--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EB100022Date: 06/30/97 From: KEITH DOUGLAS Time: 05:11pm \/To: PETER MCNEILL (Read 2 times) Subj: I'm BACK!!!! PM> I'd give it up. You'll never win. Just take in the fact that PM> the echo is PM> moderated by OS/2 users and you'll know why. There is no I am not an OS/2 user. --- 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: EB100023Date: 06/30/97 From: KEITH DOUGLAS Time: 05:23pm \/To: JACK STEIN (Read 2 times) Subj: Re: OS/2 JS> made on earth for DOS/WIN/OS2/MAC that could not be made for JS> UNIX, and most of them probably are anyway. The fact Joe Mac OS does have several OS level features that are not found on other platforms. Applications that rely on them wouldn't be portable. (eg: things that rely on OSA, ColorSync, QuickDraw GX (some features of it anyhow), and a few others) --- 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: EB100024Date: 06/30/97 From: KEITH DOUGLAS Time: 05:25pm \/To: LEON KIRILIUK (Read 2 times) Subj: Re: I'm BACK!!!! LK> Hey.. look at the mac users.. they're happy with LK> their 3 crashes a LK> day, but do they complain?? NO! You know why? Because they Mac OS doesn't crash 3 times a day. --- 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: EB100025Date: 06/30/97 From: LAWRENCE LUCIER Time: 01:39pm \/To: ERIC JONES (Read 2 times) Subj: OS'es [1/2] [1/2] Eric Jones @ 1:147/92 wrote on 06-28-97 10:14 about *OS'es [1/2] [1/2]* EJ> the system going again because of some bizarre error that hosed EJ> the system. It's latest problem is that it just plain quit using EJ> her sound card for no apparent reason. My Win95 system has "lost" the CD-ROM. From what I have been reading this seems to be a common problem with Win95. My 7 year old daughter was about to play one of her games the other day, clicked on the icon and Win95 did a spontaneous reboot. --- Sqed/32 1.13b2/r15155 * Origin: T-Shirts 'N Genes BBS - (250) 748-3408 v32b v42b XA CM (1:340/204) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EB100026Date: 06/30/97 From: GREG COBB Time: 06:22pm \/To: LEON KIRILIUK (Read 2 times) Subj: I'm BACK!!!! Hi Leon! Saturday June 28 1997, Leon Kiriliuk babbled to Greg Cobb: GC>> Win 3.1 apps. There's also the same BS about there not being any GC>> good apps available. Ridiculous statements like this are what blow -> Well, I see where you're coming from. If you were using OS/2 since -> the days of 2.0, than Lotus Smartsuite would sure look like a "good" app. Sp you're saying it looks good with 95 but not OS/2? -> But you see, the reason win users say there are no good apps, is -> because they compare the quality, speed, compatibility, portability, -> flexability, support, and feature to feature of OS/2 apps to win apps, nd -> there simply ain't a comparison! OS/2 apps' are so full of holes it makes -> them look like swiss cheese! ;) If you need support from Lotus or MS, you're going to get it faster because it's a "Win 95" program???? I think not. Please explain what you mean by compatibility, portability, and flexability...And in detail. -> But then again OS/2 users always did have to live with being put n -> the back burner while win32 apps are developed first, and then when their -> turn comes around, the apps aren't complete. Wrong again, in many cases. -> After all, you folks do have -> to put up with Lotus Smartsuite and NS 2.02 (which are the 2 best things -> going for OS/2, and both are pathetic compared to win32 standards!) Bzzt. You're humiliating yourself again. --- 2SuaveEd v.0 * Origin: Picture This... Southaven, Ms (601)280-2805 - (1:123/434) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EB100027Date: 06/30/97 From: GREG COBB Time: 06:27pm \/To: LEON KIRILIUK (Read 2 times) Subj: I'm BACK!!!! Hi Leon! Saturday June 28 1997, Leon Kiriliuk babbled to Greg Cobb: GC>> the Win 95 users' credability to hell. Oh, and I forgot the one GC>> about one particular person who said he ran 3.x for 6 years and never GC>> had the first GPF. And should I also mention the person who said he -> I can believe that, if the only thing you run on it is Word 2.0! n -> fact, I've heard this happening in a few places.. for example, in a Dr.'s -> office. (A friend of mine where I upgraded her mom's 386 to a 486) She said -> that in all those years, it never crashed once. I can see that. I'll switch to 95 and not run anything critical so it won't crash. What an interesting concept. GC>> had the first GPF. And should I also mention the person who said he GC>> tried for what amounted to 250+ hours to get OS/2 set up and -> HEY! Some people can't get OS/2 to work no matter what! Did you ee -> some of the stuff IBM recommends you do before you install OS/2?!?!? Yeah, sure did. You know what? I did as they said and it installed just fine. -> Turn -> off the shadow cache in your BIOS! What the hell!?!? Some people don't -> even -> know what a BIOS is, yet alone how to get into it! One more reason to run 95. You don't have to know anything more than how to click on an icon and attempt to start a program. -> (One of my friends had -> an old 486DX33 and when he got a copy of warp 3 from work, that was the -> only way to install it! With all the speed increases in his BIOS turned -> off!) And you think following instructions is the