www.scoug.com/warpexpowest/pictures/album2/album.html
>
>Oh don't be shy:
>http://www.scoug.com/warpexpowest/pictures/album1/ta1-010f.jpg

No, no, no.   Not me.

This is more interesting:

http://www.scoug.com/warpexpowest/pictures/album2/mvc-325x.jpg


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                   24-Sep-99 19:16:25
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:11
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: [e-mail] (Pascal Haakmat)

Tim Mayer wrote:

>> Tim Mayer wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> >Doesn't it depend on intent. If you make a computer with the intent of
>> >selling and marketing as a tool for creation of computer viruses, then
>> >what you are doing is morally wrong. If you sell this computer with the
>> >same intent...
>>
>> Could you, however, sell and market the computer as a tool for
self-defense?
>
>But is that also your intended purpose, or only your "innocent" marketing
>plan to conceal your true intent? If you still designed it and intended it
>to be used as a tool for virus creation, then it is still morally wrong!

But what happens if I design a tool for some purpose X, and such a design
entails the easy creation of viruses (or manslaughter)? The fact of the
matter is that any computer is a tool for virus creation. The only way to
overcome that is to limit it's expressive capabilities, at which point it is
no longer a general purpose computer.

>Actually, it's quite funny but Law and Order had an episode on last night
>that dealt with a very similar issue: A semi-automatic weapon had a design
>flaw that allowed it to be easily converted to an automatic weapon, which
>made it a #1 choice amongst criminals. The manufacturer completed a survey
>and discovered that if they correct the flaw, that sales would fall
>dramatically. So, they chose not to correct the problem in favor of higher
>profit. This went to trial, and the jury found the manufacturer guilty of 15
>counts of murder in 2nd degree, although the judge over-turned the jury's
>ruling since it did not meet the requirements of the law. Morally wrong, but
>legally OK.

I would say that morally, it is wrong to kill a man, period.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: A2000 Kabeltelevisie en Telecommunicatie (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                24-Sep-99 14:25:22
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:11
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: Mayor Of R'lyeh <[e-mail]>

On Fri, 24 Sep 1999 17:44:44 GMT, [e-mail] chose to bless
us with this bit of wisdom:


>>
>> Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
>>
>
>I have this distinct feeling that you are one of several people I might
>know. Are you from Montreal? Do the words "Blue Carrot" mean anything to
>you? If not, I apologize and ignore this last remark...
>
>-kitts

No to all of the above. I'm from central Indiana. I did visit Montreal
once about 20 years ago though. Nice place.



--

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: City Of R'lyeh (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                         24-Sep-99 19:29:23
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:11
Subj: Re: FW: Response from IBM

From: [e-mail] (Richard R. Klemmer)

On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 19:30:31, Wayne Johnson
<[e-mail]> wrote:

[...]
> my message.  Today I received the following from IBM, I assume it is in
> response to the message I sent to Lou.
>

I got the exact same reply after sending big Lou a note last Friday.
It was obviously a form letter.

-----------------------------
Richard R. Klemmer
[e-mail]
http://www.webtrek.com
-----------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: WebTrek L.L.C. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                24-Sep-99 19:37:29
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:11
Subj: Re: OS/2ezine??

From: [e-mail] (Chris Wenham)

On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 05:54:55, [e-mail] (Ronny Ko) wrote:

> As far as I can see, even their last writer, Bob St. John has moved to
> 32BitsOnline after a failed attempt by now dead e-Zine to kidnap Timmy.
>
> It all back fired badly; then again desparate people call for desparate
> measures and certainly that measured back fired royally.

 Ouch.

Regards,

Chris Wenham - [e-mail]
Editor-In-Chief for OS/2 e-Zine!
http://www.os2ezine.com/
The views expressed are mine.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OS/2 e-Zine! (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                24-Sep-99 14:39:01
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:11
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: Mayor Of R'lyeh <[e-mail]>

On Fri, 24 Sep 1999 13:47:32 -0400, "Tim Mayer"
<[e-mail]> chose to bless us with this bit of wisdom:

