
                   comp.os.os2.advocacy             (Usenet)

                 Saturday, 20-Nov-1999 to Friday, 26-Nov-1999

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

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au                               20-Nov-99 11:26:02
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 10:33:12
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au (Richard A Crane)

Lots of people in this thread have been talking about the 
"clueless masses'. Can someone tell me what they are going 
to use a computer for?
Richard A Crane
Barrister & Solicitor
slightly altered email (anti-spamming) rcrane AT 
octa4.net.au 
OR rcrane AT attglobal.net

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Octa4 Pty Ltd (1:109/42)

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

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au                               20-Nov-99 11:25:15
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 10:33:13
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au (Richard A Crane)

On Thu, 11 Nov 1999 20:31:22, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> Most employees that actually make things happen (ie. write software,
> etc.) have little part in the decision making process.  Why should they
> be punished for the attitudes and actions of their high-level
> management?
And why send the axe murderer to goal if he/she has a 
dependant family?
Richard A Crane
Barrister & Solicitor
slightly altered email (anti-spamming) rcrane AT 
octa4.net.au 
OR rcrane AT attglobal.net

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Octa4 Pty Ltd (1:109/42)

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

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au                               20-Nov-99 11:25:24
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 10:33:13
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au (Richard A Crane)

On Fri, 12 Nov 1999 04:37:26, David H. McCoy 
<forgitaboutit@fake.com> wrote:

> In article <382B780C.D97D6FA3@stny.rr.com>, mamodeo@stny.rr.com says...
> >
> >Since you obviously have a superior understanding of the situation and have
> >drawn better conclusions than I, why not tell us how fining MS is going
right
> >all of the wrongs that were caused.
> >
> >- Marty
> >
> 
> What wrongs? OS/2? Please. IBM did more to crush OS/2 than MS ever could. 
> Apple? Right? Apple's longtime refusal to clone the Mac and a its hardware 
> resulting in prices that would make PC makers and MS jealous followed by
Steve 
> Jobs' decimation of that very market did in Apple.
> 
> Netscape? Well, this was bad, but resulted in free browsers. Find a single 
> consumer that is against free browsers and IE is a better product.
> 
> About the only wrong I see is that sliding OEM price scale and forcing
people 
> to bundle the browser or OS.
> 
> -- 
> ---------------------------------------
> David H. McCoy
> dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
> ---------------------------------------
At last a sensible comment from a MS supporter.
Sorry David  but I've just waded through post after post of 
drivel trying to defend MS in light of the findings of fact 
your statement was a breath of fresh air.

FWIW I disagee with it but it is a sensible rational 
position to take, even if it is wrong:) .
Richard A Crane
Barrister & Solicitor
slightly altered email (anti-spamming) rcrane AT 
octa4.net.au 
OR rcrane AT attglobal.net

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Octa4 Pty Ltd (1:109/42)

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

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au                               20-Nov-99 11:26:00
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 10:33:13
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au (Richard A Crane)

On Wed, 10 Nov 1999 13:03:22, "Drestin Black" 
<drestinblack@home.com.nospam> wrote:

> 
> Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:3828D886.797A27D9@ibm.net...
> >
> >
> > "Jason R." wrote:
> >
> > > Uhh, who the hell wants an OS with no real, widespread apps?  Windows
> > > _should_ be the dominant OS because it's easier for the clueless masses
> to
> > > learn one environment.
> >
> > Amen brother. Now tell the owner of Windows to stop breaking anti-trust
> laws
> > and messing with the natural order of the world.
> "Natural order of the world?" and what pray tell would that be, bro?
> 
> >
> > And we should all drive Ford Explorers. It is easier for the clueless
> masses of
> > the world to learn one vehicle and dashboard layout.
> 
> um, nooooo. In US cars we got the wheel on the left, you turn it and the car
> goes towards the direction you turned it. Shift using one of two methods, #1
> manual or #2 automatic (transmission, version 2.0+). Pedal on right goes
> faster, pedal on left (or middle if using shift method #1) stops. Clutch to
> shift manual. Display in front of wheel with info regarding speed, fuel and
> other factors.
> 
> There is a general layout that is followed in 95%+ cars in the US. If
> someone suddenly switched the gas and brake pedals? Do you see a problem
> with that? Would someone defend that saying: "You've gotta have choice!"
> 
> are all dashboard layouts 100% clones, no, so, you do have some choice but
> consistant design is a bonus. Having some degree of consistancy from vehicle
> to vehicle is good not only for the clueless masses but even to pro's. You
> can instantly transfer some of your experience in other vehicles to any new
> vehicle you encounter and thus be at least slight proficient immediately.
> But, throw a completely new layout to someone and he's back to square one.
> This is good? Hell no.
> 
But no one seriously sayes you must have this years car to 
go on the highway or that this years model has the steering 
reversed (turn left to go right - select start to stop) for 
your convenience. Or puts up to quote a famous USA'n an 
automobilble that is "unsafe at any speed".
Richard A Crane
Barrister & Solicitor
slightly altered email (anti-spamming) rcrane AT 
octa4.net.au 
OR rcrane AT attglobal.net

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Octa4 Pty Ltd (1:109/42)

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

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au                               20-Nov-99 11:25:22
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 10:33:13
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au (Richard A Crane)

On Thu, 11 Nov 1999 20:31:22, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> If the government had a problem with their actions, it should have acted
> immediately.  The fact that it had to "find a fact" to now start
> applying laws to Microsoft demonstrates that the government had no
> problem with what MS was doing in the past.
> 
"March the guilty party in." 

Are you seriously suggesting that a trial is unnecessary?
Richard A Crane
Barrister & Solicitor
slightly altered email (anti-spamming) rcrane AT 
octa4.net.au 
OR rcrane AT attglobal.net

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Octa4 Pty Ltd (1:109/42)

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

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au                               20-Nov-99 11:25:23
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 10:33:13
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au (Richard A Crane)

On Thu, 11 Nov 1999 20:31:22, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

>  This
> also doesn't change the fact that the judicial system shares
> theoretically 1/3 of the governing ability of the US, and is therefore,
> just as much a part of the government as any of the other branches.
> 
No doubt derived by the sound basis that their are two other
arms of government!

Read Montesque - your Constitution is based on his theories.
Richard A Crane
Barrister & Solicitor
slightly altered email (anti-spamming) rcrane AT 
octa4.net.au 
OR rcrane AT attglobal.net

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Octa4 Pty Ltd (1:109/42)

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

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au                               20-Nov-99 11:25:10
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 10:33:13
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au (Richard A Crane)

On Wed, 10 Nov 1999 23:29:55, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

[USA Jurisprudential theories snipped]
> 
> The court must have some regard for the employees and families of the
> corporation in question.  If they significantly and radically harm the
> corporation many innocent employees will suffer unjustly.
> 
What is an innocent employee (??- someone who never did 
anything??) and why should this argument hold any more water
than the hory chestnut about not goaling someone as they 
have family who would be upset?

As I understand it USA finds it necesssary to send more of 
its citizens per 1000 head of population to goal than 
anywhere else in the "Western World" (I don't know where 
that leaves me though as the Territory I live in goals 13x 
the national average per 1000 people!!)

Richard A Crane
Barrister & Solicitor
slightly altered email (anti-spamming) rcrane AT 
octa4.net.au 
OR rcrane AT attglobal.net
PS email replies this is getting too off topic!

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Octa4 Pty Ltd (1:109/42)

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

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au                               20-Nov-99 11:26:11
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 10:33:13
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au (Richard A Crane)

On Thu, 11 Nov 1999 23:12:23, "Chad Mulligan" 
<cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org> wrote:

> The training curve of three respective systems show Macs to have a shallower
> initial curve that peaks at a very low level of knowledge, UNIX has very
> steep initial curve that peaks very high, windows splits the difference
> while not restricting how much a user can learn.
> 
With such a big claim I'd expect supporting citation of 
documents evidencing these findings.  Note well Chad does 
not bother with such.
Richard A Crane
Barrister & Solicitor
slightly altered email (anti-spamming) rcrane AT 
octa4.net.au 
OR rcrane AT attglobal.net

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Octa4 Pty Ltd (1:109/42)

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

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au                               20-Nov-99 11:26:06
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 10:33:13
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au (Richard A Crane)

On Wed, 10 Nov 1999 23:13:21, "Chad Mulligan" 
<cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org> wrote:

> That just confirms that the Judge was in the pocket of the whiners that
> brought the case.
> 
Headline news "Chad Mulligan alleges MS judge was corrupt"!

On what basis- do you have knowledge of a financial 
transaction for the judges benefit?
Richard A Crane
Barrister & Solicitor
slightly altered email (anti-spamming) rcrane AT 
octa4.net.au 
OR rcrane AT attglobal.net

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Octa4 Pty Ltd (1:109/42)

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

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au                               20-Nov-99 11:25:27
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 10:33:13
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au (Richard A Crane)

On Tue, 9 Nov 1999 22:17:45, fwkirk@ibm.net (Frank Kirk) 
wrote:

> On Sun, 7 Nov 1999 13:48:07, "Daniel Johnson" 
> <daniel.n.johnson@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> 
> >Those OSes were often well suited for some purpose or other, but not 
> for the purpose Windows  is put to.
> 
> 	What might that be?
> 
> FWK
> > 
Usual practice is to open or close them for the convenience 
of room occupants. But some people insist that they must be 
opened to do any computer work at all.
Richard A Crane
Barrister & Solicitor
slightly altered email (anti-spamming) rcrane AT 
octa4.net.au 
OR rcrane AT attglobal.net

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Octa4 Pty Ltd (1:109/42)

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

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au                               20-Nov-99 11:25:21
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 10:33:13
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au (Richard A Crane)

On Thu, 11 Nov 1999 20:31:22, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> A drug cartel is not an incorporated business.
And their liability is unlimited!!
So what is the relevance?
Richard A Crane
Barrister & Solicitor
slightly altered email (anti-spamming) rcrane AT 
octa4.net.au 
OR rcrane AT attglobal.net

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Octa4 Pty Ltd (1:109/42)

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

From: alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net                          20-Nov-99 07:31:19
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 10:33:15
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: Hobbyist <alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net>

"Brent Davies" <brentdaviesNOSPAM@home.com> posted:

> 
> Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
> news:38358d37$12$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com...
> | On <38316965.A37A7DB0@frostbytes.com>, on 11/16/99 at 09:25 AM,
> |    Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com> said:
> |
> | > Pfft.  OS/2 is not commercially viable anymore.  The only reason IBM is
> | > still supporting it is that they have a lot of existing customers who
> | > will be pissed-off if they drop it cold, and those customers buy a lot
> | > of AS/400s.
> |
> | That is your opinion. You are entitled to it. That is is totally invalid
> | has no bearing on your right to hold and express it. Of course, it shows
> | the world what an idiot you are.
> 
> Commercial viability has a lot to do with the driving force behind
> a product. IBM isn't too interested in increasing the install base
> of OS/2.  I think that's rather apparent.  They are simply
> supporting whatever install base they currently have.
> 
> Whether or not the product could compete in today's market?
> That's for experts to say.  It is plainly obvious, however, that
> IBM isn't interested enough in their own product for me to
> become interested in it myself.  It's one of those products
> that IBM could drop tomorrow and not ever think of again.
> That should scare anyone who thinks about putting OS/2 into
> new installations.

FUD in the true sense. :)

FUD based on factual grounds.

-- 
-=Ali M.=-

Mail to: <alliem 'at' wtjam 'dot' net>
         

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: mere_mortal@my-deja.com                           20-Nov-99 08:05:03
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 10:33:15
Subj: OS/2 is an excellent system admin OS

From: mere_mortal@my-deja.com (mz)

I've never seen anyone say this, so I'm saying it: OS/2 is an excellent
OS to have for administering a PC. 

(I like it for all the other reasons folks have stated too: WPS, great
TCP/IP, configurability, 16-bit development for Wintendo and DOS, Java
dev, and yes, good apps and the ability to run the good Wintendo 16 code
that folks have abandoned because MickeSoft told them to). 

BootManager gives me real OS flexibility: especially necessary when
monopolist OSs demand a C: boot.

OS/2, of course, is able to install on logical partitions.

I often need to rebuild partitions because I like to have a clean
starting point when programming. PMFDISK lets me reconfigure my
partitions quickly.

The disk format feature is fast.

With ZIP.EXE and SYSINSTX, I can have a ZIP archive of an OS/2 partition
running in seconds. 

With ZIP.EXE and the W9x/WNT Emergency Diskettes, I can manage W4
partitions. 

OS/2 handles huge Zipping and Unzipping operations beautifully. These
operations never seem to slow my other concurrent work (unlike on
Wintendo NT). Just recently, I unzipped a 100 MB partition archive while
copying a 150 MB archive from a Jaz cartridge. While I worked on an
IBMWorks spreadsheet to study my finances for next year. Hombre, this is
multitasking. And I was doing it on a 486 years ago, just as I'm now
doing it on a faster AMD K6 2 today.

REXX is built-in and is very useful for automating operations.

There is plenty of good freeware and shareware available for OS/2. (And
I think many now agree that there's nothing wrong with purchasing
shareware or using freeware utilities. Some still want pretty MickeySoft
pulp and plastic from a store shelf. They are the ones with needle
tracks on their arms.)

Yes, there are many things in OS/2 that I'd like to see updated. I'm not
anxious about it. 

NO OTHER OS has given me the value that OS/2 has. It seems MickeySoft
has a legal hammer-lock on OS/2, so IBM can't do much with it. I think
MickeySoft's eagerness to keep the Cinderella in rags is an indication
of how ugly a stepsister MickeySoft really is.


-- 
MZ
- -
Dear Spambot: bill.gates@microsoft.com

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

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

From: lucien@metrowerks.com                             20-Nov-99 13:18:17
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 14:53:11
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: lucien@metrowerks.com

In article <8159la$13n$1@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenantispam@hawaii.edu wrote:
> Lucien writes:
>
> >>>>> Answer the question put to you:
>
> >>>> Take the two simple tests, Lucien.
>
> >>> Note the refusal to answer a basic, central question - looks like
> >>> we've hit another major soft spot.
>
> >> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?
>
> > Note again the pat refusal to answer the question.
>
> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

...and we see the refusal again (another instance of an implicit
concession to my argument).

The question again:

According to your statement, under what conditions
does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
functionality..."?

Here is your statement again for reference:

"The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
information."

