OS/2 Shareware BBS: 15 Message/15-Message.zip/UU990925.zip/Uh990924.txt

Text File | 1999-09-26 | 151KB | 3,918 lines

                   comp.os.os2.programmer.misc      (Usenet)

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 17-Sep-99 11:33:06
  To: All                                               18-Sep-99 01:08:04
Subj: Re: PM window resizing/clipping : seems backwards...

From: [e-mail] (Bruce LaZerte)

On Fri, 17 Sep 1999 10:33:55, Ian Harvey <[e-mail]> wrote:

> case WM_CALCVALIDRECTS:
>    return MRFROMLONG(CVR_ALIGNBOTTOM | CVR_ALIGNLEFT);

Works perfectly. That's exactly what I was looking for.
Many thanks!

(this is the most useful list ...)

----------------------
Bruce LaZerte
Muskoka,Ontario,Canada
freshwat at muskoka dot com

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                  17-Sep-99 16:04:09
  To: All                                               18-Sep-99 01:08:05
Subj: Editor to use with Watcom C++ v11

From: [e-mail]

Hello,

I just picked up from a friend a copy of Watcom C++ version 11.  Since
Sybase has marked the product as dead he's moving on to VisualAge from
IBM ...

Anyway, I'm wondering what editor I should buy for use within the IDE?
It defaults to EPM which is nice, but it has some quirks when used
with my system.  Namely the various WPS addons like NPS Enhancer,
Styler/2 ...

Any ideas?
Kon?
Mr Ed?
Preditor?

Thanks for any info ...
Gregory L. Marx
[e-mail]

PS - I'm experienced using Sibyl/2 from SpeedSoft (a Pascal dev tool)
but I thought it would be best to pickup a good c++ compiler.  I want
to be able to help in anyway I can should StarDock get the go ahead
for the new Warp Client.  Brad Wardell has hinted that they would be
setting up some kind of Linux-like website for programmers to
help/share/fix/add and I want to be part of that effort.

Is Watcom a good way to go?

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

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

From: [e-mail]                               17-Sep-99 15:16:24
  To: All                                               18-Sep-99 04:37:14
Subj: Re: EMXBIND earns its name...

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Ilya Zakharevich wrote:
>
> [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to Marty
> <[e-mail]>],
> who wrote in article <[e-mail]>:
> > One more side issue:
> > Has anyone else noticed that when you run GCC on a file that takes a long
> > time to compile that the VIO window in which you ran it doesn't like to
> > give up the window focus?  Any ideas why this could happen?
>
> This happens with many compute-intensive applications (but I could not
> reproduce it with small examples).  I think it is a question of wrong
> priority of the PM thread (?) which is responsible for switching
> windows.
>
> Somehow long-running foreground VIO application without I/O
> "accumulates" (?) higher priority than this thread.  When you click
> outside the VIO window, this thread is ready-to-run, but of too small
> priority, so it goes into "starved" state.  After each MAXWAIT (from
> config.sys) seconds its priority is bumped up one notch, until it is
> above the priiority of the VIO application,
>
> On my systems MAXWAIT==3, and I usually need to wait circa 6 sec for
> window switch to happen.
>
> Ilya

That sounds about right.  Does this also explain why, while running some
compute-intensive apps I see VIO programs such as TOP (which is not very
compute-intensive itself) executing very slowly when they are in the
background, but when they are brought to the foreground they execute at
normal speed?

> P.S.  Aha, maybe it is a thread in some PM enhancer, not PM itself?
>       I'm using NPSWPS.

I don't run any such enhancers myself.  It has to be something internal
to the PM or core OS.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                          17-Sep-99 18:33:27
  To: All                                               18-Sep-99 04:37:14
Subj: Re: EMXBIND earns its name...

From: [e-mail] (Ilya Zakharevich)

[A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to Marty
<[e-mail]>],
who wrote in article <[e-mail]>:
> One more side issue:
> Has anyone else noticed that when you run GCC on a file that takes a long
> time to compile that the VIO window in which you ran it doesn't like to
> give up the window focus?  Any ideas why this could happen?

This happens with many compute-intensive applications (but I could not
reproduce it with small examples).  I think it is a question of wrong
priority of the PM thread (?) which is responsible for switching
windows.

