--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EBC00077Date: 07/02/97 From: JOHN MEROTH Time: 08:49am \/To: ROBERT WHITE (Read 2 times) Subj: OS/2 Hello Robert! Replying to a message of Robert White to Jack Stein: RW>>>> Haven't you heard of NT? JS>>> Sure, and I saw 3 of 4 workstations running it crashed, all in JS>>> the soace of 30 minutes, installed by professionals at high cost. We JS>>> just installed NT 4.0 on new Pentium/166 with 64 megs and all it JS>>> does is act as a print server, something we didn't need at all, as JS>>> UNIX was doing the same thing plus a lot more on a 386/25 with 8 JS>>> megs ram. RW> Well if you are using it as a print server on a P166 then you RW> obviously dont realise what potential it has, nor how to use it RW> properly. You obviously missed the point. All they needed was a print server. NT required it to ba a P166. Unix was happy printing as an additional task on a 386-25 that was doing many other things. RW> --QUOTE-- RW> Can it run DOS, WIN and OS/2 apps concurrently, on the same RW> screen with no effort? RW> --QUOTE-- RW> If its not speculation, then you shouldn't have any trouble proving RW> it. I do all of the above as part of my job. The DOS language I write in will not even run on Win95 in protected mode. TTYL, John Meroth --- FleetStreet 1.19 NR * Origin: Tampa Bay OS/2 -- Clarion BBS (1:377/86) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EBC00078Date: 07/02/97 From: JOHN MEROTH Time: 08:53am \/To: LEON KIRILIUK (Read 2 times) Subj: OS/2 Hello Leon! Replying to a message of Leon Kiriliuk to Dave Raymond: DR>> So what's yer point? How many peoplr use NT Server at home? LK> But many people use Windows NT workstation at home. If nothing LK> else but for it's great multilingual support. Last I recall, it's LK> ascii character use something like 2 bits per character, which allows LK> oriental people flexability in their work (just like Linux) and LK> unlike OS/2. But I wouldn't know anything about it.. some guy at LK> school told me about that one. But it's just an example of why some LK> people choose NT. You're right. You don't know anything about it. Most ALL OS's come with multi-lingual support. OS/2 most definately supports Oriental languages. BTW, that's two BYTES per character. TTYL, John Meroth --- FleetStreet 1.19 NR * Origin: Tampa Bay OS/2 -- Clarion BBS (1:377/86) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EBC00079Date: 07/02/97 From: JOHN MEROTH Time: 08:56am \/To: LEON KIRILIUK (Read 2 times) Subj: OS/2 Hello Leon! Replying to a message of Leon Kiriliuk to John Meroth: JM>> Again, I find it very hard to believe that you have used OS/2. HPFS, JM>> like several other drivers has 16 bit code, but is written to run on JM>> a 32 bit platform and has quite a bit of 32 bit code. LK> The point remains that it is not 100% 32-bit! Your old remarks LK> just fell through the cracks! Nope, not at all. If you understood the difference between 16 & 32, you would know why. TTYL, John Meroth --- FleetStreet 1.19 NR * Origin: Tampa Bay OS/2 -- Clarion BBS (1:377/86) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EBC00080Date: 07/02/97 From: JOHN MEROTH Time: 09:01am \/To: LEON KIRILIUK (Read 2 times) Subj: A tale to be told... Hello Leon! Replying to a message of Leon Kiriliuk to Ken Pimontel: KP>> As an OS/2 user this really slapped me in the face. W95 is sold as LK> Try LApLink under OS/2 with HPFS drives.. same thing. Actually, no. Thye DOS version runs just fine in the backround. The OS/2 version does much better, though. TTYL, John Meroth --- FleetStreet 1.19 NR * Origin: Tampa Bay OS/2 -- Clarion BBS (1:377/86) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EBC00081Date: 07/02/97 From: JOHN MEROTH Time: 09:04am \/To: KENNETH ABRAMS (Read 2 times) Subj: Buggy OS or Buggy ap Hello KENNETH! Replying to a message of KENNETH ABRAMS to LEON KIRILIUK: KA> And I've *never* seen a scroll bar on the left side of the screen, KA> anywhere (that I can recall). I wonder if he was talking about the scroll bar that is on the right side of the left frame? You know, the one that is supposed to be there so that you can scroll that frame. TTYL, John Meroth --- FleetStreet 1.19 NR * Origin: Tampa Bay OS/2 -- Clarion BBS (1:377/86) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EBC00082Date: 07/02/97 From: JOHN MEROTH