>
>Mayor Of R'lyeh <[e-mail]> wrote in message
>news:4I=[e-mail]...
>> On Fri, 24 Sep 1999 06:11:38 -0400, [e-mail] (tinman) chose to
>> bless us with this bit of wisdom:
>>
>> >In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
>wrote:
>> >[snip]
>> >
>> >> >
>> >> Let's write about this directly. If I write a devasting virus but keep
>> >> it to myself I've done no wrong. If I show it to someone and they
>> >> swipe it without my permission or knowledge and release it themselves
>> >> I've still done no wrong. All of the blame goes with the person who
>> >> initiated the wrongful action. Just because he got the tools from me
>> >> doesn't make me responsible for his actions.
>> >
>> >Borderline. If you bring something dangerous into the world, IMO you're
>> >morally responsible for making some efforts at keeping it out of the
>hands
>> >of others who might use it to harm others out of malice or ignorance.
>>
>> Why? We can realistically be only responsible for our own actions. I
>> don't know about you but I have neither the time nor the inclination
>> to be everyone's nanny.
>
>Lets say you develop a very dangerous virus, but opt to keep in the fridge
>at your home. Someone, from a radical terrorist group break in and steal
>this virus easily because of the unsecured environment. The virus is then
>used to taint the water supply of a major city, causing tens of thousands of
>deaths. Now, IMO the creator of the virus is partially responsible for the
>deaths of the people.

What about your intent argument? If I've no intent to release it am I
still responsible? Does my lack of security measures make me culpable?
What if I thought by keeping it at home I wouldn't draw attention to
my work and was counting on the obscurity to keep it safe? I guess I'm
really asking do you think poor planning makes me responsible for
other's actions?
>
>[SNIP]
>
>> > Certainly on the moral plane you are aiding his actions, and thus
>partially responsible.
>>
>>
>> But where does it end? What If I was making small talk with the
>> salesman who sold me the computer used to write the virus and I told
>> him that I wanted it to write virii on? Is he now somehow responsible?
>> What about the store he worked for? Shouldn't they have taken some
>> kind of steps to ensure that their salesmen wouldn't sell to a virus
>> writer? What about the computer maker?
>
>Doesn't it depend on intent. If you make a computer with the intent of
>selling and marketing as a tool for creation of computer viruses, then what
>you are doing is morally wrong. If you sell this computer with the same
>intent...

Sure intent enters into it. There's also willfull ignorance Most ISPs
practice it. The ones I've dealt with will only respond to a detailed
complaint about content and will only look at the specifics of that
complaint. They take great pains not to know what's on and coming
through their systems. Granted there's been some court decisions that
make this the wisest practice for them but does that make it right?

>
>> Its no secret that there are a
>> fair number of people of writing virii. Should we hold the
>> manufacturer partially to blame because he didn't have some kind of
>> screening system in place to ensure that only upstanding types used
>> his product? Just how far up the chain are you willing to go?
>
>But as long as it was not the intended purpose of the product, then no moral
>wrong has been committed.
>
>Tim
>
>

--

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: City Of R'lyeh (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]               24-Sep-99 17:10:25
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:11
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: Digger <[e-mail]>

And when the stars are right, Great Cthulhu will rise from his sleep and
reclaim what is his.

--
The abductions have already begun
All around you we've infected someone you love
Initiate the start of an alien war
We're already one!

Give in to what you cannot fight Walk among Us!


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: SLA Industries (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                  24-Sep-99 16:20:13
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:11
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: Peter Ammon <[e-mail]>

Pascal Haakmat wrote:
>
> Tim Mayer wrote:
>
> >> Tim Mayer wrote:
> >>
> >> [snip]
> >>
> >> >Doesn't it depend on intent. If you make a computer with the intent of
> >> >selling and marketing as a tool for creation of computer viruses, then
> >> >what you are doing is morally wrong. If you sell this computer with the
> >> >same intent...
> >>
> >> Could you, however, sell and market the computer as a tool for
self-defense?
> >
> >But is that also your intended purpose, or only your "innocent" marketing
> >plan to conceal your true intent? If you still designed it and intended it
> >to be used as a tool for virus creation, then it is still morally wrong!
>
> But what happens if I design a tool for some purpose X, and such a design
> entails the easy creation of viruses (or manslaughter)? The fact of the
> matter is that any computer is a tool for virus creation. The only way to
> overcome that is to limit it's expressive capabilities, at which point it is
> no longer a general purpose computer.

Look at Java.  (If I say something stupid, just correct, don't flame).
Why are there no Java viruses?  It's because of the Java sandbox.  You
can grant Java apps access outside of the sandbox, but you have to
explicitly grant it.  Java is not limited in its expressive capabilities
yet is still secure.