Somehow long-running foreground VIO application without I/O
"accumulates" (?) higher priority than this thread.  When you click
outside the VIO window, this thread is ready-to-run, but of too small
priority, so it goes into "starved" state.  After each MAXWAIT (from
config.sys) seconds its priority is bumped up one notch, until it is
above the priiority of the VIO application,

On my systems MAXWAIT==3, and I usually need to wait circa 6 sec for
window switch to happen.

Ilya

P.S.  Aha, maybe it is a thread in some PM enhancer, not PM itself?
      I'm using NPSWPS.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Department of Mathematics, The Ohio State Univers
(1:109/42)

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

From: [e-mail]                                       17-Sep-99 11:07:18
  To: All                                               18-Sep-99 06:00:27
Subj: IBM Advanced Interface Design Guide-OS2

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

From the 1989 IBM Systems Application Architecture Library, this mint book
was written for OS2 programmeris in mind, but is an excellent basic manual
for any one involved with building user interfaces. A nice book to add to
you IBM OS2 collection.

http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=164690812

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 18-Sep-99 12:01:07
  To: All                                               18-Sep-99 11:03:06
Subj: Re: Editor to use with Watcom C++ v11

From: [e-mail] (Bruce LaZerte)

On Fri, 17 Sep 1999 16:04:18, [e-mail] wrote:

> Anyway, I'm wondering what editor I should buy for use within the IDE?
> Mr Ed?

I'm using MrEd but not with Watcom's IDE...
I believe that it's shareware so you can try it out.
Last time I looked: http://www.utopia-planitia.de/indexus.html

----------------------
Bruce LaZerte
Muskoka,Ontario,Canada
freshwat at muskoka dot com

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (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 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 21:46:29
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 06:48:22
Subj: *.c versus *.cpp and libraries - EMX

From: [e-mail] (Bruce LaZerte)

I have a C program that links to two third party libraries of functions.
It compiles fine with the EMXGNU compiler whether I use the *.c or *.cpp
extension.

(I was just playing around to see what different warnings I would get with
the GNU C versus the C++ compiler. Each has different warnings...)

Anyway I noticed that while the *.obj file compiled as a C program links
fine with both libraries and produces an executable, when compiled as a C++
program the object file would only link with one of the libraries. The
functions in the other lib could not be found.

The calls to the linker are the same...

Any ideas as to why and what?

----------------------
Bruce LaZerte
Muskoka,Ontario,Canada
freshwat at muskoka dot com

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (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]                               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]                                 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 23:54:11
  To: All                                               19-Sep-99 18:48:07
Subj: comm port monitoring

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

I have a device connected to comm port and my applicaton is sending and
receiving discontinous data over the comm port.
I need to write a small program to monitor the data flow over the comm port
and take appropriate action if no data flow over comm port for a period of
time. Since the data is discrete therefore the small program cannot be
running continuously without stopping.
Can anyone out there have any idea to cope with it or any other suggestion
to monitor the discrete data over comm port?

Thanks in advance for any inputs.

Regards,
Chris.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Pacific Supernet Limited (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 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 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 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 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 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 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]@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 20:53:10
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 00:54:19
Subj: Re: comm port monitoring

From: [e-mail] (Julian Thomas)

In <7s30ie$7vh$[e-mail]>, on 09/19/99
   at 11:54 PM, "chris" <[e-mail]> said:

>I need to write a small program to monitor the data flow over the comm
>port and take appropriate action if no data flow over comm port for a
>period of time. Since the data is discrete therefore the small program
>cannot be running continuously without stopping.
>Can anyone out there have any idea to cope with it or any other
>suggestion to monitor the discrete data over comm port?

SIO includes a program called PMLM that monitors the line.  Not sure how
to use it in an automated fashion, though....

--
 Julian Thomas: jt 5555 at epix dot net  http://home.epix.net/~jt
 remove numerics for email
 Boardmember of POSSI.org - Phoenix OS/2 Society, Inc  http://www.possi.org
 In the beautiful Finger Lakes Wine Country of New York State!
 -- --
 All computers wait at the same speed.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (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 22:42:09
  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 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 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 09:12:03
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 05:19:29
Subj: Re: EMXBIND earns its name...

