--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: E3V00001Date: 03/23/97 From: SCOTT LITTLE Time: 03:37pm \/To: JACK STEIN (Read 2 times) Subj: Cache Efficiency [ Quoting Jack Stein to Jamie Walker ] JW> Increasing performance is not something you see as valuable? JS> they've been around a good while, yet are rarely used in JS> non-networking systems. Why is that? Non-networking uses are generally more predictable than networking ones. JS> with. I firmily believe this "adequate size" cache is much smaller JS> than most people use as it is Usually true. Under MSDOS, a 128K cache was plenty for my system. The main feature of the cache was the write-behind capability, especially when moving files, and opening 300-400 database files sequencially (my BBS). However, by increasing this cache to around 4meg, my BBS can search the aformentioned databases in less than 1/6th the time it takes with 128K, as the majority of the databases are in memory, rather than just their locations and indexes. If the one piece of information is being accesses continually, a large enough cache to hold all/most of it is beneficial. But when many different files are being accessed at random, a minimal cache is fine. This is perhaps why OS/2 has the 2meg limit - since it's (supposed) to be used for heavy duty multitasking, the same bit of data is rarely in memory, or at least, not often enough to cache. JS> Moreover, I would be VERY skeptical of any dynamic cache desiged by JS> MS, as they never produced a good static cache. The fact you don't JS> run any MS products gives you an edge on having a good cache, dynamic JS> or not. My MS cache seems to work great for me. Loading, for example, Netscape Nav. for the first time in several hours takes around 12 seconds. If I close it, and wait a few minutes, reopening it takes around 4 seconds. (My cache is set to a max of 8meg, and a minumum of 2meg (via SYSTEM.INI settings). Being dynamic, Win95 is free to float around up and down between those values.) Regards, - Scott [ admin@cyberia.asstdc.com.au | www.asstdc.com.au/~cyberia ] --- FMail/Win32 1.22 * Origin: Cyberia <61-2-9534-1702> Internet, Fidonet, Battlenet.. 3:712/848) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: E3W00000Date: 03/25/97 From: OLIVER SCHWABEDISSEN Time: 10:20pm \/To: ALL (Read 2 times) Subj: TeamOS/2 Germany talked to John Soyring Hello All, This was translated from german to english. If you find any errors please forward them to hhf@teamos2.de, thanks. TeamOS/2 Germany talked to John Soyring Everyone who was with TeamOS/2 at the CeBIT computer fair in Hannover, Germany, in March this year already knows the news: Thomas Christinck and I talked to John Soyring. John Soyring, who has the official titel "director of the business unit Network Computing Project", but is maybe better described as the boss of Paul Giangarra, the leading head of OS/2 development, visited the CeBIT. I used his appearence at the IBM booth in Hall 2 to verify the words of an attendance of the meeting of the australian OS/2 usergroup. He reported that John Soyring said that Lou Gerstner has told a US bank that OS/2 will be supported by IBM for another ten years. I asked him if this was right and he told us that what he has said together with Lou Gerstner in person at this meeting with a US bank was, that OS/2 will be supported and developed by IBM "for the forseeable future, at least ten years from now". - So its not "ten years", but "at least ten years". I said to John Soyring that I feel that there are many people _inside_ IBM that doubt the future of OS/2 and he answered that he is aware of this problem. He said that there have been made tremendeous errors in the past and used the claim "the OS/2 kernel is frozen" as an example. He said that he was right here at the CeBIT to tell IBMers and IBM customers that OS/2 is not dead but has a bright future. One of the problems is, he said, that most of the people are informed by the press. IBM will start from now to deliver new technology or enhancements for OS/2 "every Web year" - every 90 days - "to keep the OS/2 plattform visible and vital". John Soyring said IBM has put about USD 150 Million into OS/2 development and resarch in the last