-Peter

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Cornell University (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                24-Sep-99 15:17:24
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:11
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: Mayor Of R'lyeh <[e-mail]>

On 24 Sep 1999 19:16:50 GMT, [e-mail] (Pascal Haakmat) chose to
bless us with this bit of wisdom:

>Tim Mayer wrote:
>
>>> Tim Mayer wrote:
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>> >Doesn't it depend on intent. If you make a computer with the intent of
>>> >selling and marketing as a tool for creation of computer viruses, then
>>> >what you are doing is morally wrong. If you sell this computer with the
>>> >same intent...
>>>
>>> Could you, however, sell and market the computer as a tool for
self-defense?
>>
>>But is that also your intended purpose, or only your "innocent" marketing
>>plan to conceal your true intent? If you still designed it and intended it
>>to be used as a tool for virus creation, then it is still morally wrong!
>
>But what happens if I design a tool for some purpose X, and such a design
>entails the easy creation of viruses (or manslaughter)? The fact of the
>matter is that any computer is a tool for virus creation. The only way to
>overcome that is to limit it's expressive capabilities, at which point it is
>no longer a general purpose computer.
>
>>Actually, it's quite funny but Law and Order had an episode on last night
>>that dealt with a very similar issue: A semi-automatic weapon had a design
>>flaw that allowed it to be easily converted to an automatic weapon, which
>>made it a #1 choice amongst criminals. The manufacturer completed a survey
>>and discovered that if they correct the flaw, that sales would fall
>>dramatically. So, they chose not to correct the problem in favor of higher
>>profit. This went to trial, and the jury found the manufacturer guilty of 15
>>counts of murder in 2nd degree, although the judge over-turned the jury's
>>ruling since it did not meet the requirements of the law. Morally wrong, but
>>legally OK.
>
>I would say that morally, it is wrong to kill a man, period.

Even in self-defense?



--

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: City Of R'lyeh (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                             23-Sep-99 17:52:13
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:11
Subj: Re: Netlabs statement about the future of OS/2

From: "Doug Darrow" <[e-mail]>

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 03:01:47 GMT, [e-mail] wrote:

>In a nutshell, that's my beef with IBM. How about a little open and honest
>dissemination of intentions from the ONLY people who know their plans -
>IBM ? We all bought the product, we all have time and effort and money
>invested, whatever they want to do is their business, just TELL US ! then
>we can get on with our lives, decide what is best for us individually, not
>have to sift rumours and innuendo for scraps of insight.  Or does IBM shelter

>under the CIA umbrella now ? If anyone can be said to be responsible for the
>OS/2 FUD campaign, it'd be IBM for never being upfront with us. And YES,
>we deserve it - we bought the product, now come out and tell the truth,
>get it over with !

Actually, I believe IBM has been QUITE open and honest with the OS/2
SOHO crowd. IBM has ALWAYS said "OS/2 is not for the consumer
market...", "The war for the desktop is over and Windows won...", "We
recommend that you move to Windows...". "We (IBM) will no longer
support OS/2 on the Desktop...". How much more clear can they be?

The problem isn't that IBM isn't being clear or open with us. The
problem is that WE don't want to accept IBM's stated direction. IBM
continues to update OS/2 for their large corporate accounts and they're
kind enough to allow us SOHO users to benefit from those updates at no
charge. But they see no future in continuing OS/2 as a client system,
so they've decided not to develop the client any further... and they've
been TELLING us that for over three years, while WE keep insisting that
they CONTINUE development of OS/2 Client. Where is IBM being deceitful
in this?



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                              24-Sep-99 16:35:23
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:11
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: "Chad Myers" <[e-mail]>

But they DO in NT, and VIRII don't work in NT, unless you're logged in as
Admin.

By the way, the saying that you should create a non-root user in UNIX and
only
log in as root to do admin tasks, holds true in NT.

If you have NT permissions set properly, and you're not logged in as admin,
the
same holds true.