From: Armin Lambacher <[e-mail]>

Marty <[e-mail]> writes:

> Ilya Zakharevich wrote:
> >
> > Somehow long-running foreground VIO application without I/O
> > "accumulates" (?) higher priority than this thread.  When you click
> > outside the VIO window, this thread is ready-to-run, but of too small
> > priority, so it goes into "starved" state.  After each MAXWAIT (from
> > config.sys) seconds its priority is bumped up one notch, until it is
> > above the priiority of the VIO application,
> >
> > On my systems MAXWAIT==3, and I usually need to wait circa 6 sec for
> > window switch to happen.
> >
> > Ilya
>
> That sounds about right.  Does this also explain why, while running some
> compute-intensive apps I see VIO programs such as TOP (which is not very
> compute-intensive itself) executing very slowly when they are in the
> background, but when they are brought to the foreground they execute at
> normal speed?

I have this on my system, too, but I noticed that I can switch the windows
fast if I use Ctrl-Esc an then choose from the process list. Do others
experience this also?

>
> > P.S.  Aha, maybe it is a thread in some PM enhancer, not PM itself?
> >       I'm using NPSWPS.
>
> I don't run any such enhancers myself.  It has to be something internal
> to the PM or core OS.
>
> - Marty

No enhancers here

Armin


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Armin Lambacher                                 email: [e-mail]

"Ich sag' nicht viel, aber was ich sag' ist Quatsch." (Pippi Langstrumpf)

"He, der Kerl hat 'ne Meise, aber Rueckenwind!" (thomas d)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Rechenzentrum der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft in Garc
(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 09:51:24
  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 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 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 11:57:29
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 14:52:05
Subj: Re: *.c versus *.cpp and libraries - EMX

From: [e-mail] (Bruce LaZerte)

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 01:51:19, Hubert Chan <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> The way to fix this in the other library is to write
>
> extern "C" {
> #include <headerfile.h>
> }
>
> where headerfile.h is the header file of the library that doesn't link
> properly.

That fixed it.  (I luv this list ...)
And you're right, the other header file already had the code

Many thanks, Bruce L.

----------------------
Bruce LaZerte
Muskoka,Ontario,Canada
freshwat at muskoka dot com

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

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

From: [e-mail]                          20-Sep-99 17:35:23
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 14:52:06
Subj: Already use hyper file ?

From: Franck Mesnier <[e-mail]>

Hi

Is there someone who has already used Hyper File for OS/2, it's a database
engine used under Dos, but there's equally exists equally under OS/2 ?

Thanks

-----------------------------------
From the OS/2 WARP v4 fp10
Desktop of Franck MESNIER
34140 LOUPIAN
FRANCE
[e-mail]
ICQ : 26368765
-----------------------------------

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

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

From: [e-mail]                                 20-Sep-99 19:06:01
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 20:06:16
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 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]                                  21-Sep-99 00:14:22
  To: All                                               20-Sep-99 21:25:21
Subj: Getting FilesystemID - unusual return-values???

From: Dirk Baumanns <[e-mail]>

Hi,

i use the API-Call DosQueryFSInfo for getting the ID of the FileSystem,
but i get only 0-values - - it makes no difference when i
select different drives with different filesystems (hpfs, fat ...)-
the value i get is always 0 -

so:
* are there errors in my c-code?
* are there errors in the api? (i read carefully the ibm redbooks, but
there are no hints, which tell me the id of a hpfs-drive ...)
* or is it just the wrong api-call to get such info?
* how can i get more information about the used filesystem (hpfs, fat)?


thanks, dirk

- i used the ibm c/c++ set 2.01 with latest fixes and warp4-

here is my short test-programm:


#define INCL_DOS
#define INCL_DOSFILEMGR
#define INCL_DOSDEVIOCTL
#define INCL_ERRORS