year. This amount will not be changed in the next years. I said that IBM did put more money into OS/2 in 1995 than that and he answered that IBM has moved the OS/2 Client and OS/2 Server development to the same place: Of 900 OS/2 developers in Boca Raton, 720 were moved to the LAN developers in Austin, Texas, into a new building. All developers now meet at the coffeemachine and for lunch. Its six minutes from one developer to any other developer "including the elevator queue". John Soyring said the spirit is up, productivity is up and quality is up. And still IBM has saved money. "In the first nine months of 1996, we've produced more new code for OS/2 Warp 4 than we've had in any previous 10 years of development, we're going to continue our investment at a very high rate because the operating system is used extensively for mission critical applications among the world's 10,000 largest enterprises." Additionally, John Soyring told us that the "Hong Kong Chinese Bank", a Bank with about 34.000 (thirtyfourthousand) subsidiaries and about a million employees has signed with IBM and will move to OS/2 for all client PCs. The Hong Kong Chinese Bank is that big that one of the bigger banks in England, the Midland Bank, UK is just a subsidiary. With his assistant becoming more nerveous every minute, John Soyring now had to leave for the next appointment. But two minutes later he came back and said that also Lee Reiswig, before leaving the company, has said in public that OS/2 will be here to stay until the year 2005 at least. And with this he left. Created by Hendrik Fulda, hhf@teamos2.de Ciao, Oliver --- FleetStreet 1.18+ * Origin: Welcome to NASA Headquarters! Please log in: ..... (2:241/53) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: E3W00001Date: 03/25/97 From: RAY HYDER Time: 08:35pm \/To: DAVE RAYMOND (Read 2 times) Subj: Mac OS apps * Reply to a msg from Dave Raymond @ 1:3603/210 on 03-21-97 RH> Dave, maybe "withdrawn" was a little overstated... How about "has RH> ceased to compete"? DR> And when did they compete for the home market? RH> Zero advertizing, DR> See above. Seeing the above, I recall magazine ad's that at least suggested home targets. "a better window's than window's", "a better dos than dos" comes to mind. Were those ad's to corporate America? If so, they were flacid at best. If not, then what market/audience were they directed toward? RH> little internal IBM support, ^^^^^^^^ Read please. DR> I haven't had any problems getting support when I needed it. Internal IBM has not now, NOR, will they ever really support OS/2 except for their biggest corporate customers. Why? Because there is not an executive in IBM with testicles bigger than a pea. RH> abandonment by major product developers and service providers, DR> I haven't seen this. I've always gotten OS/2 drivers, or the DR> availability of them, with any piece of hardware that I've DR> purchased. I've also not had a problem getting software that I DR> wanted, to do the things that I've wanted to do. Well that's great! Neither have I! OS/2 works great here. No driver problems. How about applications? At some point in life ya gota think.. ... Well I got this hi-tech operating system... Let's see if I can do something productive with it... Darn, all the good applications are win 3.1 or win 95 based. Ehh? RH> and almost no name recognition in the home and small business DR> Success in what? These are not their target markets. I would suggest that IBM has NO target market for OS/2. AND, that they have no idea what the product is... - ray --- PC-RAIN 1.00 (6) * Origin: Rasputin Compute's, Georgetown, Georgia (1:18/666) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: E3W00002Date: 03/26/97 From: DAVID BOWERMAN Time: 06:48am \/To: SCOTT LITTLE (Read 2 times) Subj: Cache Efficiency Scott Little wrote in a message to Jack Stein: SL> If the one piece of information is being accesses continually, a SL> large enough cache to hold all/most of it is beneficial. But when SL> many different files are being accessed at random, a minimal cache SL> is fine. This is perhaps why OS/2 has the 2meg limit - since it's SL> (supposed) to be used for heavy duty multitasking, the same bit of SL> data is rarely