Chad

"Mike" <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:7sgmv8$fpo$[e-mail]...
> Microsoft's security *IS* to blame. If they used file system access
> permissions like Linux then you wouldn't have to worry about it because
only
> if the virus was run by root could you have damage.
>
> --
> Digital Heresy (http://members.tripod.com/~digitalheresy), dissenting in
the
> digital age.
>
> OSS, because warez is not a reliable way of getting free, useful software.
>
> ----------
> In article <7sbtci$[e-mail]>, "Kelly Robinson"
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>
> > Let's assume I'm a typical 95/98/NT user (I use more than windows but
let's
> > stick to what the majority uses for my damning point:)
> >
> > If I, as an uninformed typical computer user who doesn't know the
> > behind-the-scenes stuff, and heard that someone created a virus or
trojan or
> > lifestyles or whatever sort of nasty which would exterminate my
computer, I
> > would more likely blame the fucking bastards who created these things
(who
> > claim they want to point of MS bugs but are merely TERRORIZING THE
FRIGGING
> > PUBLIC by their despicable acts).
> >
> > So to you fucking bastards and everyone else who want to blame MS, keep
this
> > truth in mind:
> >
> > When one man kills another with a shotgun and takes his posessions, who
is
> > to blame:  the man or the gun?
> >
> > The computer is the gun.
> >
> > The man who makes the virus is no different than the man who  has a gun,
> > aims it, and shoots it once or thrice.
> >
> > So for those of you who like to laugh in MS's face, go right ahead.  I
might
> > almost join you.
> >
> > But unlike you, there are millions who suffer because supposedly
intelligent
> > people use viruses and such s if you took a cat and tormented and
physically
> > beaten it.
> >
> > Bottom line?  You cannot excuse the behavior.
> >
> > You cannot say that MS's lack of security is to blame.  Why not get some
> > sugar, find a car, and dump the sugar in?  Who's to blame for making a
car
> > with inadequate fuel locking systems?  Your arguement is bullshit since
it
> > is inevitable that something is going to be missed.  Inevitable.  You
remain
> > civilized.  You do not be a spoiled little brat who deserves to die in
an
> > electric chair and fuck up millions of lives.
> >
> > Fair enough?   See you in hell, hackers, I'll bribe the devil to give
you a
> > nasty punishment.
> >
> >
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Jump.Net (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                      24-Sep-99 16:28:14
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:11
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: "Mike" <[e-mail]>

Microsoft's security *IS* to blame. If they used file system access
permissions like Linux then you wouldn't have to worry about it because only
if the virus was run by root could you have damage.

--
Digital Heresy (http://members.tripod.com/~digitalheresy), dissenting in the
digital age.

OSS, because warez is not a reliable way of getting free, useful software.

----------
In article <7sbtci$[e-mail]>, "Kelly Robinson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:


> Let's assume I'm a typical 95/98/NT user (I use more than windows but let's
> stick to what the majority uses for my damning point:)
>
> If I, as an uninformed typical computer user who doesn't know the
> behind-the-scenes stuff, and heard that someone created a virus or trojan or
> lifestyles or whatever sort of nasty which would exterminate my computer, I
> would more likely blame the fucking bastards who created these things (who
> claim they want to point of MS bugs but are merely TERRORIZING THE FRIGGING
> PUBLIC by their despicable acts).
>
> So to you fucking bastards and everyone else who want to blame MS, keep this
> truth in mind:
>
> When one man kills another with a shotgun and takes his posessions, who is
> to blame:  the man or the gun?
>
> The computer is the gun.
>
> The man who makes the virus is no different than the man who  has a gun,
> aims it, and shoots it once or thrice.
>
> So for those of you who like to laugh in MS's face, go right ahead.  I might
> almost join you.
>
> But unlike you, there are millions who suffer because supposedly intelligent
> people use viruses and such s if you took a cat and tormented and physically
> beaten it.
>
> Bottom line?  You cannot excuse the behavior.
>
> You cannot say that MS's lack of security is to blame.  Why not get some
> sugar, find a car, and dump the sugar in?  Who's to blame for making a car
> with inadequate fuel locking systems?  Your arguement is bullshit since it
> is inevitable that something is going to be missed.  Inevitable.  You remain
> civilized.  You do not be a spoiled little brat who deserves to die in an
> electric chair and fuck up millions of lives.
>
> Fair enough?   See you in hell, hackers, I'll bribe the devil to give you a
> nasty punishment.
>
>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Digital Heresy (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                      24-Sep-99 16:24:12
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:11
Subj: Re: A real OS... or at least one which is here now

From: "Mike" <[e-mail]>

*yawn* I agree with you that BeOS R4.5.2 is superior for most things than
MacOS 8.6, you obviously aren't a regular user of BeOS. I have dns problems
every 5 minutes, why do you think that Be is going to rewrite most of the
networking parts of BeOS in R5? NT being easier and superior though, don't
make me laugh! As easy I might agree with you, but superior not hardly.
Linux is better for networking, BeOS is a better workstation and internet
appliance OS and MacOS is a better OS for all other areas. FYI I have
COL2.3, BeOS R4.5.2, Win98 and MacOS 8.6 on my 2 computers, a hp pavilion
8390 and a powerbook g3 333 (which has 192mb of ram I might add...).