Lucien S.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

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

From: pcguido@attglobal.net                             20-Nov-99 16:15:22
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 14:53:12
Subj: Re: THE VERSION OF OS/2 WARP 4 THAT CAN RUN WINDOWS 95 >>YES IT DOES 

From: pcguido@attglobal.net

In <38355A5E.B130547C@frostbytes.com>, Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com> writes:
|pcguido@attglobal.net wrote:
|| Not to point out the obvious or anything; but, he
|| wants OS/2 to run Win95, not his PC.i
||
|| Give-it-up, won't happen for a number of reasons.
|
|It could certainly be done given a robust enough VDM.	VMWare sells such a
|thing for Linux; it even runs NT.

Have you _used_ VMWare? Just try running NT under Linux for a while, and
see if it suits you. The _entire_ NT disk area is housed under _one_
file in the Linux file system. Thus, your NT is not available for
standalone boot; and, if anything happens to that one file it's good-bye
everything.

Not Ready for Primetime, IMO.

|
|| 2. (Business Reasons) Investment Protection
|
|Is this more or less valuable than being able to drop maintenance on the OS/2
|codebase?

What _are_ you talking about? IBM has not dropped maintenance on OS/2,
they're just about to start asking you to pay for your (previously free)
ride. Total up all those Mikeysoft 'upgrades' you get forced into, and
try to tell me MS is the cheaper/wiser investment for business.

|| 3. (Legal) MS vs DOJ
||
|| IBM is not stupid enough to try to prove to the DOJ that
|| there _is_ a way around the MS monopoly.
|
|The ability to run Win9x under OS/2 doesn't circumvent the monopoly.  If
|anything it helps support it.
|
|jim

Apparently you haven't read the judge's FoF. His most often repeated
point was the barrier to _application's_ entry caused by the bulldozer
success of MS's products. If OS/2, or any other OS, could run
unmodified Win32 apps most of that barrier would disappear. Remember
WinOS/2 and how mad it made Gates? And Ballmer, that asshole wiggled
out of eating the floppy he promised to munch if IBM could ever
make Win3.1 run in Enhanced Mode under OS/2.

Don't hold your breath for an OS/2 that can run Win32 apps.

Guido

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: pcguido@attglobal.net                             20-Nov-99 16:17:05
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 14:53:12
Subj: Re: OS/2 on large hard disks

From: pcguido@attglobal.net

Jaimie,

You are indeed a fool; and, I am not your friend.

regards

Guido

In <1e1jaxo.1j6vq724e9kl4N@dialup-447.germany.ecore.net>,
andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm) writes:
|<pcguido@attglobal.net> wrote:
|
|| Go ask in comp.os.os2.setup.storage, fool.
|
|Question has already been answered, thank god by more intelligent people
|than yourself, my friend.
|
|This was the dumbest answer I got, really.
|
||
|| In <1e1eiua.1ldcxd81mairrgN@dialup-385.germany.ecore.net>,
|| andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm) writes: |Somebody sent the
|| required file to me a month ago, but I seem to have |lost it. Now I have
|| finally found the time to install OS/2 once again on |my Intel machine.
|| Looking for the right link on the IBM website I found |nothing. Could
|| somebody point me to the right file please? | |-- |Fan of Woody Allen
|| |User of MacOS, BeOS, LinuxPPC |Supporter of Pepperoni Pizza
|
|
|--
|Fan of Woody Allen
|User of MacOS, BeOS, LinuxPPC
|Supporter of Pepperoni Pizza



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: pcguido@attglobal.net                             20-Nov-99 16:24:04
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 14:53:12
Subj: Re: OS/2 is an excellent system admin OS

From: pcguido@attglobal.net

In <1e1k4fx.euncar54sbp2N%mere_mortal@my-deja.com>, mere_mortal@my-deja.com
(mz) writes:
|I've never seen anyone say this, so I'm saying it: OS/2 is an excellent
|OS to have for administering a PC.
|
|(I like it for all the other reasons folks have stated too: WPS, great
|TCP/IP, configurability, 16-bit development for Wintendo and DOS, Java
|dev, and yes, good apps and the ability to run the good Wintendo 16 code
|that folks have abandoned because MickeSoft told them to).
|
|BootManager gives me real OS flexibility: especially necessary when
|monopolist OSs demand a C: boot.
|
|OS/2, of course, is able to install on logical partitions.
|
|I often need to rebuild partitions because I like to have a clean
|starting point when programming. PMFDISK lets me reconfigure my
|partitions quickly.
|
|The disk format feature is fast.
|
|With ZIP.EXE and SYSINSTX, I can have a ZIP archive of an OS/2 partition
|running in seconds.
|
|With ZIP.EXE and the W9x/WNT Emergency Diskettes, I can manage W4
|partitions.
|
|OS/2 handles huge Zipping and Unzipping operations beautifully. These
|operations never seem to slow my other concurrent work (unlike on
|Wintendo NT). Just recently, I unzipped a 100 MB partition archive while
|copying a 150 MB archive from a Jaz cartridge. While I worked on an
|IBMWorks spreadsheet to study my finances for next year. Hombre, this is
|multitasking. And I was doing it on a 486 years ago, just as I'm now
|doing it on a faster AMD K6 2 today.
|
|REXX is built-in and is very useful for automating operations.
|
|There is plenty of good freeware and shareware available for OS/2. (And
|I think many now agree that there's nothing wrong with purchasing
|shareware or using freeware utilities. Some still want pretty MickeySoft
|pulp and plastic from a store shelf. They are the ones with needle
|tracks on their arms.)
|
|Yes, there are many things in OS/2 that I'd like to see updated. I'm not
|anxious about it.
|
|NO OTHER OS has given me the value that OS/2 has. It seems MickeySoft
|has a legal hammer-lock on OS/2, so IBM can't do much with it. I think
|MickeySoft's eagerness to keep the Cinderella in rags is an indication
|of how ugly a stepsister MickeySoft really is.
|
|MZ

Bravo, all good points; but, especially the Cinderella observation.

I think Mr Bill's animus towards OS/2 results from two facts
which haunt him to this day:

1. OS/2 is the best work MS ever produced.
2. MS was not good enough to finish the product.

regards,

Guido

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: mcbrides@erols.com                                20-Nov-99 11:21:20
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 14:53:12
Subj: IBM Stock...

From: mcbrides@erols.com (Jerry McBride)

--- I read this somewhere... ---
--- quote  ---


When IBM killed the Warp 5 client, the stock dropped almost 50 points.
Boom, straight down.

Now, apparently, a few days ago, IBM decided to continue supporting OS/2
until 2006.  The stock has risen almost linearly by about 10 points.

Analysts are somewhat puzzled since there are no visible reasons, but we
know, don't we?  Karma.

--

*******************************************************************************

*            Sometimes, the BEST things in life really ARE free...           
*
*       Get a FREE copy of NetRexx 1.151 for your next java project at:      
*
*                     http://www2.hursley.ibm.com/netrexx                    
*
*******************************************************************************


/----------------------------------------\
| From the desktop of: Jerome D. McBride |
|         mcbrides@erols.com             |
\----------------------------------------/

--

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

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

From: ispy@groovyshow.com                               20-Nov-99 09:56:29
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 14:53:12
Subj: Re: Not even Ballmer likes NT

From: Kelly Robinson <ispy@groovyshow.com>

Yeah, but by doing the format C: and installing one of the below, you lose
compatibiltiy with a Swedishload of apps.

And MS was a dumbfuck for creating DLLs (and the GD registry) but app
designers
are equally, if not more, to blame for making their own molestations to system
DLLs.

Let's keep blame in perspective.

Oh yeah, did I say that IBM invited Microsoft into the PC realm?  IBM seems to
be the root of all evil.

Lennart Gahm wrote:

> http://nyheter.idg.se/display.pl?ID=991117-CS18
> At Comdex, according to an article in Swedish "Computer Sweden",  Steve
> Ballmer and Jim Allchin said things like below (CS is in swedish and i have
> tried to express in english parts from it):
>
> Steve Ballmer tries to sell W2000 by claiming it doesn't have the same
> problems as NT, "DLL-Hell is soon a memory".
>
> My comment:
> Has he not heard that Novell NetWare, Unix/Linux or OS/2 Warp for e-business
> have newer had this kind of problems? Why wait another 6month for a solution
> that maybe works?
> All it takes is a Format C: and install one of the above.
>
> Allchin claims that "65% of restarts of NT is planned and 35% is because of
> some error.
> He claims that W2000 will be more stable".
>
> My comment:
> Hello, can anyone do worse?
> If you need a stable system chose between Novell NetWare, Unix/Linux or OS/2
> Warp for e-business.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: http://extra.newsguy.com (1:109/42)

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

From: ispy@groovyshow.com                               20-Nov-99 09:59:27
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 14:53:12
Subj: Re: I am worried about our future generations...

From: Kelly Robinson <ispy@groovyshow.com>

We're not here to change minds.  We're here expressing opinions.  Or haven't
you figured that out yet?  Obviously not, you're a die-hard OS/2 user who,
like the rest of us, is too stubborn to listen to alternative viewpoints
seriously.

And if you can't accept that open discussion, debate, and pointless
bickering are reasons for newsgroups, then you're as pissing stupid as the
rest of us.  Possibly even more so.

And for a MicroSloth crusader (tm), I don't recall ever writing to you
before this date.

Deal?

Cool.

Now go leave closets for clothes.

"David D. Huff Jr." wrote:

> Every time one of these whiny-ass MicroSloth crusaders writes me
> personally and spews forth revisionist history.
>
> The last one claims that IBM helped to setup MicroSloth at the
> anti-trust hearings. I thought that was called testimony now they call
> it setting someone up.
>
> Part of the letter I received discussed a part of computer history that
> happened twenty years ago. And this brash young fellow proceeds to tell
> me how I have it all wrong. Piss on you I was here I lived it! It just
> hasn't been the same since the trial. All of these weirdos are coming
> out of the closet and counter posting or writing direct about
> everything. It looks like the devil wants to have his day and his
> minions are doing their best to put on a full court press. But dang guys
> you aint gona change my mind. I think maybe I should play a more active
> part in your re-education.
>
> Even with all the in-fighting and back-biting between the OS2 dudes and
> dudetts we look pretty normal compared to most of the stupidity embraced
> by the opposition.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: http://extra.newsguy.com (1:109/42)

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

From: ispy@groovyshow.com                               20-Nov-99 10:06:18
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 14:53:12
Subj: Re: I am worried about our future generations...

From: Kelly Robinson <ispy@groovyshow.com>

Win95 is not a 32-bit OS and I cringe every time I hear it.

ON THE SAME NOTE, OS/2 is equally not 32-bit for the exact same reasons - it
incorporates 16-bit code, too.  'nuff said on that matter.  May as well throw
stones in every window and not just one.

And, like I said to the other fellow, some of us are here to express opinions,
not change minds.  If you change your mind, great.  If not, oh well.  There is
only type of scenario where I do my damndest to change minds and they are
called "Political rallies supporting the homosexual agenda".  I mean, computer
shit is computer shit.  I'm just here to talk.  But when human issues,
epsecially those which pertain to me, are impugned, I will be there with all
the artillery you can bet on that.

yeah, the P-II is a joke.  Really.  It's a P-Pro without the on-chip L2 cache
(the celeron better qualifies as a P-pro successor!) and has those 32-bit
optimization instructions removed.  I am still angry at Intel for doing that.

Microsoft is a monopoly.  Now will YOU tell the software vendors to stop
WRITING SOLELY FOR FUCKING MICROSOFT?!  THAT is the true problem!  Microsoft
has its hands in the goo, too, but if you hadn't noticed it's the bloody
applications which make computers semi-useful.  Without apps, you have a box
of
plastic and silicon - both better left for Hollywood bimbos.



pcguido@attglobal.net wrote:

> First (let's get it out of the way):
>
> This is an OS/2 newsgroup. There is no future. Get over it...
>
> OK, that being said; the MS shills are (as always) sadly mistaken
> if they think: a) They will change any minds with their drivel.
> b) Immagine they are here, convincing the right people.
>
> Just as when they tried (and failed) to promote Win95 to a 32-bit
> Operating System, we were not who needed to be convinced, it was
> the Penitum Pro that needed fooling, which they never could manage,
> hence the Pentium II with its 16-bit optimizations...
>
> So what's next? Win2k will be different? Microsoft is _not_ a
> monopoly (and even if they are, they're a nice one...)?
>
> Sounds more like: Just how many impossible things can you
> believe before breakfast?
>
> Guido
>
> In <3831EDB2.BD55DB28@nls.net>, "David D. Huff Jr." <huffd@nls.net> writes:
> |Every time one of these whiny-ass MicroSloth crusaders writes me
> |personally and spews forth revisionist history.
> |
> |The last one claims that IBM helped to setup MicroSloth at the
> |anti-trust hearings. I thought that was called testimony now they call
> |it setting someone up.
> |
> |Part of the letter I received discussed a part of computer history that
> |happened twenty years ago. And this brash young fellow proceeds to tell
> |me how I have it all wrong. Piss on you I was here I lived it! It just
> |hasn't been the same since the trial. All of these weirdos are coming
> |out of the closet and counter posting or writing direct about
> |everything. It looks like the devil wants to have his day and his
> |minions are doing their best to put on a full court press. But dang guys
> |you aint gona change my mind. I think maybe I should play a more active
> |part in your re-education.
> |
> |Even with all the in-fighting and back-biting between the OS2 dudes and
> |dudetts we look pretty normal compared to most of the stupidity embraced
> |by the opposition.
> |

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: http://extra.newsguy.com (1:109/42)

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

From: kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com               20-Nov-99 09:09:21
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 14:53:12
Subj: Re: THE VERSION OF OS/2 WARP 4 THAT CAN RUN WINDOWS 95 >>YES IT DOES

From: "Kim Cheung" <kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com>

On 20 Nov 1999 16:15:44 GMT, pcguido@attglobal.net wrote:

>Don't hold your breath for an OS/2 that can run Win32 apps.

Never say never.


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

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

From: cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org                      20-Nov-99 09:11:11
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 14:53:12
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: "Chad Mulligan" <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org>


Richard A Crane <rcrane@octa4.net.au> wrote in message
news:HN2tEbdbtdhk-pn2-KRv7HCbQkvNR@localhost...
> On Wed, 10 Nov 1999 23:13:21, "Chad Mulligan"
> <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org> wrote:
>
> > That just confirms that the Judge was in the pocket of the whiners that
> > brought the case.
> >
> Headline news "Chad Mulligan alleges MS judge was corrupt"!
>

brought not bought, though that is a good possibility too.