#include <os2.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <stdlib.h>

int main (void)
{
  FSALLOCATE info={0};
  APIRET  rc=NO_ERROR;
  ULONG fstyp=0;
  ULONG uldrivenum=0;
  int i=0;
  /* A=1 B=2 C=3 ... */
  printf("Type the number for the drive 1 2 3 ...\n");
  /* read number */
  scanf("%d", i);
  /* convert to ulong */
  uldrivenum=(ULONG) i;
  /* DosError(FERR_DISABLEHARDERR); */
  rc = DosQueryFSInfo(uldrivenum,
                      FSIL_ALLOC,
                      &info,
                      sizeof(info));
  /* DosError(FERR_ENABLEHARDERR); */
  if (rc == NO_ERROR)
  {
      printf("OK\n");
      fstyp=info.idFileSystem;

      printf("Filesystemid %12ld %12ld", fstyp, info.idFileSystem);

  } else
  {
    printf("Error: %d \n", rc);
    return 1;
  };

  return 0;
}

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: debitel.net - der Onlinedienst (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 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 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]                                 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]                                 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 09:09:09
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 10:41:07
Subj: LockupOptions

From: [e-mail] (John Poltorak)

Where can I find the layout for the PM_Lockup key LockupOptions in OS2.INI?

I would like to write a routine which will automatically update the lock up
password on a server periodically with a specified value.

--
John

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

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

From: [e-mail]                           21-Sep-99 12:17:09
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 10:41:07
Subj: Re: Editor to use with Watcom C++ v11

From: Csaba Raduly <[e-mail]>

Bruce LaZerte wrote:
>
> On Fri, 17 Sep 1999 16:04:18, [e-mail] wrote:
>
> > Anyway, I'm wondering what editor I should buy for use within the IDE?
> > Mr Ed?
>

Try FTE (Folding Text Editor). Has syntax highlighting.
Sources available. And it's free!

http://www.kiss.uni-lj.si/~k4fr0235/fte/

Csaba

--
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1
GCS/>GMU d- s:- a30 C++$ UL+ P+>+++ L++ E- W+ N++ o? K? w++>$ O++$ M-
V- PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X++ R* tv++ b++ DI+++ D++ G- e+++ h-- r-- !y+
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----

Csaba Raduly,    Software Developer (OS/2),    Sophos Anti-Virus
mailto:[e-mail]            http://www.sophos.com/
US Support +1 888 SOPHOS 9            UK Support [phone]
Life is complex, with real and imaginary parts.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: SOPHOS Plc (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 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 17:55:17
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:11
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 15:09:22
  To: All                                               21-Sep-99 17:28:12
Subj: Re: EMXBIND earns its name...

From: Marty <[e-mail]>

Ian Harvey wrote:
>
> Threads running in the foreground session get a priority boost within
> their priority class.  Hence when a TOP process running in the
> foreground session decides that it needs to refresh its screen (or
> whatever) it will get the CPU in preference to the compute intensive
> process executing in a background session.  (Conversely if TOP is in the
> background then it may have to wait - this all assumes that the threads
> involved haven't done something silly with their priority level or
> class.)

I know there is a setting in the config.sys that should change this and
I have set it off, but still see the symptoms described.  Does this
accumulation still happen in spite of this setting?  If so, what does
this setting actually do?

> Priority boosts are also granted for things like completed I/O events,
> keyboard input, window repainting, etc.  Maybe the combination of being
> in the foreground plus the disk I/O intensive nature of compilation is
> cause for the "accumulation" of higher priority that Ilya talks about.
> I would have thought that the thread responsible for the window switch
> was not a PM owned thread as such, but a normal application thread
> (previously blocked on WinGetMsg in the background with therefore no
> priority boost) responding to a mouse click message by calling
> WinSetFocus.

Actually, while it's crunching on the disk heavily is when it is the
most responsive.  It's when it's crunching in memory that it gets
"sticky."  But as you and Illya say, this may be due to accumulation
from the previous "disk crunching" periods.

As far as focus switching goes, I can wrestle the focus away from it
with the asynch window focus change option enabled, but the VIO window
still has a highlight around it and the cursor still is visible and
flashes.  Very bizarre quirk.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(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]                     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]                                 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 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: [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 11:03:08
  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 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]                             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 22:25:27
  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 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]                     23-Sep-99 01:42:08
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 16:41:02
Subj: Re: Apache and OS/2: is it realistic

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

On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 20:50:12 GMT, [e-mail] wrote:

>I am looking at developing web access to databases, but I don't want
>to abandon OS/2 yet. It looks to me like Domino and the Go webserver
>are both out of the running, because they have no future.
>Does anyone have any experience using databases with Apache for OS/2?
>What will I need to get started?  Is it realistic to think that I could put
>something together using Apache and some databases and tools
>ported from Unix to OS/2 or do I need to switch to Linux now?