--
Digital Heresy (http://members.tripod.com/~digitalheresy), dissenting in the
digital age.

OSS, because warez is not a reliable way of getting free, useful software.

----------
In article <7sbsog$[e-mail]>, "Kelly Robinson"
<[e-mail]> wrote:


> Every time some one rags on all of the MacOS weak points (a very un-easy to
> use 1 button mouse, co-operative (in other words, none) multitasking,
> frequent system crashes because you did somtehing with an app such as
> attempting to start a second instance of it [to you mac users who live in
> the 19th century:  a second instance is running the program again.  In real
> OSes, the program can run as many times as it wants and in seperate
> allocated memory spaces.  This can be extremely useful.]  I could go on and
> on...)
>
> Anyway, when I say that, MacOS users promptly remind me that MacOS X solves
> these problems.
>
> But what do they try to hide?  The facts that mac OS X is currently an
> overpriced server OS and that the WORKSTATION edition (what we want,
> apparently) is still not out - and won't be until mid-2000.  Is this to
> ensure it's Y2K compliant?   hehe.
>
> So, Mac losers, do you want us to wait for Apple to finish wiping its rear,
> having finished using the toilet... or should people get something which
> suits their needs NOW?
>
> Most people need stuff now.  Loyalty only goes so far.  And if you need more
> than a pretty case, Apple is completely and utterly worthless.
>
> So if you want everything the Mac lacks, get Windows NT or BeOS.  They're
> easier to use than MacOS and infinitely superior (BeOS is so superior that
> Apple prohibited Be from making BeOS for their G3-based hardware!  Apple
> can't stand the fact that someone else made something better than them and a
> lot sooner.  Heh, ask Xerox about that...)
>
> So, in conclusion, and I hope every single one of you has tuned in, you Mac
> people need to get real.  Apple hasn't a prayer (or a penis) to grab a hold
> on.  So when somebody posts these simple truths about macs, DO NOT e-mail
> that person back saying Mac OS X is out.  That's bullshit.  Nobody who is
> sane would pay $1000 for a server OS to exclusively run workstation apps and
> no more.  Of course, you guys are mac users...  and nobody would sit like a
> bump on a log to wait for Apple to get its act together.  Remember that OS/2
> thing?  IBM made it.  IBM also sat like a lump thinking people would buy it.
> Nope, people saw OS/2's weaknesses (combined with IBM's own obvious attitude
> toward it) so OS/2 died, and good riddance.  Let's hope Apple does the same
> and soon.  Apple needs to be put out of its misery since all its products
> are filled with worms.
>
> Oh yeah, if OS X Server is out, why the [beep] is the workstation edition
> taking soooooooo long?  That's ridiculous and is worthy of investigation,
> not blind hubris.  But then, you're mac people and hubris is natural to you.
>
> Cheers,
> a realist.
>
>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Digital Heresy (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                24-Sep-99 21:04:03
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:11
Subj: Re: OS/2ezine??

From: [e-mail] (Chris Wenham)

On Fri, 24 Sep 1999 08:51:58, "Christopher B. Wright"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

>
> 3. And I have no idea what he's talking about when he says we tried to
kidnap
> "Timmy".

 A number of requests by readers came in that we ask Tim Sipples to
write for us. I didn't see any reason why not to ask him, if our
readers wanted us to, so I contacted him about it. He turned the offer
down and that was the end of it. I'm glad to say that he has still
been working for us in other respects, and the fruits of which we will
be offering soon.

 I have no interest in airing the dirty laundry of 32 Bits Online or
OS/2 e-Zine!, regardless of the fact that Ronny has chosen to. I am
disappointed that his lack of professionalism has now breached its
prior containment of private e-mail. (And I fear I'm soon to do the
same.)

 I look forward to the day when he decides he no longer needs to
speculate on our status or motivations in a public forum. But even
more than that, I look forward to the day when the e-Zine! resumes its
regular publishing.

 I owe an apology to you all, however. To our readers and our
contributors, like Chris Wright and Bob St. John. My respect for you
could never be compromised.

 I also truly believe that there's nothing more pathetic and boring
than a sob story, so I've refrained from telling mine, so far. But
that restraint has forced people to speculate incorrectly, forcing me
to break my rule for just a moment.

