--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 207 OS2 LAN Ref: DEL00007 Date: 10/10/96 From: MACK NETHKIN Time: 09:01pm \/To: JAMES LAINE (Read 4 times) Subj: OS/2 WARP CONNECT peer RE: OS/2 WARP CONNECT peer BY: James Laine to All on Tue Oct 08 1996 17:14:20 > - The other machine uses Windows For Workgroups v3.11 > - Most applications are Windows 3.x based applications. > - Each opperating system is configured to start networking on startup. > > Now, the network file and printer sharing work just fine with WFW, Win95, > and OS/2. > > The disapointment is the gross lack of responce speed from OS/2, and the > disgusting ammount of hard drive activity! Upgrade to 16megs of ram. > Now I know that Multimedia Support for OS/2 will require more memory and > system resources, but I have not installed multimedia support. HPFS requires more ram too... I would never recommend a dual file system setup (HPFS and FAT) on a machine with only 8 megs of ram... Just by that, you've given up 400k to HPFS, PLUS 512k, maybe even 1024k to an HPFS cache, ALONG with another 1024k or whatever to a FAT cache... Without seeing your config.sys, I'm just guessing at the size of your cache's, but here's a good example of where your ram went. 4megs OS/2 needs to just boot. That leaves you with 4 megs left. ANd 2 of that 4, you're allocating to disk cache's between the HPFS driver and cache, and FAT cache. = 2megs left for you to do stuff in? Hardly... > Why, on the same hardware, is OS/2 signifigantly less responsive than > Windows 95? OS/2 is a more powerful and robust opperating system, but > come on! 4 to 7 minutes after power-on befor I can actually do anything > compared to Windows 95's 1.5 minutes is just disgusting. And opening > a folder or program takes a good 15 to 25 seconds for each object! I run '95, NT server v4.0 and Warp v4.0. NT and '95 have 16megs of ram, and my OS/2 machine runs 32. Not that you need 32 for your os/2 machine, but I do, since that's my main machine. On bootup, I have 13 programs being ran, besides the fact that I am all HPFS, running 2meg hpfs cache, all the networking stuff I load (TCPIP for my LAN, as well as dial-up, plus Netbios) all the multimedia stuff, the voicetype also... '95 is great for what it does... running windows app's... However it doesn't multitask very well... The programs I run on my OS/2 machine run seamless, crash proof, and are smoothe running. I rarely wait on my machine. '95, just to minimize a program takes forever... And god help me if I run more one active program. I couldn't even imagine runnin my BBS on '95. It's too jittery. As far as bootup time... That irritates me when people go judging an operating system by how long it takes to boot. Do you shop for a car and judge them by how long they take to warm up? Me, personally? I never shut any of my machines off... And even if I did, boot up wouldn't bother me, since it's something that should only be done once a day. In an office environment, the solution is simple... turn on the computer, then go get your coffee. By the time the pot's hot, your PC's booted. > What can I do (short of upgrading the hardware) to improve the nasty > responce time of OS/2 Warp Connect running OS/2 Peer? Buy another 8 megs of ram. That's it. The difference will be night and day... > I am extremely disapointed by this the results of this operational > comparison of these operating systems on the same hardware. In all honesty, if you're running this computer in an office environment, and run mostly windows programs... why are you looking at OS/2? An office is business, and a business cares about making money; not about what OS they use. The computer I use OS/2 for does nothing but telecommunications. I run a 3 node BBS on it, as well as act's as a server for my network in my house. I have 5 gigs of hard drive space in it, and 10 cd roms online, and NT or '95 couldn't come close the performance and flexibility and stability that OS/2 has given me. My '95 machine I use solely for games, quicken for windows, Print Shop ensemble III printing (Incedently, the HP-855Cse that I print to is located on my OS/2 machine). It's my "Home" machine. My NT Server machine is my training tool. Since I build computers, and work for 2 computer outlet's, I need to know NT, Novell, '95, OS/2... So my third machine