> On what basis- do you have knowledge of a financial
> transaction for the judges benefit?
> Richard A Crane
> Barrister & Solicitor
> slightly altered email (anti-spamming) rcrane AT
> octa4.net.au
> OR rcrane AT attglobal.net


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

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

From: cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org                      20-Nov-99 09:12:16
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 14:53:12
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: "Chad Mulligan" <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org>


Richard A Crane <rcrane@octa4.net.au> wrote in message
news:HN2tEbdbtdhk-pn2-b61623QIpc58@localhost...
> On Thu, 11 Nov 1999 23:12:23, "Chad Mulligan"
> <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org> wrote:
>
> > The training curve of three respective systems show Macs to have a
shallower
> > initial curve that peaks at a very low level of knowledge, UNIX has very
> > steep initial curve that peaks very high, windows splits the difference
> > while not restricting how much a user can learn.
> >
> With such a big claim I'd expect supporting citation of
> documents evidencing these findings.  Note well Chad does
> not bother with such.

Do you have any evidence that contradicts my opinion as stated?

> Richard A Crane
> Barrister & Solicitor
> slightly altered email (anti-spamming) rcrane AT
> octa4.net.au
> OR rcrane AT attglobal.net


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

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

From: ispy@groovyshow.com                               20-Nov-99 10:19:26
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 14:53:12
Subj: The intelligence level of this newsgroup is downright amusing

From: Kelly Robinson <ispy@groovyshow.com>

Win95 is not a 32-bit OS and I cringe every time I hear it.  We all know
this.  But some don't know:

OS/2 is not 32-bit for the exact same reasons as Win9x - it incorporates
16-bit code, too.  'nuff said on that matter.  May as well throw stones
in every window and not just one.

Some of us are here to express opinions, not change minds.  See, that's
what a newsgroup is for.  To talk.  If you change your mind after
listening to another's blab, then great.  If not, oh well.  I [usually]
could care less either way.

There is only type of scenario where I do my damndest to change minds
and they are called "Political rallies supporting certain human rights
agendas".  I mean, computer shit is computer shit.  I'm just here to
talk shallow like the rest of y'all.  But when human issues, epsecially
those which pertain to me, arise, I will be there with all the artillery
and you can bet on that with full intention of changing minds, if not
solely turning heads.

The P-II, while I'm at it, is a joke.  Really.  It's a P-Pro without the
on-chip L2 cache.  The celeron better qualifies as a P-pro successor
since both keep the L2 on chip for same-speed performance!  And the
P-II/III/Celeron had those 32-bit optimization instructions removed.  I
am still angry at Intel for doing that.  Even when the II came out (or
even now with the III) there is enough 32-bit code to make the
instructions useful.  In a way, Intel should never have removed the
32-bit instructions since it'd compel users (the ones who'd actually
notice as most of them are dumb in the first place) to get a real 32-bit
OS (NT, Unix, Linux, BeOS).

Microsoft is a monopoly.  Okay, I won't argue that anymore <cheers and
applause>.  But now read the next paragraph very carefully since very
few of you pushers seem to take it into account - why you don't is
unclear but I bet it's because you've been too busy urinating on
Microsoft and not studying the remainder of the issue.

Will YOU tell the software vendors to stop WRITING SOLELY FOR FUCKING
MICROSOFT?!  THAT is the true problem!  Microsoft has its hands in the
goo, too, but if you hadn't noticed it's the bloody applications which
make computers semi-useful.  Without apps, you have a box of plastic and
silicon - both better left for Hollywood bimbos.  Now software makers
are going to ahve to take a chance and make an effort to recompile their
simplistic C++ code on another hardware box so maybe it's too much
effort for them, I don't know.  Jeez, C++ was supposed to be made as
multi-platform happy - recompile anywhere... now we have java, something
infinitely slower.

And before you urinate on me about java, especially with the truly
stupid reposte of  "Faster processors will make the Java issue
pointless."  WRONG.  Faster processors will equally speed up every other
current platform considerably more.  Bill Gates once said that
processors would become so powerful that people would write fat sloppy
code.  That's almost verbatim!  And he was right, thanks to Windows (and
OS/2 since he was with IBM for that for a while) we have big fat sloppy
code.  Now for the icing to the insult cake, along comes Java - rather
the Java virtual machine.  It's a big waste.  For cutsie internet shite
it's okay but it will never take the place of the most efficient non-JVM
computer.

Hmmm... if Java is meant to be platform independent, if everyone started
to work on Java wouldn't that make Java a monopoly of its own right?

Since most computers (Dell, compaq, micron, gateway) use the same type
of technology originally cobbled together by IBM because they wanted to
keep their own monopoly intact by ensuring that the new desktop
generation would be slow shit (really, look it up.  The 808x is
horrible.  And IBM knew their name would see anything, even rotten
tomatos.)  Oh, IBM a monopoly you say?  Yup.  Look that up, too.
Anyway, since Compaq and the rest use the basic design, the IBM PC is
effectively a monopoly too.  Macs are shit but that's beside the point,
in order to make money you need to do the same identical thing as
everybody else.  And that truly is sad.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: http://extra.newsguy.com (1:109/42)

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

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          20-Nov-99 17:31:24
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 14:53:12
Subj: Re: OS/2 is an excellent system admin OS

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>pcguido@attglobal.net
>MS was not good enough to finish [OS/2].

On the other hand, IBM "finished" OS/2. Yes, under IBM's stewardship,
OS/2 is *definitely* "finished".

Someone fetch the trumpet already and play taps.

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

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

From: djohnson@isomedia.com                             20-Nov-99 09:30:07
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 14:53:12
Subj: Re: IBM Stock...

From: "David T. Johnson" <djohnson@isomedia.com>

Jerry McBride wrote:
> 
> --- I read this somewhere... ---
> --- quote  ---
> 
> When IBM killed the Warp 5 client, the stock dropped almost 50 points.
> Boom, straight down.
> 
> Now, apparently, a few days ago, IBM decided to continue supporting OS/2
> until 2006.  The stock has risen almost linearly by about 10 points.
> 
> Analysts are somewhat puzzled since there are no visible reasons, but we
> know, don't we?  Karma.
> 
The desktop operating system software business is one of the must
lucrative businesses that has ever existed as evidenced by Microsoft's
billions of dollars in profits.  But IBM seems to put the business on
the same level as selling dog turds for fertilizer.  In the past, IBM
executives could hunker down in the boardroom and point to Microsoft and
their stranglehold on the business as a reason for them to stay out of
it.  Now, however, the government is out on the field running
interference and saying to IBM and others 'Score some points, dammit!' 
So IBM is out of excuses.  They can continue to walk away from the
desktop business with a lot of mealy-mouthed excuses about how hard it
is and about how no one needs desktop operating system software anymore
but these statements will be seen for what they are:  excuses.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

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

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          20-Nov-99 17:34:25
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 14:53:12
Subj: Re: IBM Stock...

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>Jerry McBride
>When IBM killed the Warp 5 client, the stock dropped almost 50 points.
>Boom, straight down.
>Now, apparently, a few days ago, IBM decided to continue supporting OS/2
>until 2006.  The stock has risen almost linearly by about 10 points.
>Analysts are somewhat puzzled since there are no visible reasons, but we
>know, don't we?

You actually believe that IBM's stock price is determined by what they
do with OS/2????

Wow, you OS/2 zealots are remarkably naive and deluded.

So, are any of you actually sane?

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

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

From: znu@znu.dhs.org                                   20-Nov-99 18:29:07
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 14:53:12
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: znu@znu.dhs.org (ZnU)

In article <816l54$qmv$2@news.campuscwix.net>, "Chad Mulligan"
<cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org> wrote:

> Richard A Crane <rcrane@octa4.net.au> wrote in message
> news:HN2tEbdbtdhk-pn2-b61623QIpc58@localhost...
> > On Thu, 11 Nov 1999 23:12:23, "Chad Mulligan"
> > <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org> wrote:
> >
> > > The training curve of three respective systems show Macs to have a
> shallower
> > > initial curve that peaks at a very low level of knowledge, UNIX has very
> > > steep initial curve that peaks very high, windows splits the difference
> > > while not restricting how much a user can learn.
> > >
> > With such a big claim I'd expect supporting citation of
> > documents evidencing these findings.  Note well Chad does
> > not bother with such.
> 
> Do you have any evidence that contradicts my opinion as stated?

I can fly under my own power, without the aid of any device. Do you have
any evidence that contradicts my opinion as stated?

-- 
All parts should go together without forcing.  You must remember that the
parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you.  Therefore, if you
can't get them together again, there must be a reason.  By all means, do
not use a hammer.
           --IBM maintenance manual, 1925

ZnU <znu@znu.dhs.org> | <http://znu.dhs.org>

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

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

From: flmighe@attglobal.net                             20-Nov-99 21:00:03
  To: All                                               20-Nov-99 18:58:10
Subj: Re: THE VERSION OF OS/2 WARP 4 THAT CAN RUN WINDOWS 95 >>YES IT DOES EX

From: flmighe@attglobal.net

In <3834d344_3@news1.prserv.net>, pcguido@attglobal.net writes:

Nothing is obvious. If you want to run OS/2 and Win95
on the same machine, you can do that. You can do that
today on IBM Thinkpads. What should be obvious is that
consumers are making a big mistake purchasing Win95
only applications. In fact why should consumers even 
purchase an office suite when Star office is free. Consumers
should be aware that Java based products are the
future.

But, The Win32s 3.0 controversy comes to mind. You
remember Microsoft was trying to kill Win 3.X on OS/2
and had developers "upgrade" to a version of Win32 that
would not work in Win OS/2. It turns out that that version
did nothing. Adobe Photo Shop, for example, still runs under
Win OS/2, if you reinstal the older version of Win32s.

Consumers that stuck with Win 3.1 are better off than
than those that upgraded to Win95/98 except that if
you have Win 98 you are likely to get $120 refund owing
to the FoF. 

Technical issues are often not the real problem. I think
you pointed that out below.

http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/lssys.htm

|Not to point out the obvious or anything; but, he
|wants OS/2 to run Win95, not his PC.i
|
|Give-it-up, won't happen for a number of reasons.
|
|1. (Technical) Differing memory models.
|
|Win-32 allocates a 2 GB user address space, OS/2 allocates
|a 512 MB user address space. The first thing that Win95
|does when DOS loads it, is to touch the 2 GB line - causing
|a fatal error in OS/2. IBM could change this; but that would
|(or at least, might) break a lot of legacy code in the
|vertical apps that big OS/2 customers have written over the
|years.
|
|2. (Business Reasons) Investment Protection
|
|IBM has lots of big customers (read enterprise) who use
|many different sizes of computers and write a lot of their
|own apps. IBM avoids doing anything that would devalue
|a customer's previous investment in IBM solutions. This is
|the reason always cited by IBM for not pursuing #1 above.
|
|3. (Legal) MS vs DOJ
|
|IBM is not stupid enough to try to prove to the DOJ that
|there _is_ a way around the MS monopoly. Plenty of time
|for that after the hangin' judge guts 'em. For now, any
|attempt at real competition will have to come from the
|Linux kids.
|
|Personally, I hope MS fights the DOJ to the last Windows OEM.
|Once the judge rules them an illegal monopolist, they will
|be liable to myriad civil suits, all for tripple damages.
|Gates might actually be able to tough out the goverment,
|after all IBM did; but, he'll never survive the death of
|a thousand cuts that all the little folk who he's bullied
|will inflict.
|
|Hope he's too proud to settle...
|
|
|Guido
|
|In <3834c53c_2@news1.prserv.net|, flmighe@attglobal.net writes:
||In <udcwOBg00GeJoV5kTSPS698QwfzE@4ax.com|, Diablo <kinghell@earthlink.net|
writes:
|||I Here Their Is A Version Of Os/2 Warp 4 That Can Run
|||Windows 95 Insted Of Win 3.1 And That People Who
|||Have Been Inside IBM Have Actually Seen It Work
|||But Can't Be Released Because Microsoft Wont Alow It
|||I Would Love It If Some One Could Get A Copy Of It
|||And Post It Here Or Give An FTP SITE To Where It
|||Is At.
||
||As far as I know, all the ThinkPads from 380 on up are
||capable of that. Yesterday, I tried it, just to confirm on
||one of the 380D Thinkpad computers that egghead is
||selling for < $800 .
||
||OS/2 Warp 4 loaded into the C: partition where
||Windows 95 had been pre loaded by IBM. Once loaded
||I was able to boot back to Windows 95 without problem.
||Then after shutting down to DOS mode I was able to boot
||back to OS/2. I could not go directly from Windows 95 to
||OS/2. That was the only bit missing. Windows 95 was
||intact. OS/2 worked fine. I even got Win OS/2. You would
||probably need to fiddle a bit to get special drivers and
||sound but it was an easy install.
||
||http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/client.htm
||
|
|

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: mroeder@best.cNOoSPAMm                            20-Nov-99 12:23:06
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 02:58:01
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: mroeder@best.cNOoSPAMm (Timberwoof)

In article <HN2tEbdbtdhk-pn2-YJny7ESYfqxt@localhost>, rcrane@octa4.net.au
wrote:

> On Wed, 10 Nov 1999 23:29:55, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
> wrote:
> 
> [USA Jurisprudential theories snipped]
> > 
> > The court must have some regard for the employees and families of the
> > corporation in question.  If they significantly and radically harm the
> > corporation many innocent employees will suffer unjustly.
> > 
> What is an innocent employee (??- someone who never did 
> anything??) and why should this argument hold any more water
> than the hory chestnut about not goaling someone as they 
> have family who would be upset?
> 
> As I understand it USA finds it necesssary to send more of 
> its citizens per 1000 head of population to goal than 
> anywhere else in the "Western World" (I don't know where 
> that leaves me though as the Territory I live in goals 13x 
> the national average per 1000 people!!)
> 
> Richard A Crane
> Barrister & Solicitor
> slightly altered email (anti-spamming) rcrane AT 
> octa4.net.au 
> OR rcrane AT attglobal.net
> PS email replies this is getting too off topic!

Don't you mean "gaol"? A "goal" is what I sometimes stand in front of.

-- 
Timberwoof; mroeder<at>best<dot>com; http://www.best.com/~mroeder
Ice Hockey QA Engineer (Goalie), 1998 BMW R1100GS rider, and
not your ordinary noncomformist. "You may have the right to say that,
but I will defend to the death my right to disagree."