 Perhaps Ronny Ko knows what it's like to loose your job and your car.
Perhaps he knows what it's like to suffer a month of hideous stress,
living on a ramen noodle and TV-dinner diet. Perhaps he knows what its
like to have your father in failing health with no money coming in to
see a doctor.
 Perhaps he doesn't, it would earn as little sympathy anyway and it's
not as if I'm demanding any from him, either.

 I've got my job back (and may even get a raise soon, whee!), I'm
working overtime now because I'm one of the few left who know how to
run the business. I got some transportation back, all 21 speeds worth.
I'm back to working on the makeover and underlying changes that'll
bring new life to the e-Zine! with the morsels of spare time I get
(sorry, folks, I'm more than a month off even my second personal goal
:-(
 I'm also working for my own personal satisfation in accomplishment,
so I haven't exactly been paying attention to how "dead" OS/2 is
supposed to be (bummer, Brad).

 So there you go. Boo hoo. Life sucks. Now it's back to work.

 As for Ronny Ko and Tim Martin:

 Fuck you.

 :-)

Regards,

Chris Wenham - [e-mail]
Editor-In-Chief for OS/2 e-Zine!
http://www.os2ezine.com/
The views expressed are mine.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OS/2 e-Zine! (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                 24-Sep-99 21:27:17
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 20:01:11
Subj: Re: The Linux agenda revealed...

From: [e-mail] (Donovan Rebbechi)

On 24 Sep 1999 04:31:28 GMT, Stephen S. Edwards II wrote:

>Apologies if I offended you, Donovan,

No offence taken.

>   Yes, I would consider
>anyone who takes it upon themselves to speak out about Linux to at
>least be affiliated with the Linux Community.

This doesn't make them a *representative* of that community -- merely
a member.

And if you're including these goons in the "linux community", it's
not really fair to compare them to Microsoft ( you should compare them to
windows users instead )

> That's why it's
>important to make sure you're actually doing some good by speaking
>out...

I agree with this. I'd also agree that his behaviour makes linux look bad.
But it's also important to keep in mind the fact that he is not a
representative of the linux community.

>No, they're not... now take a look at some of the ads in Linux journal...
>take a look at what many advocates say... much of it is "emotional" in
>varying degrees, from what I can see.

Ads aren't supposed to be "technical". I wouldn't call MS's ads  "technical"
either.

But if you look at the arguments Eric Raymond makes, I wouldn't call
them "emotional".

--
Donovan

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                   24-Sep-99 22:57:11
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 21:16:29
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: [e-mail] (Pascal Haakmat)

Peter Ammon wrote:

>> But what happens if I design a tool for some purpose X, and such a design
>> entails the easy creation of viruses (or manslaughter)? The fact of the
>> matter is that any computer is a tool for virus creation. The only way to
>> overcome that is to limit it's expressive capabilities, at which point it
is
>> no longer a general purpose computer.
>
>Look at Java.  (If I say something stupid, just correct, don't flame).
>Why are there no Java viruses?  It's because of the Java sandbox.  You
>can grant Java apps access outside of the sandbox, but you have to
>explicitly grant it.  Java is not limited in its expressive capabilities
>yet is still secure.

Java is only sort of secure when you limit it's expressiveness. For example,
when you prohibit access to the local filesystem and external networking (as
is done in applets). I say sort of secure, because the security relies on a
security model that runs on a machine with unlimited expressiveness. As
such, the security model could easily be expressed in terms detrimental to
security.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: A2000 Kabeltelevisie en Telecommunicatie (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                               24-Sep-99 16:41:02
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 21:16:29
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: Craig Kelley <[e-mail]>

"Chad Myers" <[e-mail]> writes:

> But they DO in NT, and VIRII don't work in NT, unless you're logged in as
> Admin.
>
> By the way, the saying that you should create a non-root user in UNIX and
> only
> log in as root to do admin tasks, holds true in NT.
>
> If you have NT permissions set properly, and you're not logged in as admin,
> the
> same holds true.

Too bad the default permissions are so atrocious.

I couldn't even imagine a unix box going out the door with 777 on the
root drive...