I don't see why you can't use Apache for OS/2...  I use it here, and I've got
mostly Perl CGI scripts running.  I have used REXX, but that doesn't really
go too far without writing a bunch of modules to do the CGI::* functions from
Perl.  Unfortunately, DB2 for OS/2 doesn't seem to ship with Perl support
directly.  That said, you *can* access DB2's REXX interface, with a little
bit of effort.  I know I've done this type of thing (accessing REXX from
inside Perl), but can't seem to find my sample code.

That said, I also have another box running Linux, and am thinking of moving
it all over.  Unfortunately, I have my http, ftp, and BBS all linked to one
another, and it'll likely be difficult to move it over.
---
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]                               23-Sep-99 13:50:13
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:00
Subj: Re: Apache and OS/2: is it realistic

From: [e-mail] (Esther Schindler)

On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 20:14:49, Leonardo <[e-mail]> wrote:

| I think this should be out pretty soon since WebSphere 3.0 and Visual Age
Java
| 3.0 are almost out of the door.

WebSphere 3.0 is already shipping, here in the U.S. Are you saying
that there will be an OS/2 version Real Soon Now? (I was under the
impression that there wasn't, and I'd be happy to be mistaken.)

--Esther


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                   23-Sep-99 15:00:00
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: Apache and OS/2: is it realistic

From: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]>, Leonardo <[e-mail]> writes:
>This is the reason why you should stay with OS/2. I work for IBM developing
>e-bussiness solutions here in Chile. Domino Go Webserver is not going to be
>supported anymore because of this IBM is developing their IBM Http Server for
>OS/2 (based on Apache) using natives threads (the same goes for Windows) and
>the new APIs for socket programming.
>I think this should be out pretty soon since WebSphere 3.0 and Visual Age
Java
>3.0 are almost out of the door.

Thansk very much for that piece of information.  This is the best news I have
had for some time.  My impression, on reading the material about WSeB in my
mail and onit  their website, was that it would not be a serious contender for

Web business because  (a) Go Webserver would no longer be supported,
(b) there was no Apache port offered, and (c) the Websphere app server and
Websphere studio they were offering fo NT were not available for WSeB
either (at least not in a current version).

If they are going to start making usable tools available, then I will be more
than happy to stay with Warp- I have a considerable investment in it already.
Thanks again



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

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

From: [e-mail]                                   23-Sep-99 15:07:11
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:01
Subj: Re: Apache and OS/2: is it realistic

From: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]>, "Darin
McBride" <[e-mail]> writes:

>I don't see why you can't use Apache for OS/2...  I use it here, and I've got
>mostly Perl CGI scripts running.  I have used REXX, but that doesn't really
>go too far without writing a bunch of modules to do the CGI::* functions from
>Perl.  Unfortunately, DB2 for OS/2 doesn't seem to ship with Perl support
>directly.  That said, you *can* access DB2's REXX interface, with a little
>bit of effort.  I know I've done this type of thing (accessing REXX from
>inside Perl), but can't seem to find my sample code.

Thanks for the quick reply.  I have managed to get Apache for OS/2 1.2.4
 and Perl running, but I haven't figured out how to get a database hooked
up to it.  More to the point, I am wondering which database will be the
easiest to connect to Apache via Perl.  Have you any experience with the
OS/2 port of MySQL?

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

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

From: [e-mail]                            23-Sep-99 20:37:07
  To: All                                               23-Sep-99 20:16:02
Subj: Re: Apache and OS/2: is it realistic

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

On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 20:50:12 GMT, [e-mail] wrote:

>I am looking at developing web access to databases, but I don't want
>to abandon OS/2 yet. It looks to me like Domino and the Go webserver
>are both out of the running, because they have no future.
>Does anyone have any experience using databases with Apache for OS/2?
>What will I need to get started?  Is it realistic to think that I could put
>something together using Apache and some databases and tools
>ported from Unix to OS/2 or do I need to switch to Linux now?