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

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

From: malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu                      20-Nov-99 15:33:16
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 02:58:01
Subj: Re: IBM Stock...

From: Jason <malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu>

Jeff Glatt <jglatt@spamgone-borg.com> wrote:
:>Jerry McBride
:>When IBM killed the Warp 5 client, the stock dropped almost 50 points.
:>Boom, straight down.
:>Now, apparently, a few days ago, IBM decided to continue supporting OS/2
:>until 2006.  The stock has risen almost linearly by about 10 points.
:>Analysts are somewhat puzzled since there are no visible reasons, but we
:>know, don't we?

: You actually believe that IBM's stock price is determined by what they
: do with OS/2????

: Wow, you OS/2 zealots are remarkably naive and deluded.

: So, are any of you actually sane?

You windows looneys that live in this group are amazingly devoid of humor.

-Jason

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

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

From: malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu                      20-Nov-99 15:40:01
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 02:58:01
Subj: Re: Not even Ballmer likes NT

From: Jason <malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu>

Kelly Robinson <ispy@groovyshow.com> wrote:

: Oh yeah, did I say that IBM invited Microsoft into the PC realm?  IBM seems
to
: be the root of all evil.

If you did, you were completely wrong.  Microsoft was the largest seller 
of PC languages long before IBM even considered making a personal 
computer.  It was Microsoft who helped IBM get into the PC realm, by 
making sure that the deals went through by securing them an operating 
system for their PC.

-Jason

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

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

From: cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org                      20-Nov-99 13:07:23
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 02:58:01
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: "Chad Mulligan" <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org>

ZnU <znu@znu.dhs.org> wrote in message
news:znu-2011991325430001@192.168.0.2...
> In article <816l54$qmv$2@news.campuscwix.net>, "Chad Mulligan"
> <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org> wrote:
>
> > Richard A Crane <rcrane@octa4.net.au> wrote in message
> > news:HN2tEbdbtdhk-pn2-b61623QIpc58@localhost...
> > > On Thu, 11 Nov 1999 23:12:23, "Chad Mulligan"
> > > <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > The training curve of three respective systems show Macs to have a
> > shallower
> > > > initial curve that peaks at a very low level of knowledge, UNIX has
very
> > > > steep initial curve that peaks very high, windows splits the
difference
> > > > while not restricting how much a user can learn.
> > > >
> > > With such a big claim I'd expect supporting citation of
> > > documents evidencing these findings.  Note well Chad does
> > > not bother with such.
> >
> > Do you have any evidence that contradicts my opinion as stated?
>
> I can fly under my own power, without the aid of any device. Do you have
> any evidence that contradicts my opinion as stated?

Pleased to meet you Mr. Dent.

>
> --
> All parts should go together without forcing.  You must remember that the
> parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you.  Therefore, if you
> can't get them together again, there must be a reason.  By all means, do
> not use a hammer.
>            --IBM maintenance manual, 1925
>
> ZnU <znu@znu.dhs.org> | <http://znu.dhs.org>


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

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

From: Alan_Baker@bc.sympatico.ca                        20-Nov-99 14:59:04
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 02:58:01
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Alan_Baker@bc.sympatico.ca (Alan Baker)

In article <mroeder-2011991223120001@dynamic42.pm09.sf3d.best.com>,
mroeder@best.cNOoSPAMm (Timberwoof) wrote:

>In article <HN2tEbdbtdhk-pn2-YJny7ESYfqxt@localhost>, rcrane@octa4.net.au
wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 10 Nov 1999 23:29:55, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> [USA Jurisprudential theories snipped]
>> > 
>> > The court must have some regard for the employees and families of the
>> > corporation in question.  If they significantly and radically harm the
>> > corporation many innocent employees will suffer unjustly.
>> > 
>> What is an innocent employee (??- someone who never did 
>> anything??) and why should this argument hold any more water
>> than the hory chestnut about not goaling someone as they 
>> have family who would be upset?
>> 
>> As I understand it USA finds it necesssary to send more of 
>> its citizens per 1000 head of population to goal than 
>> anywhere else in the "Western World" (I don't know where 
>> that leaves me though as the Territory I live in goals 13x 
>> the national average per 1000 people!!)
>> 
>> Richard A Crane
>> Barrister & Solicitor
>> slightly altered email (anti-spamming) rcrane AT 
>> octa4.net.au 
>> OR rcrane AT attglobal.net
>> PS email replies this is getting too off topic!
>
>Don't you mean "gaol"? A "goal" is what I sometimes stand in front of.

And something into which I would try to put the puck in despite your
standing there. Although I suspect not all that often.

-- 
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall to that
wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you sit in the 
bottom of that cupboard."

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

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

From: spamcatcher@softhome.net                          20-Nov-99 19:50:10
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 02:58:01
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows...

From: spamcatcher@softhome.net (Mike)

In article <8NSY3.20$EN1.38800@news.bctel.net>, mike@lionsgate.com (Mike
Stephen) wrote:

> In message <sdIzOBlEE6Aojmy+ALnAlrxatedl@4ax.com> - Hobbyist
> <alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net>Thu, 18 Nov 1999 05:29:31 -0500 writes:
> :>
> :>clasqm@mweb.co.za (Michel Clasquin) posted:
> :>
> :>> On Wed, 17 Nov 1999 08:55:15 GMT, mike@lionsgate.com (Mike Stephen)
> :>> wrote:
> :>> 
> :>> >system level, not at an application level)!  Running two videos as
> :>> >once tends to tax Beos to the limit.  Whereas I can run three or four
> :>> 
> :>> Sorry to be the one to tell you this, but there's something wrong with
> :>> your system. I only have a humble AMDK6 200 with 64M RAM, and my
> :>> graphics card is just barely supported, but I can  run 4 or 5 AVI's
> :>> and Quicktimes with no perceptible slowdown - and that's from CDROM.
> :>> When I push it up to eight, they start running slower, but don't skip
> :>> any frames that I can see. Windows chokes solid on just 2.
> :>
> :>No, there's nothing wrong with his system. He's just an OS/2 advocate
> :>spreading exaggerated claims of OS/2 superiority. Your refute doesn't
> :>surprise me in the least. After using OS/2 for 2 yrs, then using NT, I
> :>found no significant differences in multitasking between the two and I
> :>did run tests and did things with NT that OS/2 advocates claimed
> :>couldn't be done where NT multitasking is concerned. I'd take their
> :>rants in this regard with a big grain of salt.
> 
> If you found no significant differences between NT's multitasking nd
> OS/2's multitasking then I think you really do not run more than 2-3
> apps at once.  On my system just booting up to my standard screen,
> takes 24 active tasks,  33 processes, and 133 threads.  
> 
> Oh please  This from a Win advovate...  no less! My system is a bit on
> the slow side, it is a AMD 450Mhz with 64 megs dram.  If I play both
> the mpgs (the monitors thrown off the building) at the same time, they
> do not play smoothly at all.  This is fact, not exageration.
> 
> :> 
> :>> The shortage of codecs is a fair comment, though. You do come across
> :>> clips that BeOS doesn't recognise.
> :>> 
> :>> Regarding your comments on the interface: the tracker/deskbar
> :>> interface is just a program, and on Be's site it  is stated explicitly
> :>> somewhere in the FAQ that it can be replaced. So, learn to program the
> :>> BeOS and duplicate the OS/2 shell. If there are really thousands of
> :>> prospective customers out there, you might make yourself a small
> :>> fortune in shareware fees. But don't expect Be to do it for you.
> :>> They've developed a signature UI (which us hardened BeOS users have
> :>> learned to love and respect) of their own, and IMHO they should stick
> :>> to it.
> 
> It is very similar to the windows interface, and nothing like the WPS
> with SOM and DSOM.
> 
> :>
> :>He's one of those OS/2 advocates that's expects another OS/2 WPS out
> :>of another OS. If he doesn't get this, then it's crap and a total
> :>disappointment. The refute to this would be that OS/2 has made them
> :>expectant of high standards and intolerant of mediocrity. I say
> :>they're inflexible and almost obsessed in the main (this is a
> :>generalisation please).
> 
> Obsessed?  All I want is an operating system that at least meets my
> needs.  Windows certainly doesn't, and I was hoping BEOS did.  It
> doesn't either.  I do wish someone out there would adapt the SOM/DSOM
> model and incorporate it into a GUI like the WPS.  I do not need it to
> look like the WPS, just act like it.  At least I consider BEOS a lot
> better than Windows NT.  However it still is no match for Warp OS/2. 
> I can demonstrate it any time for anyone who wishes.  Just send me a
> note when you are in Vancouver.  I have both operating systems
> installed and can demontrate those same two mpg files in both BEOS and
> OS/2.  You can decide which operating system can handle the two MPGS
> better.

If you like OS/2 so much why don't you try to reimplement the parts of it
you like.... and make your own OS. Otherwise shut up and get back in line.
OS/2 ain't coming back and no OS is perfect.

-- 
For a good time visit:
http://digitalheresy.tripod.com

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

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

From: malstrom@emily.oit.umass.edu                      20-Nov-99 18:23:22
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 02:58:02
Subj: Re: Not even Ballmer likes NT

From: Jason <malstrom@emily.oit.umass.edu>

flmighe@attglobal.net wrote:
: In <38370723@oit.umass.edu>, Jason <malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu> writes:
:>Kelly Robinson <ispy@groovyshow.com> wrote:
:>
:>: Oh yeah, did I say that IBM invited Microsoft into the PC realm?  IBM
seems to
:>: be the root of all evil.
:>
:>If you did, you were completely wrong.  Microsoft was the largest seller 
:>of PC languages long before IBM even considered making a personal 
:>computer.  It was Microsoft who helped IBM get into the PC realm, by 
:>making sure that the deals went through by securing them an operating 
:>system for their PC.
:>

: Actually, the story I am aware of has Bill Gate's mother begging her
: IBM friend at United Way to give her son some kind of an opportunity.
: Without the connection through the United Way Bill would never have been
: able to ace out the owners of CPM, a fine OS that would have worked
: fine for IBM. The root of all evil - then - is United Way ;>)

That sounds not quite correct since it was Microsoft who refered IBM to 
Digital Research to license CPM.  It was only after that deal didn't go 
through that Microsoft promised IBM an operating system in order not to 
lose the BASIC deal they had made.  As who referred IBM to Microsoft to 
buy BASIC in the first place, I don't know.

-Jason

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

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

From: al_kahn@crl.com                                   21-Nov-99 01:40:00
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 02:58:02
Subj: Re: IBM Stock...

From: al_kahn@crl.com

On Sun, 21 Nov 1999 00:20:03, isxios@yahoo.com (Isxios) wrote:

> Windows zealots apparently don't have a sense of humor...
> 
> Didn't you get the fact that it was meant as a joke of sorts?
>
 
 You are  right. There is no sport with these guys. They come up and 
hit (chomp)on anything that hits the water. Even a lunker bass under 
the lily pads hesitates a little more than these galloots. They are 
like a frisky bronc at a rodeo. And when you got a good horse, got's 
to RIDE IM !

festus

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: yegned_mugombo@rrl.net                            21-Nov-99 02:26:06
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 02:58:02
Subj: Re: The intelligence level of this newsgroup is downright amusing

From: yegned_mugombo@rrl.net

On Sat, 20 Nov 1999 16:19:52, Kelly Robinson <ispy@groovyshow.com> 
wrote:

> Win95 is not a 32-bit OS and I cringe every time I hear it.  We all know
> this.  But some don't know:
> 
> OS/2 is not 32-bit for the exact same reasons as Win9x - it incorporates
> 16-bit code, too.  'nuff said on that matter.  May as well throw stones
> in every window and not just one.
> 
> Some of us are here to express opinions, not change minds.  See, that's
> what a newsgroup is for.  To talk.  If you change your mind after
> listening to another's blab, then great.  If not, oh well.  I [usually]
> could care less either way.



Do you talk that much in bed ? 


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: glshimi@attglobal.net                             21-Nov-99 00:32:13
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 02:58:02
Subj: Re: Bye-Bye OS/2

From: "Gary L. Shiminsky" <glshimi@attglobal.net>

I'm seriosly considering OS2 Warp just because of all the problems I've
had trying to upgrade to a Pentium from a 486 using Win95.  Unless you
buy a prepackage system, trying to do anything with Win95 is not
straightforward.  You sort of have to approach it from the side and
sneak up on it.  In addition, after having read the judges "Finding of
Facts" why would I want to enrich a corporation that has so little
regard about me as a comsumer?


"uno@40th.com" wrote:
> 
> Bob Germer? (bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com?) wrote (Mon, 15 Nov 1999 00:37:05
-0500):
> >system. Their boat isn't sinking and neither is mine.
> 
> Somebody has to make up the 0.025% (one-quarter of one percent)
> of systems out there using OS2.  Pure xx-DOS makes up about 3%.
> If OS2 isn't (still) sinking, it sure is dead in the water.
> 
> Who here, if they were just starting today, would install OS2
> as the sole (99% use) OS?  If you have to guts to admit it, at
> least say why you'd use OS2 (avoid cliches if possible) instead
> of say, NT4.  I doubt more than a couple will dare.  I know none
> will have a good reason.  Simple challenge.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: josco@ibm.net                                     20-Nov-99 21:56:09
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 02:58:02
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Chad Mulligan wrote:

> Richard A Crane <rcrane@octa4.net.au> wrote in message
> news:HN2tEbdbtdhk-pn2-b61623QIpc58@localhost...
> > On Thu, 11 Nov 1999 23:12:23, "Chad Mulligan"
> > <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org> wrote:
> >
> > > The training curve of three respective systems show Macs to have a
> shallower
> > > initial curve that peaks at a very low level of knowledge, UNIX has very
> > > steep initial curve that peaks very high, windows splits the difference
> > > while not restricting how much a user can learn.
> > >
> > With such a big claim I'd expect supporting citation of
> > documents evidencing these findings.  Note well Chad does
> > not bother with such.
>
> Do you have any evidence that contradicts my opinion as stated?

I don't have any evidence that MS isn't killing orphan children.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         21-Nov-99 04:54:07
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 02:58:02
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Lucien writes:

>>>>>>> Answer the question put to you:

>>>>>> Take the two simple tests, Lucien.

>>>>> Note the refusal to answer a basic, central question - looks like
>>>>> we've hit another major soft spot.

>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

>>> Note again the pat refusal to answer the question.