--
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]                               24-Sep-99 18:10:23
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 21:16:29
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Tim Mayer wrote:
>
> Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> news:[e-mail]...
> > Tim Mayer wrote:
> > >
> > > Marty <[e-mail]> wrote in message
> > > news:[e-mail]...
> [SNIP]
> > >
> > > Considering the millions of windoze users, what quantity does "many"
> imply.
> > > I highly doubt that a large percentage of windoze users have switched to
> a
> > > more secure alternative. If they did, what alternative did the "many"
> adopt?
> >
> > It applies to those that have switched (aka the <former> users).  "Many"
> > people have switched to other OS's, but of those, many <of them> have had
> > an analogous situation to what I have described.
>
> But can you quantify many?

42

> What OS did they turn to?

Are you trying to deny that many people have switched from windoze to an
alternative OS?  Are you implying that possibly only a meer handful have?

> > > Keep in mind that windoze is the target of one of the more organized
> hacker
> > > groups called the "Cult of the Dead Cow" with products like "Back
> Orifice
> > > 2000" (http://www.microsoft.com/security/bulletins/ms98-010.asp). If
> > > Microsofts security appears to be the weakest, it may be because it is
> one
> > > of the most attacked (and hated).
> >
> > Or it may be because it is.  Perhaps the reason h4x0r groups for other
> OS's
> > aren't so organized is because they're having a much more difficult time.
> >
>
> Unlikely. I would expect that organization is directly proportional to the
> difficulty of the task.

I take it you meant "wouldn't".

> Consider the cDc, they have actually written and
> publish software. Have they done this because it was easy -- I doubt it. I
> think that they did it out of dislike for windoze regardless of the
> difficulty.

I've read CERT reports (http://www.cert.org) on many holes in Microsoft
products.  I don't remember seeing any that made me say to myself, "Wow!
How did anyone figure that out?"

> IMHO, windoze security has been more tested than any other OS,
> which might give the false impression of it being less secure.

Possibly, but tested by whom?  Microsoft or hackers?  If I were running
windoze, I'd feel a lot more comfortable if Microsoft were finding more
holes than the hackers were.

How can you say that an OS like Linux may not be as "tested" as windoze?
Or OS/2 for that matter?  I see extraneous packets whizzing down my cable
modem all the time that have no legitimate business arriving at my
machine.  Most hackers don't know what OS you're running before they
actually break into your system.  Selectively going after and targetting a
windoze box (as opposed to a box running another OS) is difficult without
insider knowledge of the box you're attacking.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                 24-Sep-99 19:01:07
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 21:16:29
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: [e-mail] (The Lord Of Lemmings)

In article <[e-mail]>, Craig Kelley
<[e-mail]> wrote:

>"Chad Myers" <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>> But they DO in NT, and VIRII don't work in NT, unless you're logged in as
>> Admin.
>>
>> By the way, the saying that you should create a non-root user in UNIX and
>> only
>> log in as root to do admin tasks, holds true in NT.
>>
>> If you have NT permissions set properly, and you're not logged in as admin,
>> the
>> same holds true.
>
>Too bad the default permissions are so atrocious.
>
>I couldn't even imagine a unix box going out the door with 777 on the
>root drive...

777 -- king of kings, host of hosts?

--
|        Scientia Claus, Lord Of Lemmings <[e-mail]>          |
|"The Library is a sphere whose exact center is any one of its hexagons|
|   and whose circumference is inaccessible." -- Jorge Luis Borges     |
|"One feels as if one is dissolved and merged into nature." -- Einstein|

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Cornell University (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                         24-Sep-99 22:18:12
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 21:16:29
Subj: Updated Drivers

From: [e-mail] (Anecdoter)

IBM has updated their OS/2 drivers for this month.  The bootom of the page
states 101 new drivers, 22 updated.   Most of these updates are for LAN
adapters, although their is an update to the I2O SCSI driver, and some USB new
drivers.

Here's the link: http://service.software.ibm.com/os2ddpak/html/index.htm

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: AOL http://www.aol.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                   24-Sep-99 22:37:09
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 21:16:29
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: [e-mail] (Pascal Haakmat)

Mayor Of R'lyeh wrote:

>>I would say that morally, it is wrong to kill a man, period.
>
>Even in self-defense?

Yes, morally, that's wrong. Of course, when you are in danger of losing your
own life, morally, there's no difference between your life being lost or the
life of your attacker being lost. So both defending and not defending
yourself are morally equally unjustifiable. In which case you can justify
self-defense on other, non-moral grounds.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: A2000 Kabeltelevisie en Telecommunicatie (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                         24-Sep-99 16:33:16
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 21:16:29
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: "Wren" <[e-mail]>

Pascal Haakmat <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
> I would say that morally, it is wrong to kill a man, period.