There is no need to switch to linux, you can run Apache on OS/2 without any
problems. For example os2.org (and soon also netlabs.org) is running Apache
for OS/2 with MySQL as backend and PHP3 as connection between MySQL and
Apache. PHP3 is really easy to learn and if you know SQL, MySQL shouldn't be
a
problem.

Some links you should check:

Apache for OS/2 with PHP3 & MySQL support: http://silk.apana.org.au/apache/
PHP3 Homepage: http://www.php.net
MySQL Homepage: http://www.mysql.org
MySQL for OS/2: http:;//www.netlabs.org/projects/mysql.html (more recent
version is at Hobbes, http://hobbes.nmsu.edu).

So you see that OS/2 is a great platform for this :)

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 20:13:26
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:03
Subj: Re: Tell apart two print screen keys

From: Jonesy <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote a LOT OF DUPLICATES.

So, are you doing this via some sort of cron?

0      [  12]  Tell apart two print screen keys       [e-mail]
1      [  12]  Tell apart two print screen keys       [e-mail]
2      [  12]  Tell apart two print screen keys       [e-mail]
3      [  12]  Tell apart two print screen keys       [e-mail]
4      [  12]  Tell apart two print screen keys       [e-mail]
5      [  12]  Tell apart two print screen keys       [e-mail]
6      [  12]  Tell apart two print screen keys       [e-mail]

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: RMI.net (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 23:40:23
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:04
Subj: Re: Apache and OS/2: is it realistic

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

On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 15:07:22 GMT, [e-mail] wrote:

>In <[e-mail]>, "Darin
McBride" <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>>I don't see why you can't use Apache for OS/2...  I use it here, and I've
got
>>mostly Perl CGI scripts running.  I have used REXX, but that doesn't really
>>go too far without writing a bunch of modules to do the CGI::* functions
from
>>Perl.  Unfortunately, DB2 for OS/2 doesn't seem to ship with Perl support
>>directly.  That said, you *can* access DB2's REXX interface, with a little
>>bit of effort.  I know I've done this type of thing (accessing REXX from
>>inside Perl), but can't seem to find my sample code.
>
>Thanks for the quick reply.  I have managed to get Apache for OS/2 1.2.4

Um, 1.3.9 is available - I'd highly recommend using it.  ;-)  No point in
starting with an obsolescent version when the newest version doesn't cost any
more.  :->

> and Perl running, but I haven't figured out how to get a database hooked
>up to it.  More to the point, I am wondering which database will be the
>easiest to connect to Apache via Perl.  Have you any experience with the
>OS/2 port of MySQL?

No.  Mind you, I may be somewhat biased.  You see, I work for DB2.  ;-)
---
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]                               23-Sep-99 22:14:13
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 04:26:04
Subj: Re: and now I know it is a scam [nt]

From: Marty <[e-mail]>



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (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 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]                                   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 15:03:19
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 13:22:29
Subj: Re: Apache and OS/2: is it realistic

From: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]>, "Darin
McBride" <[e-mail]> writes:

>
Snip
>
  Mind you, I may be somewhat biased.  You see, I work for DB2.  ;-)
>---
I did do some development work with DB2 for OS/2 in one of its earlier
incarnations (2.1) but it seems like overkill for the little projects I am
working on now.  However, if these projects do turn out to be worthwhile, then
I plan to review whether they can be moved to DB2 without too much pain.
Thanks again.


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

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

From: [e-mail]                                   24-Sep-99 14:55:25
  To: All                                               24-Sep-99 13:22:29
Subj: Re: Apache and OS/2: is it realistic

From: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]>, "Adrian Gschwend"
<[e-mail]> writes:
>On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 20:50:12 GMT, [e-mail] wrote:
>
>
>Some links you should check:
>
>Apache for OS/2 with PHP3 & MySQL support: http://silk.apana.org.au/apache/
>PHP3 Homepage: http://www.php.net
>MySQL Homepage: http://www.mysql.org
>MySQL for OS/2: http:;//www.netlabs.org/projects/mysql.html (more recent
>version is at Hobbes, http://hobbes.nmsu.edu).
>
>So you see that OS/2 is a great platform for this :)
>

Thanks for the links- I had found some of the things I needed but not enough.
This should get me the rest of the way.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: MBnet Networking Inc. (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)

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

+============================================================================+