>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

> ....and we see the refusal again

Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?  What we really see is your
dishonest deletion of my answer.

> (another instance of an implicit concession to my argument).

You're erroneously presupposing the existence of some "refusal",
Lucien.  How ironic that your own "refusal" to take the two simple
tests represents another instance of "an implicit concession to my
argument".

> The question again:

Unnecessary, Lucien, given that I've answered it.  I will restore my
two simple tests, however, given that you've never taken them.

> According to your statement, under what conditions
> does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
> functionality..."?

Perhaps you'd like to tell me how the statement you keep pointing to
applies to the JDK sentence, Lucien.

> Here is your statement again for reference:

I don't need it again, Lucien, but I do find it ironic that you would
delete text to alter the context.

> "The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
> 'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
> information."

And how does that concern the JDK sentence, Lucien, as you've repeatedly
insisted?

Note again the pat "refusal" to take the two simple tests:

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Meanwhile, I noticed that you failed to answer my little test,
Lucien:

] #1:  It rained today.                                              
]                                                                    
] #2:  It rained today until sunset.                                 
]                                                                    
] The question:  did it rain all of the day or only some of the day? 
]                                                                    
] The word "rained", by itself, doesn't indicate duration, therefore 
] one cannot determine an unambiguous answer to the question in the  
] absence of other information.  Yet I will claim that the answer to 
] the question is in fact unambiguous in the case of statement #2.   
]                                                                    
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.                                    

Test grade:  F.

Here's another little test for you, Lucien:

] #3:  It did rain today.
] 
] #4:  It didn't rain today.
] 
] The question:  what fraction of the day did it rain?
] 
] Structurally, the two statements are identical, yet there is nothing
] in statement #3 that allows the question to be answered unambiguously,
] while there is something in statement #4 that does allow the question
] to be answered unambigiously.
] 
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.

Test grade:  F.

Perhaps readers will notice how 3-4 corresponds to the "prevent costly
mistakes" thread, where the quantification is provided by the definition
of a word and not the structure.  Perhaps readers will notice how 1-2
corresponds to the "Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality" thread,
where the additional information resolves what would otherwise be
ambiguous.

Yet more evidence that you're playing your own "infantile game".   
Or are you really that idiotic?                                    

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: flmighe@attglobal.net                             21-Nov-99 05:43:14
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 05:24:18
Subj: Re: Revisited: Bye Bye OS/2

From: flmighe@attglobal.net

In <Pine.SOL.4.10.9911181128470.3284-100000@comp.uark.edu>, "Vincent P.
LaBella" <vlabella@comp.uark.edu> writes:

>If I learned one thing in the past eight years with OS/2 it is to keep
>everything as platform independant as possible (i.e. ignore the OS that
>you are using, it is uniportant and can disapear at any minute).

That is the way things ought to be. But Jackson found that Microsoft
used its monopoly power to make certain that that was not reality. Reality,
for the last 10 years has been that if you code you code with Windows
in mind. One of the interesting aspects of DoJ Microsoft case is that it 
focused on competition for browsers not competition for operating systems. 
It appears that building an operating system that competes technologically 
against Windows 95/98 is not all that difficult. Heck even Microsoft can do
it.
But it takes monopoly power to build a browser that can compete against
the Notes and Netscape browsers. That is what the case focused on.

http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/lsmonop.htm
read the Facts from Jackson. Learn a lot more about OS/2 and how
Microsoft forced IBM to stop marketing it.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: mroeder@best.cNOoSPAMm                            20-Nov-99 21:29:00
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 05:24:18
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: mroeder@best.cNOoSPAMm (Timberwoof)

In article <slrn83e4b3.p5u.float@incandescent.firedrake.org>,
float@incandescent.firedrake.org (void) wrote:

> In article <mroeder-2011991223120001@dynamic42.pm09.sf3d.best.com>,
Timberwoof
> wrote:
> >
> >Don't you mean "gaol"? A "goal" is what I sometimes stand in front of.
> 
> Yeah, I mean, if you're going to talk English wrong, you could at least
> spell it right.  ;-)
> 
> <preparing to hide from murderous mob of Brits>

You misspelled "gits".  }: )

-- 
Timberwoof; mroeder<at>best<dot>com; http://www.best.com/~mroeder
Ice Hockey QA Engineer (Goalie), 1998 BMW R1100GS rider, and
not your ordinary noncomformist. "You may have the right to say that,
but I will defend to the death my right to disagree."

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

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

From: josco@ibm.net                                     20-Nov-99 21:48:27
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 05:24:18
Subj: Re: Not even Ballmer likes NT

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Kelly Robinson wrote:

> Yeah, but by doing the format C: and installing one of the below, you lose
> compatibiltiy with a Swedishload of apps.
>
> And MS was a dumbfuck for creating DLLs (and the GD registry) but app
designers
> are equally, if not more, to blame for making their own molestations to
system
> DLLs.
>
> Let's keep blame in perspective.
>
> Oh yeah, did I say that IBM invited Microsoft into the PC realm?  IBM seems
to
> be the root of all evil.

Head check time.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: josco@ibm.net                                     20-Nov-99 21:54:19
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 05:24:18
Subj: Re: I am worried about our future generations...

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Kelly Robinson wrote:

> Win95 is not a 32-bit OS and I cringe every time I hear it.
>
> ON THE SAME NOTE, OS/2 is equally not 32-bit for the exact same reasons -

ZDLabs tested OS/2 3.0 and Win95 on the Pentium Pro.  Win95 ran slower, 16-bit 
code
crippled the OS's performance.  OS/2 ran faster.  OS/2 is a 32-bit OS.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                21-Nov-99 03:39:09
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 10:40:09
Subj: Re: Tholen Digest II - Electric Boogaloo

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu (tholenbot)

In article <815gnq$6ag$2@news.hawaii.edu>, tholenantispam@hawaii.edu wrote:

> Eric Bennett writes (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see you're appending text again without adding a level of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> indentation, thereby creating the potential for the correct
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> attribution to be misunderstood by the casual reader. 
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't understand.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> >>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> >>> Enjoying your chat with tholenbot, Dave?
> 
> >> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> > Doesn't look like Eliza anymore.  Looks more like Dave Tholen pasting in
> > canned lines from Eliza without actually having Eliza respond to the
> > post.  
> 
> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.

See what I mean?
 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> But
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> even that wouldn't completely solve the problem, as you've
also
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> screwed up the correct attributions. 
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Is the fact that even that would not completely solve the
problem
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> as Marty also screwed up the correct attributions the real
reason?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>> Enjoying your chat with tholenbot, Dave?
> 
> >> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> > Doesn't look like Eliza anymore.  Looks more like Dave Tholen pasting in
> > canned lines from Eliza without actually having Eliza respond to the
> > post.  
> 
> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

See what I mean?

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note that the URL and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the line that follows have the same level of indentation, yet
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> you wrote one and I wrote the other.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Does the fact that the url and the line that follows have
the same
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> indentation yet Marty wrote one and you wrote the other
explain
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> anything else?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?
> 
> >>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?
> 
> >>> Enjoying your chat with tholenbot, Dave?
> 
> >> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> > Doesn't look like Eliza anymore.  Looks more like Dave Tholen pasting in
> > canned lines from Eliza without actually having Eliza respond to the post.
> 
> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?

See what I mean?

-- 
"I do not "approve" phrases.
-Dave Tholen"
-tholenbot

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

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

From: sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.c...               21-Nov-99 11:27:29
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 10:40:10
Subj: Re: Interesting Reading Comprehension Problem by Bass

Message sender: sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk

From: David Sutherland <sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk>

On 19 Nov 1999 00:23:58 GMT, tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)
wrote:

>Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:
>
>CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
>CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.
>
>I am deleting all but the most recent new text.
>
>Curtis Bass writes:
>
>> Classic Tholen: Misinterpret what your opponent says
>
>What alleged misinterpretation, Curtis?
>
>> and insist that your misinterpretation
>
>What alleged misinterpretation, Curtis?
>
>> is the correct interpretation,
>
>I didn't "insist" on anything, Curtis.  I simply proved that it is the
>correct interpretation by reproducing the actual relevant quotation.
>
>> because it's the "logical" one,
>
>On the contrary, one doesn't require logic to recognize an actual
>quotation, Curtis.
>
>> based on your own twisted brand of "logic."
>
>What's allegedly "twisted" about my logic, Curtis?


Tholen is reduced to breaking single sentences into small parts in
order to try and score points - what a sad little man.   Try
addressing the argument sometime instead of the words, tholen - oh,
but you are too stupid to be able to do that.   What a  loser.






Regards,
David Sutherland
(note **ANTI-SPAM** in reply field)

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

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

From: lennart-remove-@plg.-remove-a.se                  21-Nov-99 12:16:17
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 10:40:10
Subj: Re: Not even Ballmer likes NT

From: "Lennart Gahm" <lennart-remove-@plg.-remove-a.se>

>
>Kelly Robinson wrote:
>
>> Yeah, but by doing the format C: and installing one of the below, you lose
>> compatibiltiy with a Swedishload of apps.
>>
>> And MS was a dumbfuck for creating DLLs (and the GD registry) but app
designers
>> are equally, if not more, to blame for making their own molestations to
system
>> DLLs.
>>

To Kelly:

It was Steve Ballmer who admitted that DLL-hell exist.
It is Microsoft who is to blame. To make a Windows program you need to access
system DLLs.
If a developer uses Visual Basic or C the installationprograms whose program
create,
automatic replaces system DLLs. Just by adding one program you can break
other programs who can't deal with whose new DLLs. Perhaphs its even worse in
mixed language systems.


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

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

From: isxios@yahoo.com                                  21-Nov-99 00:20:01
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 10:40:10
Subj: Re: IBM Stock...

From: isxios@yahoo.com (Isxios)

On Sat, 20 Nov 1999 17:34:50, jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt) 
wrote:

> You actually believe that IBM's stock price is determined by what they
> do with OS/2????
>  
> Wow, you OS/2 zealots are remarkably naive and deluded.
>  
> So, are any of you actually sane?
> 

Windows zealots apparently don't have a sense of humor...

Didn't you get the fact that it was meant as a joke of sorts?

Isxios

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http
(1:109/42)

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

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           21-Nov-99 06:04:06
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 14:27:08
Subj: Re: Why can't it die?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <zozo83c1b4.60.uno@sage.40th.com>, on 11/20/99 at 02:20 AM,
   uno@40th.com (uno@40th.com) said:

> >Once the truth is acknowledged then the rest is an argument about
> >MS's brand name.

> Or IBM's lack thereof, ay?  If you think MS is evil, you are not well
> read.  IBM have been bad, bad boys for a very, very long time. What
> they've done with regard to Warp is baby poop in comparison.

IBM in the past was sued twice by the DOJ. In both instances, they agreed
to consent decrees and have operated under them to this day. One case was
filed in 1952, the second in 1968. Since then, IBM has not been charged
with any violation of either the law or the consent decrees. And in the
second case, IBM was forced to pay serious reparations to Cray in the form
of money and an entire family of computers.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

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

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

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           21-Nov-99 06:08:27
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 14:27:08
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <814fie$qdq$1@news.campuscwix.net>, on 11/19/99 at 01:33 PM,
   "Chad Mulligan" <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org> said:

> > Haven't done much reading about the tobacco suits have you?
> >

> THey aren't being held criminally just civilly

I repeat the question. The obvious answer is no. In at least one suit, the
industry was found criminally negligent. Others are pending, on trial,
etc. Ford was found criminally negligent in at least one Pinto suit and
the company was ordered to pay a fine.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

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

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

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           21-Nov-99 06:20:00
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 14:27:08
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <HN2tEbdbtdhk-pn2-b61623QIpc58@localhost>, on 11/20/99 at 11:26 AM,
   rcrane@octa4.net.au (Richard A Crane) said:


> > The training curve of three respective systems show Macs to have a
shallower
> > initial curve that peaks at a very low level of knowledge, UNIX has very
> > steep initial curve that peaks very high, windows splits the difference
> > while not restricting how much a user can learn.
> > 
> With such a big claim I'd expect supporting citation of 
> documents evidencing these findings.  Note well Chad does 
> not bother with such.

Mulligan, McCoy, Glatt and the rest of that assinine ilk haven't the
brains to understand your comment. Hell, I bet they don't even know the
difference between a Soliciter and a Barrister.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

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

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

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           21-Nov-99 06:22:25
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 14:27:08
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <HN2tEbdbtdhk-pn2-YJny7ESYfqxt@localhost>, on 11/20/99 at 11:25 AM,
   rcrane@octa4.net.au (Richard A Crane) said:

> What is an innocent employee (??- someone who never did 
> anything??) and why should this argument hold any more water than the
> hory chestnut about not goaling someone as they  have family who would
> be upset?

The idiot savants who attempt to defend the indefensible (or as my
attorney puts it to paint shit white) will likely think the above comment
is about a hockey or soccer match. They likely think kirk is the name of a
popular actor.

Of course, I would like to see Gates strapped to a hockey goal without
pads. <LOL>

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

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

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

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           21-Nov-99 06:25:11
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 14:27:08
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <HN2tEbdbtdhk-pn2-BdcjkJZcvt7k@localhost>, on 11/20/99 at 11:25 AM,
   rcrane@octa4.net.au (Richard A Crane) said:

> Do yourself a favour have a look at the Nurumberg Trials 
> transcripts before running that argument. Also as I 
> understand the USA is litigation crazy whats to stop the 
> janitors et al sueing the individuals at MS that put the co  in that
> position?

Don't know about employees, but if they are stockholders as well, they
surely do.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

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

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

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           21-Nov-99 06:34:10
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 14:27:08
Subj: Re: Not even Ballmer likes NT

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <38378237_3@news1.prserv.net>, on 11/21/99 at 05:25 AM,
   flmighe@attglobal.net said:

> Another story has Bill getting kicked out of Harvard for stealing 
> computer time by having a non student code up the simulator  necessary
> for Bill's BASIC. Before you respond be certain to read the facts that
> Judge Jackson has written. I do not doubt that Bill Gates has an
> exceptional memory. I have come to question his capablities in coding
> even a BASIC compiler. Is it not possible that he stole even that
> accomplishment?

According to articles published some 7 years ago in one of the Seattle
newspapers, Gates was one of three guys at Harvard who worked on his BASIC
interpreter. Paul Allen was the second, and a classmate at Harvard whose
name escapes me was the third. According to those articles, Allen was the
one who wrote the bootstrap routine which would allow basic to be run on
the Altair. He supposedly did it on yellow foolscap on an airplane enroute
from Boston to Albequerque.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

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

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

From: fmarchand@iname.com                               21-Nov-99 13:32:25
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 14:27:08
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows...