serves no purpose other then to give me a training platform. Something I can break, then fix... then break... :) -- Mack --- TRWMail v3 * Origin: [T]he [R]eal [W]orld BBS - OS/2 - Washington State (1:350/36) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 207 OS2 LAN Ref: DEL00008 Date: 10/10/96 From: MACK NETHKIN Time: 10:50pm \/To: MICHAEL LARSEN (Read 4 times) Subj: Warp peer to peer with Win95? RE: Warp peer to peer with Win95? BY: Michael Larsen to All on Sun Oct 06 1996 21:03:38 > Hello ! > > Is subj. possible? I have installed TCP/IP on both machines, but they cannot > see each other. Should I use another protocol? TCPIP is fine... but you must load a dameon on one machine, or both. OS/2 Warp Connect, or OS/2 v4.0 comes with all that you need... Win '95 only comes with client software... SO, without the server part... Client to Client just ain't happening... Also, with TCPIP you don't really "see" another machine... You attempt to telnet, ftp, http, or whatever to another machine, and it's either there or not... but it's not something that would appear in say, your network neighborhood. And you don't share drives with TCPIP. You FTP around... NETBIOS is for sharing drives... I run both TCPIP and NETBIOS on all 3 of my machines so that on my LAN I can share all my cdroms, all my hard drives, and my printer with any of the three computers... and I keep TCPIP loaded so when I'm on the internet, I can just "go to town" on any machine. :) -- Mack --- TRWMail v3 * Origin: [T]he [R]eal [W]orld BBS - OS/2 - Washington State (1:350/36) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 207 OS2 LAN Ref: DEL00009 Date: 10/15/96 From: GUSTAVO MUSLERA Time: 01:38am \/To: SCOTT DRAKE (Read 2 times) Subj: Help Needed Hi Scott, In a message of to All (), you wrote: SD> Also doe anyone know if there is a DNS server that will run under WARP v4, SD> Freeware maybe??? Bind for OS/2, freeware. You may find it in Hobbes or ftp.cdrom.com. Works for me :-) Bye, Gustavo. --- The-Box Point 0.15- PC * Origin: uuFido (4:850/3.7) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 207 OS2 LAN Ref: DEL00010 Date: 10/15/96 From: JIM GITZEN Time: 08:45am \/To: ALL (Read 2 times) Subj: Notes/2 Server? In order to use the Notes Mail CD that comes with 4.0, the documentation seems to indicate that the mail server must be a Notes server. Is that true? I'm interested in trying it for reading Internet mail that comes in to our firewall. That firewall machine is not a notes server, but does handle POP3. Would the Notes CD be of any use to me? --- GoldED/2 2.42.G1219+ * Origin: Graffiti on the BBS Wall * 317-448-2842 (1:201/20) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 207 OS2 LAN Ref: DEL00011 Date: 10/15/96 From: PHIL PATTENGALE Time: 09:26pm \/To: FRANK SEXTON (Read 2 times) Subj: Ftp and Telnet? -> However, I can't seem to ftp or telnet between them. Should -> I be able to do that using only the Warp 4.0 supplied -> software? The only thing I can recommend is to make certain that you've selected those services (ftpd and telnetd) in the TCP/IP config program. Phil --- GOMail v2.0 [94-0279] * Origin: The Graphics Shop - Graphics & DOOM (v.34+) (1:2201/23) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 207 OS2 LAN Ref: DEL00012 Date: 10/15/96 From: ALEC HERRMANN Time: 07:34pm \/To: DOUG VOGT (Read 2 times) Subj: 3Com and Lantastic cards Hello Doug, Replying to a message of Doug Vogt to All: DV> I've got an OS/2 network up using Lantastic AE-2 cards and came DV> across a 3Com 3C509B-TP card - 10BASE-T (RJ45) and thick coax DV> connectors. Is there any way to use the 3Com card with the Lantastic DV> stuff? No. Lantastic AE-2 and ethernet are two different types of media. Also, you can not connect coax (either thick or thin) to a 10BaseT only card. Regards, Alec --- FleetStreet 1.12 NR * Origin: The Nibble's Roost, Richmond BC 604-540-8048 (1:153/8086) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 207 OS2 LAN Ref: DEL00013 Date: 10/15/96 From: FRANK SEXTON Time: 07:00pm \/To: ALEC HERRMANN (Read 2 times) Subj: Inet and LAN Together -=> /* Quoting Alec Herrmann to Frank Sexton */ <=- FS> Do you know if there is a way I can use my Dial-up Inet FS> provider with TCP/IP at the same time I'm accessing my FS> other computer over a LAN with TCP/IP? FS> Every time I dial my