Time: 09:05am \/To: LEON KIRILIUK (Read 2 times) Subj: Buggy OS or Buggy ap Hello Leon! Replying to a message of Leon Kiriliuk to KENNETH ABRAMS: LK> Same goes with win95 (with 32bit apps). Why would you waste LK> your $$$ on 16bit software, if the 32bit ones are faster and more LK> feature full? In most cases, a 32bit application will be slower. LK> Cool.. I have the EXACT same machine! If you try installing LK> win95 with Netscape 3.01 GOLD (which is a bit better than NS 2.02 for LK> OS/2) Actually, 3.01 has LESS features. TTYL, John Meroth --- FleetStreet 1.19 NR * Origin: Tampa Bay OS/2 -- Clarion BBS (1:377/86) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EBC00083Date: 07/02/97 From: JOHN MEROTH Time: 09:10am \/To: ROBERT WHITE (Read 2 times) Subj: To Linux or not to Linux, that's the que09:10:4407/02/97 Hello Robert! Replying to a message of Robert White to Greg Cobb: RW> Greg, RW> There no Software designed to be used for recreational / Home use RW> which is written exclusivley for OS/2. I have more than a few games written for OS/2. Check out ftp.tbos2cla.com/os2/os2games RW> I have run OS/2 before whilst running my bbs and I found it Slow and RW> sluggish while i multitasked between two DOS sessions and this was on RW> a P166 with 24 meg RAM. I have a friend who had the same problem. Turned out to be a defective MB. Yes, it ran WIN95 just fine. It finally fried last week. TTYL, John Meroth --- FleetStreet 1.19 NR * Origin: Tampa Bay OS/2 -- Clarion BBS (1:377/86) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EBC00084Date: 07/01/97 From: KENNETH ABRAMS Time: 11:25pm \/To: LEON KIRILIUK (Read 2 times) Subj: Buggy OS or Buggy ap LK> Really!?! Next time a frame loads, press on the bar to go dow LK> you'll see what I'm talking about.. This was a major complaint peopl Been there, done that, still haven't seen a left hand scroll bar in NS/2. LK> and multiheadering works great under win95... that is why I can can Multiheadering? What's that? Is it anything like multithreading? LK> Not true! You are spreading false remarks! You can't even nam LK> single application which is so! Haven't you ever heard of OLE2!?!? I've heard of it. It being broken is the biggest problem we've had moving from AutoCad r12 to r13. Things you could do under r12, like inserting a drawing into a WordPerfect file (technical manual), are broken under r13 because of Win32 and OLE (so says AutoDesk). LK> Believe it.. I know a heck of a lot more about OS/2 than you LK> win95! You've demonstrated very little real knowledge of OS/2 in here. To the point where it really does become hard to believe that you ever did. As for Win95, I know as much as I want about it, which is that I want nothing to do with the lame piece of junkware. Unfortunately, it's being shoved down my throat at work. We're going to AutoCad r14, which requires Win95/NT. At least, based on the review in Byte, they appear to have fixed a number of the problems with r13. Eventually, all of our workstations will be going that way. I only know of one person at work that is actually looking forward to it, and that's only because he feels it's gotta be better than the forever crashing Win3x we deal with now. Meanwhile, we've connect with a cc:Mail router running on an NT machine that locks up all the time for no apparent reason. And, when it's not doing that, it's dropping connections. Then there's the first few Win95 workstations over at the office, where they're having problems with WordPerfect printing on the network, problems it appears even Microsoft doesn't have answers for. Yeah. I just can't wait to deal with that. kabrams@erols.com * RM 1.3 03106 * --- Platinum Xpress/Win/Wildcat5! v2.0 * Origin: BBS Networks @ bbsnets.com 301-863-5089 (1:2612/10) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EBC00085Date: 07/01/97 From: JACK STEIN Time: 08:57pm \/To: KEITH DOUGLAS (Read 2 times) Subj: To Linux or not to Linux, that's the que20:57:4607/01/97 Keith Douglas wrote in a message to Jack Stein: JS> The GREP command has become so common, even across JS> platforms, that it's acronym (Get Regular ExPression) has ... has become moot, and it is now a word in itself, who's roots are meaningful mainly to historians and those wishing to impress people with their "knowledge" of trivia. KD> Obviously not, because Paul doesn't know it. See