From: Frederic Marchand <fmarchand@iname.com>

DC wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 20 Nov 1999 00:50:19 GMT, Frederic Marchand
> <fmarchand@iname.com> wrote:
> 
> >  "The Alt.OS Video booth at Comdex demonstrated a high-resolution movie
> >rendered entirely in Bryce for BeOS, which took more than 36 hours to
> >render on Be engineer Adam Haberlach's machine (a still frame from the
> >movie can be seen at BeDope). According to Kimpton, Haberlach continued
> >to use BeOS normally for all of his development needs as the rendering
> >continued in the background, without affecting the machine's performance
> >(testament to the real-world usefulness of a pervasively multithreaded
> >environmnet)."
> >
> >  That's this sort of things I like with BeOS...
> 
> (Not having Bryce for NT)
> 
> How is that different from how NT handles a rendering?

  I don't know. But rendering AND development needs are huge. Running
both a landscape rendering and a project compile is definitively not a
trivial task for any OS. This story shows BeOS' excellent
multithreading.

  And I know that if you have a SMP machine, rendering two landscapes
with Bryce will automatically make use of all CPUs and that's BeOS
exclusive advantage (Bryce is not "SMP ready"...). Another point for
BeOS.

-- 
 Frederic Marchand
 BeOS Developer E-14363
 http://fmarchand.free.fr/

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

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

From: cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org                      21-Nov-99 05:48:02
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 14:27:08
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: "Chad Mulligan" <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org>

Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
news:3837d59f$1$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com...
> On <HN2tEbdbtdhk-pn2-b61623QIpc58@localhost>, on 11/20/99 at 11:26 AM,
>    rcrane@octa4.net.au (Richard A Crane) said:
>
>
> > > The training curve of three respective systems show Macs to have a
shallower
> > > initial curve that peaks at a very low level of knowledge, UNIX has
very
> > > steep initial curve that peaks very high, windows splits the
difference
> > > while not restricting how much a user can learn.
> > >
> > With such a big claim I'd expect supporting citation of
> > documents evidencing these findings.  Note well Chad does
> > not bother with such.
>
> Mulligan, McCoy, Glatt and the rest of that assinine ilk haven't the
> brains to understand your comment. Hell, I bet they don't even know the
> difference between a Soliciter and a Barrister.
>

Do too, and I can spell them.

>
> --
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------
> Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
> Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
> MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
> Aut Pax Aut Bellum
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------
>


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

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

From: alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net                          21-Nov-99 07:47:02
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 14:27:08
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: Hobbyist <alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net>

"Brent Davies" <brentdaviesNOSPAM@home.com> posted:


 <snip>
> | FUD in the true sense. :)
> |
> | FUD based on factual grounds.
> 
> Huh?  Do you want to explain that?
> 
> I personally don't care to introduce a product into my company
> that it's maker doesn't seem to be really excited about.  I see
> ads for Novel, for Linux, for Solaris, for AIX, for NT, and more,
> and I see them all over the trade rags.  Why don't I ever see
> anything from IBM about OS/2?  It sure does seem to me like
> they don't care much about it.  I might find that they indeed are
> behind it 100% if I were to visit their web site, but that doesn't
> take away from the fact that they don't seem to be openly
> pushing OS/2 anymore.
> 
> Or is OS/2 so much of a departure from the mainstream, like
> MAC, that it is publicized in a totally different area of the
> market?

FUD ... Fear, uncertainty and doubt.

What you said, I agreed with, and anyone who knows this and are
considering deploying OS/2 will understandably feel .... FUD...
Fear uncertainty and doubt. FUD that's based on truth. :)

I guess you were confused because when the term FUD is used, it's
normally used to define *misinformation* or *inaccuracies* that will
lead to fear, uncertainty and doubt when considering an OS or system
for deployment or use.

-- 
-=Ali M.=-

Mail to: <alliem 'at' wtjam 'dot' net>
         

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Dept. of Surgery, UHWI (1:109/42)

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

From: uno@40th.com                                      21-Nov-99 12:19:07
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 14:27:08
Subj: Re: Not even Ballmer likes NT

From: uno@40th.com (uno@40th.com)

Lennart Gahm? (lennart-remove-@plg.-remove-a.se?) wrote (Sun, 21 Nov 1999 12:1
>It was Steve Ballmer who admitted that DLL-hell exist.

Because he's got W2k to sell you.  He doesn't care one bit about
selling you NT4 anymore.  If he can FUD you into buying W2k the
day it comes out, he'll have done his job.


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

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

From: cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org                      21-Nov-99 06:15:12
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 14:27:08
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Chad Mulligan" <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org>

Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
news:3837d344$5$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com...
> On <814fie$qdq$1@news.campuscwix.net>, on 11/19/99 at 01:33 PM,
>    "Chad Mulligan" <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org> said:
>
> > > Haven't done much reading about the tobacco suits have you?
> > >
>
> > THey aren't being held criminally just civilly
>
> I repeat the question. The obvious answer is no. In at least one suit, the
> industry was found criminally negligent. Others are pending, on trial,
> etc. Ford was found criminally negligent in at least one Pinto suit and
> the company was ordered to pay a fine.

There is a legal difference between criminal negligence, which isn't a crime
and criminal justice.

>
>
> --
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------
> Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
> Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
> MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
> Aut Pax Aut Bellum
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------
>


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

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

From: lucien@metrowerks.com                             21-Nov-99 14:28:01
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 14:27:08
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: lucien@metrowerks.com

In article <817ttn$3fg$2@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenantispam@hawaii.edu wrote:
> Lucien writes:
>
> >>>>>>> Answer the question put to you:
>
> >>>>>> Take the two simple tests, Lucien.
>
> >>>>> Note the refusal to answer a basic, central question - looks
like
> >>>>> we've hit another major soft spot.
>
> >>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?
>
> >>> Note again the pat refusal to answer the question.
>
> >> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?
>
> > ....and we see the refusal again
>
> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

...and again.

The question again:

According to your statement, under what conditions
does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
functionality..."?

Here is your statement again for reference:

"The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
information."

Lucien S.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                21-Nov-99 03:38:19
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 14:27:08
Subj: (1/2) Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu (tholenbot)

In article <815glh$6ag$1@news.hawaii.edu>, tholenantispam@hawaii.edu wrote:

> Eric Bennett writes (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you say that?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor" lisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own bot
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> What makes you say that?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> >>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

See what I mean?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you positive that is the real reason?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor" lisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own bot
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because do I say might want to do and that you came to
me?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

See what I mean?

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would appreciate it if you would continue.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor" lisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own bot
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that those are mine?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Does it bother you that those are yours?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that those are mine?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>> Are you sure that those are mine?
> 
> >>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >> Are you sure that those are mine?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

See what I mean?
 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you certain that this is the real reason?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor" lisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own bot
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all
this?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that is the real reason?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?
> 
> >>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

See what I mean?

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What makes you believe what makes I believe this?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor" lisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own bot
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> When did you first know that those are eliza's?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?
> 
> >>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

See what I mean?

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe my life that I am going through all this have
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something to do with this.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor" lisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own bot
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Earlier you said do I say might want to do claim and?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> >>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

See what I mean?
 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Go on, don't be afraid.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor" lisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own bot
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> What makes you believe that?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't you know?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> What makes you believe that?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>> What makes you believe that?
> 
> >>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >> What makes you believe that?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

See what I mean?

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you absolutely sure that is the real reason?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor" lisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own bot
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> all this?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that is the real reason?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all
this?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all this?
> 
> >>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all this?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

See what I mean?

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that is the real reason?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor" lisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own bot
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Illogical.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

See what I mean?

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You're being a bit brief, perhaps you could go into
detail.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor" lisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own bot
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> all this?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that is the real reason?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all
this?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all this?
> 
> >>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all this?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

See what I mean?
 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because do me claim might want to do and that you
came
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to me?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor" lisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own bot
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> When did you first know that those are eliza's?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?
> 
> >>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

See what I mean?
 

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

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

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                21-Nov-99 03:38:19
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 14:27:08
Subj: (2/2) Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because do me claim might want to do and that you
came
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to me?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor" lisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own bot
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that this is the real reason?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> >>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

See what I mean?

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of my sex life that I am going through all
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this that you say I do not approve phrases either?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't ask me.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't tell me what to do.  I am the psychiatrist here! 
Maybe
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> What makes you believe that?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I would appreciate it if you would continue.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> What makes you believe that?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>> What makes you believe that?
> 
> >>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >> What makes you believe that?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

See what I mean?

-- 
"I do not "approve" phrases.
-Dave Tholen"
-tholenbot

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

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

From: jimf@frostbytes.com                               21-Nov-99 10:35:12
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 14:27:08
Subj: Re: THE VERSION OF OS/2 WARP 4 THAT CAN RUN WINDOWS 95 >>YES IT DOES 

From: Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com>

flmighe@attglobal.net wrote:
> In fact why should consumers even
> purchase an office suite when Star office is free. Consumers
> should be aware that Java based products are the
> future.

Well, speaking as a professional writer who uses both, perhaps they might do
it because Word is better at the job.  I'm using Star Office now not because
it's the better product but because Word doesn't run under Linux.

> Consumers that stuck with Win 3.1 are better off than
> than those that upgraded to Win95/98 except that if
> you have Win 98 you are likely to get $120 refund owing
> to the FoF.

Win3.x was so horrible that I find it hard to believe that people aren't
better off with Win9x.  The latter is a lot more usable.  Not that I want to
use Win9x myself, but given the choice between those two it's a pretty obvious
one.

jim

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

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

From: dc@pdq.net                                        21-Nov-99 08:45:26
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 14:27:08
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows...

From: DC <dc@pdq.net>

On Sun, 21 Nov 1999 13:32:51 GMT, Frederic Marchand
<fmarchand@iname.com> wrote:

>> How is that different from how NT handles a rendering?
>
>  I don't know. But rendering AND development needs are huge. Running
>both a landscape rendering and a project compile is definitively not a
>trivial task for any OS. This story shows BeOS' excellent
>multithreading.
>
>  And I know that if you have a SMP machine, rendering two landscapes
>with Bryce will automatically make use of all CPUs and that's BeOS
>exclusive advantage (Bryce is not "SMP ready"...). Another point for
>BeOS.

That's not exactly correct.  If there's only one thread, only one CPU
can be engaged on that task.  That's common in any mass-market OS.  NT
and Be are exactly the same in that regard.  

DC

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http
(1:109/42)

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

From: jimf@frostbytes.com                               21-Nov-99 10:07:08
  To: All                                               21-Nov-99 14:27:08
Subj: User interface learning curves

From: Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com>

Chad Mulligan wrote:
> > > The training curve of three respective systems show Macs to have a
> shallower
> > > initial curve that peaks at a very low level of knowledge, UNIX has very
> > > steep initial curve that peaks very high, windows splits the difference
> > > while not restricting how much a user can learn.
> > >
> > With such a big claim I'd expect supporting citation of
> > documents evidencing these findings.  Note well Chad does
> > not bother with such.
> 
> Do you have any evidence that contradicts my opinion as stated?

The old "prove me wrong" gambit.  That's just a lazy argument.  But let's go
into some of the available knowledge for a minute.

AT&T did a study back in the 70s regarding learning curves for textual
interfaces.  Quite unexpectedly they found no difference in learning curve
between mnemonic, abbreviated, or even nonsensical interfaces.  This stood in
stark contrast to common opinion (which held that mnemonics was vastly
superior).  There's a couple of good lessons in how our cognitive processes
actually work in there.

GUIs were supposed to improve things by making the interface more closely
model things that users were already familiar with in the real world, thus
eliminating the need for making associations.  Unfortunately they didn't; they
just substituted iconics for words, and along the way added whole new
obstacles in the form of interaction gestures (click, double-click, drag,
window manipulation, menu manipulation, etc) that must be learned before you
can even make use of the associations.  So GUIs not only required the
development of cognitive links but also the development of new motor skills! 
That was a big step backwards in terms of learning curve.

And that was back when GUI interfaces were *simple*.  They've become ever more
subtle and complex, often in counterproductive ways (don't get me started on
toolbars).

I used to have a folder of articles related to this topic but, unfortunately,
I've thrown it out in housecleaning.  But that's ok, if you really care about
this stuff you can do the research yourself.  If you're a professional GUI
developer you really ought to do your own research anyway (your uneducated
opinion is both unreliable and costly to your users), and if you're not then
it's all just armchair quarterbacking and your opinion doesn't actually count.

What scares me is that there are a lot of people whose opinion *does* actually
count that believe what you're saying.  And that's why we have interfaces like
Microsoft Word (shudder) that are difficult to learn and inefficient both in
terms of resource usage and user effort.

It amuses the hell out of me that we went full-circle such that a lot of GUI
interfaces are now just pretty menu interfaces.  There's a good reason for
that, and even if there's still that motor control development thing, well,
evolution will eventually take care of that.

jim

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

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

From: josco@ibm.net                                     21-Nov-99 08:15:24
  To: All                                               22-Nov-99 03:20:20
Subj: Re: Not even Ballmer likes NT

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Jim Frost wrote:


> A lot of people wonder why PC-DOS beat out CP/M when they had equal billing
> and CP/M was by far the more mature.  That comes down to simple economics:
> PC-DOS was $70 while both UCSD Pascal and CP/M were $300.  Since PC-DOS was
> effectively a CP/M clone (some have said even a rip-off) the decision was
> pretty easy.

That's how I remember it.  MS underpriced the other two and gained marketshare 
--
despite having fewer applications for DOS at the time.  CP/M had the large app
base.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: malstrom@wilde.oit.umass.edu                      21-Nov-99 21:31:26
  To: All                                               22-Nov-99 03:20:20
Subj: Re: Not even Ballmer likes NT

From: Jason <malstrom@wilde.oit.umass.edu>

Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com> wrote:

: You got a lot of it right, but the CP/M deal DID go through.  CP/M was one
of
: three OSs available for the PC originally (the other was UCSD Pascal).  The
: problem with CP/M was that DRI was so hard for IBM to deal with (Kildall and
: clan went out of their way to act like flakes!) that they wanted to hedge
: their bets.  Microsoft wasn't being seriously considered until Gate's mom
got
: into the act; I don't get the impression that Gates put her up to it.  Once
: the deed was done Gates wasn't one to look a gift horse in the mouth.