Inet provider I get a system message FS> stating that "Your host has a LAN adapter configured. You FS> may not be able to access machines on the LAN with a FS> dial-up link establised". AH> The problem here is that your LAN DNS is not the same AH> as the dial-up DNS. Also, which address is your host AH> when you have both LAN and dial-up sessions? Your AH> serial port will have an 'address' and your lan AH> adaptor will have an 'address'. Most dial-up sessions AH> have an address automatically assigned to the serial AH> port by the provider and is unknown until connection AH> time. FS> Do you know if there is any way this can be configured FS> to allow both simultaneously? AH> Not that I know of. However, there might be an answer AH> somewhere if you consider that Warp 4 (Merlin) can AH> have multiple host addresses. Anybody have any ideas? It looks like I got this to work okay (eliminated the message) by making sure both my machine's addresses are in the HOSTS file. However, it occurs to me that if I changed my LANs address scheme to one that is NOT an official Internet address that maybe this wouldn't be a problem at all. Right now my two addresses are 128.203.1.10 and 128.203.1.20 (made them up). Perhaps I should have chosen something like 10.100.1.10 or something??? -Frank (fsexton@concentric.net - http://www.concentric.net/~fsexton) --- Blue Wave/OS2 v2.30 * Origin: Wildcard BBS,Thornton,CO HST/V34+ +1-303-252-0491 (1:104/725) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 207 OS2 LAN Ref: DEL00014 Date: 10/15/96 From: JIM WHITELAW Time: 07:05pm \/To: FRANK SEXTON (Read 2 times) Subj: Help Needed Thus spake the keyboard of Frank Sexton: FS> I am real new at all of this, but I've just now finished FS> setting up my first LAN using Warp 4.0 between my BBS FS> machine and my personal machine. All seems to be working FS> well...(file and printer sharing etc). However, when FS> creating the shares, I chose OK to apply the permissions to FS> all subdirectories. Should I have not done that? Congratulations on setting up your LAN. You will be surprised how in a couple of months, you will rely on it completely, and wonder how you ever worked without it. I think the way you shared the drives is fine for fixed drives. It only seems to make a difference on CD's where the disc can be removed. I'm not certain, but I suspect that the access controls applied to directories also incorporate the volume name as well. That's why new directories on the same volume remain accessible, but a new CD is not. --- * Origin: Starship Heart of Gold - Edmonton, AB [403]489-1735 (1:342/42) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 207 OS2 LAN Ref: DEL00015 Date: 10/16/96 From: PHIL PATTENGALE Time: 02:39am \/To: GUSTAVO MUSLERA (Read 2 times) Subj: Help Needed -> SD> Also doe anyone know if there is a DNS server that will run under -> v4, -> SD> Freeware maybe??? -> Bind for OS/2, freeware. You may find it in Hobbes or ftp.cdrom.com. -> Works for me :-) You're running which version under Warp v4? Did you compile it yourself, or use the enclosed .exe's? 4.9.4 (I think that is it) ran fine under Warp v3, but simply exits under Warp v4 for me. I'm running the enclosed .exe's. Phil --- GOMail v2.0 [94-0279] * Origin: The Graphics Shop - Graphics & DOOM (v.34+) (1:2201/23) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 207 OS2 LAN Ref: DEL00016 Date: 10/12/96 From: LEWIN EDWARDS Time: 09:23pm \/To: PHIL PATTENGALE (Read 2 times) Subj: Inet and LAN Together ->> Every time I dial my Inet provider I get a system message ->> stating that "Your host has a LAN adapter configured. You ->> may not be able to access machines on the LAN with a ->> dial-up link establised". ->> Do you know if there is any way this can be configured to ->> allow both simultaneously? PP> Try making sure your lan machines are listed in your %ETC%\hosts file. This isn't necessary. The warning is archaic, I think - I am running with TCP/IP 4 beta under Warp Connect (it's stable, don't knock it8-) and dialup and LAN access works fine simultaneously. I run ICS as a proxy on the dialup link, and machines on the LAN can use it without problems. -- Lewin A.R.W. Edwards [Team OS/2] Tel 0419320415 * 0412809805 * 0414927056 --- MsgedSQ/2 3.35 * Origin: ZWSBBS +61-3-98276881 (V.FC)/+61-3-98276277 (V.34) (3:634/396)