above. Paul knows what "grep" is and I'd bet he uses it successfully. The fact that I, Paul and millions and millions of computer people know and use grep regularly and could care less what the acronym meaning of the world is exactly proves that it has become a word unto itself. Just yesterday in Debug I read a message that went: "A fast grep of my filebase shows..." I doubt you could find two people reading debug that didn't know exactly what he meant, even those stuck behind a GUI. KD> I doubt you could find most computer users could tell you. KD> ['Find' should be 'find'. Why all the nonsense?] Find IS find! Just more proof that Unix makes sense. KD> Why should one do more work than one has to? JS> Exactly. That's where Unix shines. Very little work KD> But if I have to learn all these commands and what not.. KD> there goes the productivity time. The amount of time wasted with people learning a gui interface and then screwing up the works completly is anti-productive. Those needing access to more than a menu, gui or text, should know the basic commands to get things done. Those that are simply running a coulple of applications as tools to get their work done should not have the abilitly to screw with the system anyway. Just the amount of time wasted with people screwing with all the pretty colors has got to cost billions in productivity losses. KD> (I know several people who are learning UNIX now. Things KD> like text config files, tools that have unclear help files KD> 'this option is obvious' and so forth - it's not pretty) I have a bunch learning the GUI interface right now, and it is down right ugly. These same people spent zero time learning Unix, but ran their applications under it for years w/o a problem. JS> to install and configure. End users that simple run the KD> Why should one pay an admin? What do you propose, slavery? 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: EBC00086Date: 07/01/97 From: JACK STEIN Time: 09:47pm \/To: LEON KIRILIUK (Read 2 times) Subj: Re: A tale to be told... Leon Kiriliuk wrote in a message to Ken Pimontel: KP> This beats the hell out of me... Everybody is talking about how W95 KP> does not multitask _THAT WELL_. Major understatement: it simply does KP> NOT multitask some dos progs WHATSOEVER. LK> There are some DOS applications that should not be LK> ran under win95 and OS/2 at ALL! Those type of applications LK> include Norton Utilities and any Tape Backup programs. I use some Norton Utilities under OS/2. For example, Norton Disk Doctor works fine under OS/2 if your fixing a screwed up floppy disk. LK> LapLink must be just one of them. Nope. I used Laplink extensively under OS/2 with no problem whatsoever. LK> Win95 multitasks, and multitasks very well. You just LK> have to think twice before using old outdated applications LK> which are specially designed to interact with the OS (rather LK> than a simple application). Just like LapLink! ;) KP> As an OS/2 user this really slapped me in the face. W95 is sold as LK> Try LApLink under OS/2 with HPFS drives.. same thing. Nope. I used Laplink, and I'm rather sure I used it on HPFS drives with no problem. KP> :-), which I can live with too), but it doesn't even support DOS KP> programs the way it should. LK> It supports them better than OS/2. You just have to LK> know what the heck you are doing. I can easily take Norton LK> Utilities and try to optimize an HD while running OS/2 FAT LK> and say "Well, look at this.. it didn't work. OS/2 DOS LK> support must suck!". Such irrational and biased descisions LK> are simply wrong. Of course they are, and they are common complaints of computer illiterates complaining about OS/2's backwards compatibility to DOS. KP> Oh yeah, the same goes for Pkzip, which also stopped zipping when I KP> switched away from its session. LK> It shouldn't. You must have the "always suspended" LK> turned on. Does WIN95 support pre-emptive, multi-threading of file I/O when running a DOS app? I don't know myself, just asking. I know OS/2 does. LK> Next time before making such "wierd" remarks.. better LK> check your setup. How come when I'm in a configuration menu in WIN95, I can't switch the focus to another app? What settings should I change to enable such a simple feature? Jack --- timEd/2-B11 * Origin: Jack's Free Lunch 4OS2 USR16.8 Pgh Pa (412)492-0822 (1:129/171)