in memory, or at least, not often enough to cache. That pretty much fits with what I found in my testing on both my OS/2 machines. However, delete the heavy duty -- even running 4 applications that were accessing the hard drive at the same time showed no performance increase with an increase in the HPFS cache size over 1.5MB. One possibility is that any increase in cache size over that point results in swapping applications which also slows things down. On the Windows 95 machine, running several applications resulted in the disk cache dropping below 1MB though I now have it set to an 1.5MB minimum which seems to be the point below which I start noticing perfomance declining. Regards, David --- timEd/2 1.10+ * Origin: Frog Hollow -- a scenic backroad off the Infobahn (1:153/290) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: E3W00003Date: 03/26/97 From: KEITH DOUGLAS Time: 02:50pm \/To: DAVID BOWERMAN (Read 2 times) Subj: Test Results DB> Simply saying that neither FAT under OS/2 or VFAT under DB> Windows 95 qualify as IFS -- there is no way to not install This is like HFS under MacOS. --- FMail/386 1.22 * Origin: The Chrono Zone (514)363-6298 Lasalle, QC, Canada (1:167/310) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: E3W00004Date: 03/22/97 From: ROGIER MEURS Time: 11:12am \/To: DENIS TONN (Read 2 times) Subj: Test Results Hi Denis! Denis Tonn wrote to Rogier Meurs (Monday March 17 1997 at 12:20) DT> This is the reason I don't consider FAT support in OS/2 as an IFS DT> (although the above diagram could also describe OS/2's DT> "architecture", or Dos 4, or NT, it's a pretty generic diagram). DT> So, is the VFAT support in the Win95 kernel or not? I have no further information on this than the diagram info in the Feature Review, so I couldn't say. Rogier http://lelystad.flnet.nl/~0meurs01/ --- FMail 1.20 Registered * Origin: File & Mailboard AD FUNDUM o32o-2821o4 Do-Ut-DeZ (2:2801/506) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: E3W00005Date: 03/24/97 From: GARTH MOSHER Time: 02:51pm \/To: BILL WOLFF (Read 2 times) Subj: BIOS 1024 CYCLINDER BUG! BW> GM> ... And WIN XX can't go anywhere but the first 1024 cylinders? BW> BW> Mine is past the first 1024 cylinders and it works. BW> BW> Got it straight now? No. There's no helping some people!! 8-> Garth --- KWQ/2 1.2f NR If you say nothing, no one will repeat it. * Origin: AdvancedOperatingSystems 503.370.4207 USRCourier336 >6GB (1:3406/25) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: E3W00006Date: 03/26/97 From: BRANDON PEN Time: 06:11pm \/To: ALL (Read 2 times) Subj: Which is the best? Hello. What operating do you think is the best? Please tell me, I would like to try a few out. I think that Windows 95 is the best, not only because it is a good system, but also because it comes with DOS v7.00!!! (Mine did, anyway). Please tell me. Also, what do you think of OS/2? If you are a Windows 95 buff, or just have it, please let me know this too. Thanks. ... Give me a gun, and nobody gets hurt... --- Blue Wave/DOS v2.20 * Origin: Sparky's BBS/2, WARPed in Oshawa (1:229/1) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: E3W00007Date: 03/26/97 From: DENIS FITZGIBBON Time: 11:15pm \/To: MACK BARSS (Read 2 times) Subj: Microsoft = Security Hell You do not have to buy a new computer to legally purchase 95 B a retailer can legally sell you a copy of 95B if you purchase a new motherboard or large capacity hard drive. As for installing the fat 32 the supplied install disk has all the required files to install fat32. Run fdisk from the install disk repartition your drive and reformat your drive and fat32 is installed --- * Origin: Melbourne PC User Group BBS (3:632/309) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: E3X00000Date: 03/27/97 From: JUSTIN BAUSTERT Time: 07:00pm \/To: BRANDON PEN (Read 2 times) Subj: Re: Which is the best? BP> would like to try a few out. I think that Windows 95 is the best, BP> not only because it is agood system, but also because it comes with BP> DOS v7.00!!! (Mine did, anyway). If you think DOS v7.00 is good, you should probably stick with v6.22.. Justin Baustert --- Telegard v3.02/mL * Origin: Courier Central \ Cashion, OK \ 405.433.2665 (1:147/92)