I thought the original deal with IBM didn't go through because DRI 
president's wife refused to sign the non-disclosure documents.  When IBM 
came back empty handed, that's when Microsoft threw in QDOS to save the 
BASIC deal.  I could be wrong here, it's just what I've read in a couple 
places.

-Jason

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

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

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               21-Nov-99 22:18:17
  To: All                                               22-Nov-99 03:20:20
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Richard A Crane wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 10 Nov 1999 23:29:55, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
> 
> [USA Jurisprudential theories snipped]
> >
> > The court must have some regard for the employees and families of the
> > corporation in question.  If they significantly and radically harm the
> > corporation many innocent employees will suffer unjustly.
> >
> What is an innocent employee (??- someone who never did
> anything??)

This attitude never ceases to astound me.  The meer fact that someone is
employed by MS makes you think they are guilty of something?  Sorry, but I
can't see your point of view and never will.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

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

From: josco@ibm.net                                     21-Nov-99 21:58:04
  To: All                                               22-Nov-99 03:20:20
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Chad Mulligan wrote:

> Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:38385F8B.6C65937C@ibm.net...
> >
> >
> > Chad Mulligan wrote:
> >
> > > Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message
> news:382ECDF8.B03E86DC@ibm.net...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Chad Mulligan wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Jeff Glatt <jglatt@spamgone-borg.com> wrote in message
> > > > > news:382ea126.758407@news.borg.com...
> > > > > > >Chad Mulligan
> > > <trimmed>
> > > > > > IBM or the market
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you, I was wondering if I was the only one who noticed that.
> > > >
> > > > I was wondering if anyone can tell a us how even 100+ years in the
> > > computer
> > > > business would help understand anti-trust law.  Does anyone here think
> IBM
> > > would
> > > > NOT want to have an IBM OS preloaded on every PC for the sum of $90?
> I
> > > think
> > > > IBM would want MS's monopoly which means selling items at retail for
> $90.
> > > >
> > >
> > > IBM has the monopoly in the Large Mainframe Market.  IBM doesn't care
> about
> > > the PC market and never have, it's always been a hobby and a drop in the
> > > bucket compared to their other profit centers and not worthy of their
> > > attention.
> >
> > Oh are you serious?  IBM hasn't a monopoly in the large mainframe market.
> >
>
> Yes, and their income from it is phenomenal.  I have a friend who is
> Director of Software Services for the IBM's that run a major clothing
> retailer's data warehouse.  His monthly fees to IBM are > $2Million and that
> is just the software maintenance.
>
> > > > And I propose a test.  If someone writes a long paragraph putting down
> > > people
> > > > with, say, 2 sentences then that person has an emotional problem.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Before you start practicing phychiatry without a license I'd suggest
> some
> > > research into the tentacles of International Business Machines and some
> self
> > > evaluation.
> >
> > Well, when I start writing long rants or trolling in the windows newsgroup
> I'll
> > take that advice.
> >
> > Meanwhile I'd love to see in what market IBM has a monopoly.  Don't
> embarrass
> > yourself with some outdated reference to mainframes.
> >
>
> I'd check your assumptions were I you.  There are a great number of IBM
> Mainframes in use, they haven't gone the way of the Dinosaur yet.

What's gone the way of the dinosaurs is IBM's mainframe monopoly and the
quality
of FUD from the MS camp.

I propose to add nonsensical, irrational arguments about IBM's "mainframe
monopoly"  to the list of attributes of a MS advocate needing help.





--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org                      21-Nov-99 22:29:02
  To: All                                               22-Nov-99 03:20:20
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: "Chad Mulligan" <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org>

Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:3838B13F.D7B0D635@ibm.net...
<cut>
> > >
> >
> > I'd check your assumptions were I you.  There are a great number of IBM
> > Mainframes in use, they haven't gone the way of the Dinosaur yet.
>
> What's gone the way of the dinosaurs is IBM's mainframe monopoly and the
quality
> of FUD from the MS camp.
>
> I propose to add nonsensical, irrational arguments about IBM's "mainframe
> monopoly"  to the list of attributes of a MS advocate needing help.
>

You can delude yourself if you wish, I really don't care.


>
>
>
>


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

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         22-Nov-99 04:01:29
  To: All                                               22-Nov-99 05:13:04
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Lucien writes:

>>>>>>>>> Answer the question put to you:

>>>>>>>> Take the two simple tests, Lucien.

>>>>>>> Note the refusal to answer a basic, central question - looks
>>>>>>> like we've hit another major soft spot.

>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

>>>>> Note again the pat refusal to answer the question.

>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

>>> ....and we see the refusal again

>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

> ....and again.

Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?  How ironic, coming
from the person who "refused" to take the two simple tests again.

> The question again:

The same response again.

> According to your statement, under what conditions
> does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
> functionality..."?

Perhaps you'd like to tell me how the statement you keep pointing to
applies to the JDK sentence, Lucien.

> Here is your statement again for reference:

Unnecessary, Lucien, given that I've answered it.  I will restore my
two simple tests, however, given that you've never taken them.

> "The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
> 'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
> information."

And how does that concern the JDK sentence, Lucien, as you've repeatedly
insisted?

Note again the pat "refusal" to take the two simple tests:

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Meanwhile, I noticed that you failed to answer my little test,
Lucien:

] #1:  It rained today.                                              
]                                                                    
] #2:  It rained today until sunset.                                 
]                                                                    
] The question:  did it rain all of the day or only some of the day? 
]                                                                    
] The word "rained", by itself, doesn't indicate duration, therefore 
] one cannot determine an unambiguous answer to the question in the  
] absence of other information.  Yet I will claim that the answer to 
] the question is in fact unambiguous in the case of statement #2.   
]                                                                    
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.                                    

Test grade:  F.

Here's another little test for you, Lucien:

] #3:  It did rain today.
] 
] #4:  It didn't rain today.
] 
] The question:  what fraction of the day did it rain?
] 
] Structurally, the two statements are identical, yet there is nothing
] in statement #3 that allows the question to be answered unambiguously,
] while there is something in statement #4 that does allow the question
] to be answered unambigiously.
] 
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.

Test grade:  F.

Perhaps readers will notice how 3-4 corresponds to the "prevent costly
mistakes" thread, where the quantification is provided by the definition
of a word and not the structure.  Perhaps readers will notice how 1-2
corresponds to the "Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality" thread,
where the additional information resolves what would otherwise be
ambiguous.

Yet more evidence that you're playing your own "infantile game".   
Or are you really that idiotic?                                    


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         22-Nov-99 04:04:01
  To: All                                               22-Nov-99 05:13:04
Subj: Re: Tholen Digest II - Electric Boogaloo

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Eric Bennett writes (using a pseudonym again):

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see you're appending text again without adding a level of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> indentation, thereby creating the potential for the correct
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attribution to be misunderstood by the casual reader. 

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't understand.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with "doctor", Dave?

>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.

>>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.

>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.

>>>>> Enjoying your chat with tholenbot, Dave?

>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?

>>> Doesn't look like Eliza anymore.  Looks more like Dave Tholen pasting in
>>> canned lines from Eliza without actually having Eliza respond to the
>>> post.  

>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.

> See what I mean?

Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> even that wouldn't completely solve the problem, as you've
also
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> screwed up the correct attributions. 

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is the fact that even that would not completely solve the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problem as Marty also screwed up the correct attributions
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the real reason?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with "doctor", Dave?

>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

>>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.

>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

>>>>> Enjoying your chat with tholenbot, Dave?

>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?

>>> Doesn't look like Eliza anymore.  Looks more like Dave Tholen pasting in
>>> canned lines from Eliza without actually having Eliza respond to the
>>> post.  

>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

> See what I mean?

Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note that the URL and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the line that follows have the same level of indentation, yet
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you wrote one and I wrote the other.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does the fact that the url and the line that follows have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same indentation yet Marty wrote one and you wrote the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other explain anything else?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with "doctor", Dave?

>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?

>>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.

>>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?

>>>>> Enjoying your chat with tholenbot, Dave?

>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?

>>> Doesn't look like Eliza anymore.  Looks more like Dave Tholen pasting in
>>> canned lines from Eliza without actually having Eliza respond to the post.

>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?

> See what I mean?

Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: mike@lionsgate.com                                22-Nov-99 08:17:03
  To: All                                               22-Nov-99 05:13:04
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows...

From: mike@lionsgate.com (Mike Stephen)

In message <d08a18.j16.ln@labserver.emmanuel.uq.edu.au> - "Christopher
Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net> writes:
:>
:>
:>"Mike Stephen" <mike@lionsgate.com> wrote in message
:>news:bWYZ3.38$Lf2.224155@news.bctel.net...
:>> In message
:>
:>> "I know you used to eat Filet Mignon steaks, but all you can have now
:>> is porridge, so shut up and eat your porridge like the rest of us...."
:>>
:>> Uh Huh....  Perhaps you should FOAD.
:>>
:>> Just because a lot of us like the features of Warps WPS, does not mean
:>> we cannot hope to convince other vendors to look at putting in
:>> features like it.  If we were all like you, we would all be running
:>> Windows style crap. After all it is the "lowest common denominator".
:>> Thanks heavens for some of us who would like to see something better!
:>
:>Having moved from OS/2 to NT myself in February '96, after using it from the
:>release of OS/2 2.0, I'm curious as to what you find so lacking in NT.
:>Certainly IMHO the performance is no different, and the UI can be learned.
:>
:>What particular features are you missing ?
:>
:>
Since you were what I would call a new user of OS/2 (from 2.0),
perhaps you didn't have much of an investment in the os.  I used it
from ver 1.0. I have about 1600 bucks of currently used software and
over 10 years of time.  I installed and still install Warp Server
machines and Workstations.  I also install NT Server and Workstations
as well.  On my home machine my primary OS is Warp 4.0 It does what I
want, how I want it, and does so without crashing. 

 NT under my control will simply not stay up reliably for more than a
few days.  So much so that I write a daemon rutine that reboots all
the workstations that I take care of over the weekends.  I also bring
the servers down as well.  With the Warp servers, they stay up for
months and only come down when upgraded.  I also do not reboot the
OS/2 workstations.  OS/2 runs well in 64 megs Dram. It even runs
reasonably well in 32 megs. NT is dog slow.  NT dosen't multitask very
well.  For most NT users this is not important because very few
Windows users run more than one or two apps at the same time.  

I take care of about 30 machines that are 486 66Mhz or 486 100Mhz,
with 16 and 32 megs of ram.  Could you send these people enough money
to upgrade to the class of machine you would reccomend for NT?  I take
care of another 30-40 Windows 3.11 machines for the same reason.  They
run 486 class machines.  I could give all these people your email so
they can ask you to give them the funds to upgrade...  Until then they
get the work needed to be done, done.  They use whatever OS gets the
job done. Interestinlgy enough, many of the Windows 3.1 users are
upgrading operating systems from Win 3.1 to OS/2 Warp because Warp
runs on 486 machines with 32 megs ram.  If we can dig up 32 megs, we
can get them more productive running both Windows and OS2 apps.

The WPS is a much nicer interface than the NT Explorer.  The concept
of shadows and SOM/DSOM is unknown to NT.  Also I can setup a Warp
machine to be brain dead easy to use, or I can let the more advanced
users customise to their hearts content. I use a lot of tiny REXX
scripts to get things done.  I also use Fastback/2 tape backup
software to backup not only the server, but the Workstations as well. 
If I need to format a boot drive, I can recover it from tape in less
than 10 mins.  In NT I would need a multi thousand dollar program to
do the same.  

NT has a nasty habit of changing DLLs without user notification.  Also
the bad habit of using silly things like registries that allbut make
it impossible to to update/reinstall without also reinstalling all
applications.  NT is stupid regarding path, dpath, and libpath. NT
wants to install all DLLS in the Windows subdirectory.  Good luck
fixing things. It makes for a reinstall job that takes hours per
machine.  Multiply your one machine by hundreds and you have a major
headache to manage Windows machines.  

NT also doesn't have anything like CID for effortless installations of
both operating systems and applications automatically.  Warp server
comes with these tools included.  I find it humourus that the top 10
best selling applications are 5 productivity apps from mostly
Microsoft, and 5 programs to fix your computer after you install those
Microsoft apps.

Networking that works sometimes and sometimes not.  Often the network
neihbourhood shows servers, and sometimes they don't.  No one at Msoft
has been able to answer those problems. I must admit though, if it
were not for Windows, I would not have as much billable time...  If I
owned these companies that use Windows servers and desktops, I think I
would consider a class action suit against Msoft for promising to
deliver what cannot be done with the technology they have. 

And finally if that doesn't convince you that Microsoft writes really
shitty designed code, tell me why Microsoft dosesn't have a true BSD
complient TCPIP stack?  Why do all Windows 9x machine run NETBUEI over
TCPIP?  It does allow me to have fun with cable modem users
though.....

Do you need more reasons?  I have more but they are far more technical
in nature.  These are enough in my opinion to ask all Operating system
vendors to write something better.  I have personally given up on IBM
ever doing anything with Warp.  It is too bad because they are still
miles (kilometres) ahead of all the other operating systems. 

I can only hope that the DOJ levels the playing field so that vendors
like BEOS and QNX, and a few other potential operating system vendors
can take a chunk out of Microsofts ill gotten marketshare.  It will
take a few years, but I hope in 5 years to be able to see a large
segment of the computer users finally see that they have been misled
by all the Windows weenies. 

Mike....




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

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

From: lucien@metrowerks.com                             22-Nov-99 12:27:25
  To: All                                               22-Nov-99 10:32:07
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: lucien@metrowerks.com

In article <81af7n$1o2$3@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenantispam@hawaii.edu wrote:
> Lucien writes:
>
> >>>>>>>>> Answer the question put to you:
>
> >>>>>>>> Take the two simple tests, Lucien.
>
> >>>>>>> Note the refusal to answer a basic, central question - looks
> >>>>>>> like we've hit another major soft spot.
>
> >>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?
>
> >>>>> Note again the pat refusal to answer the question.
>
> >>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?
>
> >>> ....and we see the refusal again
>
> >> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?
>
> > ....and again.
>
> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

....and again...

The question again:

According to your statement, under what conditions
does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
functionality..."?

Here is your statement again for reference:

"The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
information."