wrong thing to do? Forgive me if I don't seem shocked. --- 2SuaveEd v.0 * Origin: Picture This... Southaven, Ms (601)280-2805 - (1:123/434) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EB100028Date: 06/30/97 From: LYNN NASH Time: 09:35pm \/To: LEON KIRILIUK (Read 2 times) Subj: Re: os/2 applications LN> Visual SlickEdit LN> Preditor/2 LN> Rimstar LN> SourceLink LN> Boxer LN> KEdit LN> Semware LN> SPF/PC LN> Tritus SPF LK> All are pathetic sharewa/freeware. I can't believe you would even TRY LK>to compare it to something like MS Word 97! As for boxer, I have 7.5.0 LK>installed here for DOS, it is the most PTHETIC application around! Next LK>time you do come up with a list, do think quality first, because I can LK>easily logon to the internet and produce a list of 500+ text editors LK>for Win95 and just by number (which you are trying to do here) LK>overwhelm OS/2. Do you really research, or even look at these things before you post back, or do you just post for the pure sake of posting? You are the one that gave E as an editor example, along with your REXX as a database example. _All_ of the above editors are commercial and are found in most tools catalogs. You stripped the heading off of the list, not me. Would you really use Word 97 as an editor? I thought Word was a word processor. Visual SlickEdit is the number one rated text/programmers editor on the market. According to their web site some companies even OEM its core. The least expensive version is $250. It has won or placed in just about every commercial product award in its class. It is available on OS/2, Win3.1, Win-95, Win-NT, every flavor of Unix that supports X-windows. There are also text mode versions. At one time it was even Microsofts in-house editor. I do not know if it still is, now that Developers Studio is available, or if developars are allowed to make their own choice. Any version of SPF is often used by mainframe programmers that do their primary coding on a PC. Boxer does have shareware versions but they also have commercial versions. Preditor/2 is made by Compuware a pretty large software company in other markets. It also has Win-95 and NT versions in the box. Rimstar is also available on OS/2 and Win-95. It would appear that you have some sort of serious problem or a hidden agenda, whether you are aware of it or not. You just lost the last of your credibility with me. I don't continue those types of discussions. In most of my posts I just present information; I have no undying need to be right. Readers are well capable of reading both sides and determining that on their own. LN> campus and into the real world to understand. Corporations don't do LN> wars, short of MS who seems to think that they are aiding and LN> enemy and can afford to throw the dollars away. Databases have to be LN> platform to survive. LK> Of those applications, all of them have win95 ports and some more, and LK>of those, how many do you use at home? How many have win95 ports have more LK>features and are supported more? Your statement implies that you do not understand the topic, or market dynamics involved. Let me get this straight, is supporting more than one platform supposed to now be a bad thing; as a developer I do the same? I fail to see why an application has to be available for only a single platform. Somehow you seem to see that as wrong, yet you claim that you were after applications. My logic won't de-evolve to parse that. Also, software is not about feature count for sake of a number; software should be about usefulness to the task at hand in the most efficient manner. That is like that past trend for every software package ever written to have a clock just to add to the feature count. How many clocks do you need on the screen at one time even though the OS has one already? Now all the browser makers want to replace your shell; and people are supposed to go nuts over this. As far as at home, I tend to use products that are available on both OS/2 and windows platforms. But what would be the point of a description count, could take me an hour to do. You have shown that most of them you have never heard of, even if many do cost $1000 or more. Therefore your reaction is that they must be junk shareware/freeware. You would then try to convince us that this is somehow bad, unless, it is only available for Win-95 and is freeware, then it becomes good and not junk.?!?? You don't seem to find these statements inconsistant? My personal software budget is non-trivial and probably average for any vertical market developer. We are the segment that someone is always trying to get to go to some 500-1500 dollar per seat seminar or convention, rather than hoping that we drop into the corner software store. Basically the corner software store hasn't much to offer me under OS/2 or windows. If I wanted to play games, I would probably buy something from Sony, Sega, or Nintendo, rather than use a 5 to 8 grand workstation. I work at home a couple of days a week, so do the other people in my group. I run two workstations, a laptop and three servers (OS/2, NT, Netware) at home; the wife's system is also tied in; as if you had a need to know or it had anything to do with the original subject thread. Anyway, this is a waste of time, you are not after facts only a venue