Morally, its wrong to kill any living being.

-Wren



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: EarthLink Network, Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                         24-Sep-99 16:29:24
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 21:16:29
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: "Wren" <[e-mail]>

Tim Mayer <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:7selq9$usp$[e-mail]...
> Consider that the person who makes the bullet is for example the "cDc",
the
> person who fires the shot is the hacker and the kevlar vest is the
security
> system built into the OS. Does this mean that the hacker is totally to
blame
> in this scenario?

The only problem I see with this Kevlar vest analogy is that normal people
don't own or wear kevlar vests at all.  If someone were to come up to you
and shoot you, would it be your fault for not owning a kevlar vest or the
gunman's fault for shooting you?

I suppose now people are going to start saying that JFK's death was his own
fault for not wearing "proper" protection.

-Wren



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: EarthLink Network, Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                   24-Sep-99 23:46:21
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 21:16:29
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: [e-mail] (Pascal Haakmat)

Wren wrote:

>> I would say that morally, it is wrong to kill a man, period.
>
>Morally, its wrong to kill any living being.

Yes, perhaps, if you can define what is a living being.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: A2000 Kabeltelevisie en Telecommunicatie (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                                24-Sep-99 23:59:24
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 21:16:29
Subj: Re: Anti-Windows t-shirts at www.dumbentia.com

From: Jeff Hall <[e-mail]>

Except that this site also has a mildly anti-linux faux-poster called Linux is
More Geeky,
see  http://www.dumbentia.com/pdflib/moregeeky.pdf
You don't suppose this fellow hates Linux as well as NT?   He also seems to
hate luvable Ty Beany babies.

Steve Sheldon: you must be seething with pure hatred for this www.dumentia.com
site!!!
Wait, maybe these are just parodies.  Oh, never mind.

Steve Sheldon wrote:

> "ccondon" <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> >Dumbentia - http://www.dumbentia.com
>
> >Do you hate Windows? Do you dislike Microsoft with a vengeance? Then take a
> >look at the new anti-Windows t-shirts now available at Dumbentia.
>
>  Are you a Linux zealot?  Does your hatred consume you?  Do you read Moby
> Dick and see yourself in the position of Captain Ahab?
>
>  Did you believe the Emperor when he said "embrace your hatred"?
>
>  If so, then these t-shirts are for you!
>
> --
> Steve Sheldon                          email: [e-mail]
> BSCS/MCSE                              url: http://www.sheldon.visi.com

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: [e-mail]                       24-Sep-99 23:03:06
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 21:16:29
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: [e-mail]

In article <7sgaqg$13s8$[e-mail]>,
  "Jake Sink" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > Why not? Almost any rifle cartridge and a few of the larger pistol
> > cartridges can go through a kevlar jacket as easily as it goes
through
> > a cotton one. Kevlar was never meant to be effective against
anything
> > but small to mid sized pistols.
> > >>
>
> Actually, there are spectra fiber (similar to kevlar (but better) but
not
> kevlar so maybe this is not on the point) jackets that will stop
multiple
> 9mm, (you won't feel much) and many high powered rifle shots.(they
will stop
> rifles)
>
>

Hm? Hm... Interesting. Give me time to let that little bit of trivia
sink in. Wow... that's... that's really something...

Say, can anybody help me out here? I must have missed it. At what point
did we all step into the Twilight Zone and this newsgroup became
comp.advocacy.firearms?!?

Oh, ignore me. It's Friday and I'm tired.

Maybe we could call it comp.advocacy.using.firearms.on.Microsofties...

-andrew


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]                                   25-Sep-99 00:02:19
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 21:16:29
Subj: Re: Dispute this truth and I will only pity you

From: [e-mail] (Pascal Haakmat)

Eric Remy wrote:

>>> I would say that morally, it is wrong to kill a man, period.
>>
>>Morally, its wrong to kill any living being.
>
>So we should sit around (mouth covered to avoid inhaling bugs) and starve
>to death?  I suppose it would be better of course to simply stop breathing
>since every breath results in the death of countless bacteria, but you
>can't kill yourself that way.

Actually I was told by a friend of the existence of a 'religious' group of
women somewhere in Asia that adhere relentlessly to the idea of human
responsibility. Yes, they cover their mouth to avoid inhaling bugs.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: A2000 Kabeltelevisie en Telecommunicatie (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

+============================================================================+