to vent. Well I don't think I want it to be myself any longer; Bye. --Lynn * SLMR 2.1a * Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. --- DB 1.39/004485 * Origin: The Diamond Bar BBS, San Dimas CA, 909-599-2088 (1:218/1001) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EB100029Date: 06/30/97 From: JACK STEIN Time: 07:40am \/To: ROBERT WHITE (Read 2 times) Subj: OS/2 Robert White wrote in a message to Jack Stein: RW>>>> Stop living in the past and start talking about the present! JS> You tell someone to stop living in the past and talk about the JS> present, and I'm merely pointing out that WIN is the past. It's old, JS> bad, and rehashed junk technology. I was alluding to release dates, JS> but more important is the technical abilities. Unix, for example was JS> FAR more advanced, flexable and powerful 10 years ago than JS> DOS/WINxx/NT is today. RW> You were the one who brought it up! Nope! You were the one that said to stop living in the past, I, again, was simply pointing out that WINxx is the past both technically and based on release dates. What exactly did you mean when you said "stop living in the past"? Did you mean start using Unix or OS/2. RW> I was merley stating that I DIDNT SAY what the last release of RW> DOS/WIN was. Merley state on what basis you present the argument to stop living in the past? Is it based on technical abilities, release dates or just what is it that makes you say stop living in the past? RW> Now how does that relate to past and present huh?! You tell me, you made the statement to stop living in the past, I'm having a hell of a time getting you to explain what you mean, and on what basis. JS>>> Can it run an HPFS FS? Can it base file allocation on 512 byte JS>>> sectors? RW>>> Haven't you heard of NT? Both my UNIX system and OS/2 systems have 512 byte file allocation units. I don't know what NT has yet. I assume NT uses a similar scheme? JS>> We just installed NT 4.0 on new Pentium/166 with 64 megs and all JS>> it does is act as a print server, something we didn't need at JS>> all, as UNIX was doing the same thing plus a lot more on a 386/25 JS>> with 8 megs ram. RW> Well if you are using it as a print server on a P166 then RW> you obviously dont realise what potential it has, nor how to RW> use it properly. Perhaps. What potential does it have, vs the Unix Sys V we currently have, assuming the Unix hardware was updated to the Pentium box? JS>>> Can it run DOS, WIN and OS/2 apps concurrently, on the same JS>>> screen with no effort? RW>> Umm I hate to tell you this but the above is purely RW>> speculation what you said is not fact and you do not have RW>> any proof of this. ITS ALL IN YOUR HEAD PAL! JS> No, it's not "all in my head", it's on my computer. Not one ounce of JS> speculation in anything I've said up there? RW> If its not speculation, then you shouldn't have any trouble RW> proving it. I can't. You win on that one I guess. Jack --- timEd/2-B11 * Origin: Jack's Free Lunch 4OS2 USR16.8 Pgh Pa (412)492-0822 (1:129/171) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EB100030Date: 06/30/97 From: JACK STEIN Time: 08:12am \/To: LEON KIRILIUK (Read 2 times) Subj: Re: Os/2 applications Leon Kiriliuk wrote in a message to Lynn Nash: LK> All are pathetic sharewa/freeware. I can't believe LK> you would even TRY to compare it to something like MS Word LK> 97! As for boxer, I have 7.5.0 installed here for DOS, it is LK> the most PTHETIC application around! Boxer2 is "pathetic"? You might want to back that one up. What features is it missing? LK> Next time you do come up with a list, do think quality first, LK> because I can easily logon to the internet and produce a list LK> of 500+ text editors for Win95 and just by number (which you LK> are trying to do here) overwhelm OS/2. And not ONE of them will overwhelm Boxer2. In fact, all 500 of them will pale in comparison, assuming you can actually find 500 of them. While your at it, what WIN95 application comes close to providing the ease of use and functionality of OS2 Commander? When finished with that, tell me what Script language you use with WIN95? Jack --- timEd/2-B11 * Origin: Jack's Free Lunch 4OS2 USR16.8 Pgh Pa (412)492-0822 (1:129/171) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EB100031Date: 06/30/97 From: JACK STEIN Time: 08:26am \/To: LEON KIRILIUK (Read 2 times) Subj: Re: To Linux or not to Linux, that's the08:26:2206/30/97 Leon Kiriliuk wrote in a message to Lee Roberts: LK> again, I'm sure you don't even know what 1/2 that stuff is, LK> do you? Or better yet, you have no need for such nonsense That's right, most of the crap you list as being great software I consider useless. The few things you list I use, I know your in outer space. Boxer2 is a great text editor, REXX is a super script language, and the Internet stuff that comes with OS/2 is far more than I need to get on and use the Internet. LK> (just the way you were calling netscape pathetic before an LK> OS/2 version was announced, right?) I think the Internet in general, at least the www is pretty pathetic. It's a cess pool of soccer moms, little kids and hype. There are good things mixed in, but you sure don't need WIN95 to get at them. Jack --- timEd/2-B11 * Origin: Jack's Free Lunch 4OS2 USR16.8 Pgh Pa (412)492-0822 (1:129/171)