Lucien S.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

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

From: jimf@frostbytes.com                               22-Nov-99 08:48:15
  To: All                                               22-Nov-99 12:11:10
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com>

Chad Mulligan wrote:
> > AT&T did a study back in the 70s regarding learning curves for textual
> > interfaces.  Quite unexpectedly they found no difference in learning curve
> > between mnemonic, abbreviated, or even nonsensical interfaces.  This stood
> in
> > stark contrast to common opinion (which held that mnemonics was vastly
> > superior).  There's a couple of good lessons in how our cognitive
> processes
> > actually work in there.
> >
> 
> I knew about that one but it is somewhat dated.  I think if they re-ran the
> study the results would be a little different.  Our culture has changed
> drastically with regard to computers and computing since then.

It's not a cultural thing, it's a cognitive association thing.  New users have
to learn the association between command and action no matter what that
command is called.

> One must
> remember that, other than a few wealthy nerds, almost everyone that had
> anything to do with a computer was a formally trained professional.

The AT&T study was done on raw users -- not trained professionals.  AT&T cared
because they were bringing a whole lot of people onto computers in order to
manage their phone and information systems.

Certainly the results were not what AT&T expected.

> > So GUIs not only required the
> > development of cognitive links but also the development of new motor
> skills!
> > That was a big step backwards in terms of learning curve.
> >
> 
> You must agree, though, that the initial phase of the learning curve is
> somewhat flatter with a GUI.

No I don't admit that at all.  I haven't seen it.  Rather I've seen it take a
lot longer to pick it up because they have to figure out the mouse gestures
too, and that takes not only cognitive association but fine motor control
skills.  That takes awhile.  A keyboard doesn't need such fine control and,
importantly, just about everyone has used some kind of button-based interface
prior to coming in contact with a computer.

There's nothing magic about a GUI; you're just replacing iconics for text. 
Most of the time you end up putting in text too otherwise the user just can't
figure it out.  Any wins you get from the GUI come from increased bandwidth;
you can display a lot more information in the same space and you have
additional ways of manipulating the interface.

But that doesn't improve the initial learning curve.

> A true GUI should
> represent the object properties that are manipulated.  Responsibility for
> this resides in two areas, developer management who won't give the
> programmers time to really fix this, and the programmers themselves being
> too text based.

Maybe someone will eventually prove me wrong about this but I don't see how
we're going to be able to avoid the necessity of learning what the possible
actions actually do.  I don't think it's a management issue at all.

(I take that back.  I think that a verbal/visual interface would do it.  If
the computer can see and understand like a human the interface would be really
natural.)

> What I stated is true, I've taught beginning users on eight different
> platforms over the course of my career, and the curves ( average
> functionality with course materials/time ) come out as I stated.  I did do a
> study on this 6 or so years ago, but didn't keep a copy.  Since learning is
> somewhat subjective, I could only track my observations.

I've done it too, on at least as many platforms and over a period of decades. 
I taught people through the command line era, through the menu-driven era,
through the text-based point-and-click era, and in the GUI era.  I found that
bringing someone new up to speed slowed down with the addition of the mouse.

I must note, however, that I've been talking initial learning curve here. 
There is a point beyond which GUI systems tend to see accelerated learning --
I think because the same cognitive mappings tend to apply across virtually all
applications, plus they have much better information density (useful once you
learn to read it).  The consistency issue was certainly not true of most
textual interfaces (though it could have been).  So they're slower off the
line but better down the stretch.

Unfortunately the design of most GUI programs is such that once you're over
the learning curve they become an efficiency inhibitor.  Mouse input bandwidth
is just too slow for a lot of applications.

> Programmers never learned that with a GUI less is better.

Here's where I think we can blame management.  We had a saying at one of my
previous jobs: "Fluff sells."  Things that look cool sell better than things
that don't, even if the things that are simpler or plainer work better.

And when it comes right down to it if it doesn't sell they don't pay me. 
That's a pretty big incentive to make things look impressive (even if all
we're doing is making the interface harder to use and understand).

> Not less
> features, but less buttons/menus and distractions.  I work mostly by
> selecting an object, right click, work from the context menu.  I almost
> never use menus or button bars for anything in an application.  BTW, about 2
> years ago I started teaching that way too, so the trend might catch on.

I find myself doing this more and more too.  Object/action is a very useful
paradigm.  But it doesn't alleviate you from the need to learn what the
commands do (same cognitive process as the command line) and it doesn't
improve the learning time for mouse gestures (the most difficult part of the
process for beginning users in my experience).

jim

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

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

From: jimf@frostbytes.com                               22-Nov-99 09:18:25
  To: All                                               22-Nov-99 12:11:10
Subj: Re: THE VERSION OF OS/2 WARP 4 THAT CAN RUN WINDOWS 95 >>YES IT DOES

From: Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com>

flmighe@attglobal.net wrote:
> |Win3.x was so horrible that I find it hard to believe that people aren't
> |better off with Win9x.  The latter is a lot more usable.  Not that I want
to
> |use Win9x myself, but given the choice between those two it's a pretty
obvious
> |one.
> 
> I think you have contridicted yourself. Why should someone with a fine
> Windows 3.X office package that does the job (like Corel office 7) switch to
> Win 95? If you already have the investment in Windows 3.X software there
> is not enough benefit in Win9x to justify switching. You are better off
sticking
> with Windows 3.X. Many businesses have. You are probably leading me on.

Corel Office is not a better product than MS Office in a whole lot of respects
(at least according to my wife, who uses both extensively), but even if it was
the instability of Win3.x hurts the package.  Win9x isn't great but it's a lot
better than Win3.x.

> Many businesses did not switch to Win 95 because it was not possible to
upgrade
> from Win 3.X.

Many businesses don't switch because what they have works for them.  That's
just good management.  But there were benefits with going to Win9x that could
change the equation (like better reliability and a broader applications base).

> From most angles the Win 3.X user is better off sticking with Win 3.x. If
crashing
> is a problem, well then there is Win-OS/2.

Again it depends on what you're doing.  Most people found improvements in that
Win9x had robust, integrated networking (particularly TCP/IP) support that was
not available in Win3.x (WFWG is as close as it came and it wasn't that
good).  Maybe that's a win, maybe it's not -- but a lot of people think it
was.

jim frost
jimf@frostbytes.com

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

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

From: jeffryan@ispchannel.com                           21-Nov-99 17:58:26
  To: All                                               22-Nov-99 12:11:10
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: Jeffrey W Ryan <jeffryan@ispchannel.com>


> From: Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com>
> Organization: Road Runner
> Newsgroups: 
>
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os
> .ms-windows.nt.advocacy
> Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 10:07:16 -0500
> Subject: User interface learning curves
> 
> Chad Mulligan wrote:
>>>> The training curve of three respective systems show Macs to have a
>>>> shallower
>>>> initial curve that peaks at a very low level of knowledge, UNIX has very
>>>> steep initial curve that peaks very high, windows splits the difference
>>>> while not restricting how much a user can learn.

I'm hopping in on this one, so I may be a little out of bounds. Is this to
say that if you have shallower initial curve, and a low level of peak
knowledge, that somehow the platform is lacking? If the computer was
invented to make our lives easier, wouldn't the idea of low initial curve
and low peak knowledge lead us to believe that the programmer has done more
for the user, so as to negate the necessity to learn further in order to do
what they want? I'm certainly not anywhere near any peak, and I haven't even
dug deep into AppleScript yet, I've played with ResEdit, and then there's
RealBasic and CodeWarrior, not to mention Perl. If these are the things I'm
moving on to since there isn't so much to learn about the Mac OS, I would
say that's good. The OS works, so I'm off to program and automate. Am I off
topic here? I'm not sure how an OS of any platform can restrict the user
from learning...I always thought that was something up to the users
themselves.

Jeffrey W. Ryan

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

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

From: jimf@frostbytes.com                               22-Nov-99 09:46:17
  To: All                                               22-Nov-99 12:11:10
Subj: Re: Not even Ballmer likes NT

From: Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com>

Jason wrote:
> Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com> wrote:
> : You got a lot of it right, but the CP/M deal DID go through.  CP/M was one 
of
> : three OSs available for the PC originally (the other was UCSD Pascal). 
The
> : problem with CP/M was that DRI was so hard for IBM to deal with (Kildall
and
> : clan went out of their way to act like flakes!) that they wanted to hedge
> : their bets.  Microsoft wasn't being seriously considered until Gate's mom
got
> : into the act; I don't get the impression that Gates put her up to it. 
Once
> : the deed was done Gates wasn't one to look a gift horse in the mouth.
> 
> I thought the original deal with IBM didn't go through because DRI
> president's wife refused to sign the non-disclosure documents.  When IBM
> came back empty handed, that's when Microsoft threw in QDOS to save the
> BASIC deal.  I could be wrong here, it's just what I've read in a couple
> places.

That did happen, but it wasn't the end of the relationship.  Taken from her
point of view it was actually reasonable not to sign those documents -- ever
see an IBM NDA?  They're really scary.  They basically tell you that anything
you learn from IBM you can't do anything with (with lots of threats to back it
up) but anything you tell IBM they can use any way they want.  That's not the
kind of thing you sign on a whim, particularly when IBM won't even tell you
why they're there and the major decision maker for the company isn't around.

It was a good idea to wait for Kildall to be around.  So IBM went home
empty-handed; they came back later, but they decided to hedge their bets too. 
Given that Kildall was something of a flake (or, at least, was perceived by
people at IBM that way) it's likely they would have looked for a second source
in any case.

jim

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

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

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                22-Nov-99 08:52:18
  To: All                                               22-Nov-99 12:11:10
Subj: (1/2) Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu (tholenbot)

In article <81af0b$1o2$2@news.hawaii.edu>, Dave "Bennett" Tholen
(tholenantispam@hawaii.edu) wrote:

> Eric Bennett writes (using a pseudonym again):
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you positive that is the real reason?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor"
lisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own
bot
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because do I say might want to do and that you
came to me?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>> See what I mean?
> 
> >> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

See what I mean?
 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would appreciate it if you would continue.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor"
lisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own
bot
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that those are mine?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does it bother you that those are yours?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that those are mine?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Are you sure that those are mine?
> 
> >>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>> Are you sure that those are mine?
> 
> >>> See what I mean?
> 
> >> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Are you sure that those are mine?

See what I mean?
 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you certain that this is the real reason?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor"
lisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own
bot
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through
all this?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that is the real reason?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?
> 
> >>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?
> 
> >>> See what I mean?
> 
> >> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?

See what I mean?
 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What makes you believe what makes I believe this?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor"
lisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own
bot
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When did you first know that those are eliza's?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?
> 
> >>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?
> 
> >>> See what I mean?
> 
> >> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?

See what I mean?
 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe my life that I am going through all this have
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something to do with this.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor"
lisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own
bot
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Earlier you said do I say might want to do claim and?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> >>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> >>> See what I mean?
> 
> >> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.

See what I mean?

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Go on, don't be afraid.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor"
lisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own
bot
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What makes you believe that?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't you know?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> What makes you believe that?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> What makes you believe that?
> 
> >>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>> What makes you believe that?
> 
> >>> See what I mean?
> 
> >> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> What makes you believe that?

See what I mean?
 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you absolutely sure that is the real reason?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor"
lisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own
bot
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all this?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that is the real reason?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through
all this?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all this?
> 
> >>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all this?
> 
> >>> See what I mean?
> 
> >> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all this?

See what I mean?

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that is the real reason?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor"
lisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own
bot
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Illogical.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>> See what I mean?
> 
> >> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

See what I mean?

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You're being a bit brief, perhaps you could go into
detail.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor"
lisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own
bot
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all this?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that is the real reason?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through
all this?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all this?
> 
> >>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all this?
> 
> >>> See what I mean?
> 
> >> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all this?

See what I mean?

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because do me claim might want to do and that
you came
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to me?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor"
lisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own
bot
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When did you first know that those are eliza's?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?
> 
> >>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?
> 
> >>> See what I mean?
> 
> >> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?

See what I mean?

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because do me claim might want to do and that
you came

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

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

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                22-Nov-99 08:52:18
  To: All                                               22-Nov-99 12:11:10
Subj: (2/2) Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to me?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor"
lisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own
bot
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that this is the real reason?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> >>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> >>> See what I mean?
> 
> >> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> > See what I mean?

Note: no logical response.

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of my sex life that I am going through all
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this that you say I do not approve phrases either?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't ask me.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't tell me what to do.  I am the psychiatrist
here!  Maybe
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your plans have something to do with this.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What makes you believe that?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would appreciate it if you would continue.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> What makes you believe that?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>> What makes you believe that?
> 
> >>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>> What makes you believe that?
> 
> >>> See what I mean?
> 
> >> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> What makes you believe that?

See what I mean?

-- 
"I do not "approve" phrases.
-Dave Tholen"
-tholenbot

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

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

From: jimf@frostbytes.com                               22-Nov-99 09:35:21
  To: All                                               22-Nov-99 21:38:27
Subj: Re: Not even Ballmer likes NT

From: Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com>

Joseph wrote:
> > A lot of people wonder why PC-DOS beat out CP/M when they had equal
billing
> > and CP/M was by far the more mature.  That comes down to simple economics:
> > PC-DOS was $70 while both UCSD Pascal and CP/M were $300.  Since PC-DOS
was
> > effectively a CP/M clone (some have said even a rip-off) the decision was
> > pretty easy.
> 
> That's how I remember it.  MS underpriced the other two and gained
marketshare --
> despite having fewer applications for DOS at the time.  CP/M had the large
app
> base.

Actually CP/M had the large app base but not on the 8086.  Some porting was
necessary.  But CP/M clearly had the market advantage in any case.

There is one detail I chose to leave out: for almost a year CP/M could be
purchased but you couldn't get a copy -- DRI was late in delivery.  But most
people never knew that because they just bought the cheaper thing, and as a
result I don't consider it to be much of an influence.

jim

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

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

From: jimf@frostbytes.com                               22-Nov-99 09:38:12
  To: All                                               22-Nov-99 21:38:27
Subj: Re: Not even Ballmer likes NT

From: Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com>

flmighe@attglobal.net wrote:
> Now, I did get a chance to use WORDSTAR. It worked great. I do not think
there was
> ever a spread sheet for CP/M.

Nah, especially not VisiCalc, the mother of all spreadsheets.  And by the time
the PC came along Microsoft had one too (Multiplan?  I can't remember and my
disks are in storage).

> I think 123 was the killer application that popularized PCs.

This is clearly true, but it was not a novel thing by then.  A lot of Apple
computers sold with Z80 cards so that people could run VisiCalc.

jim

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

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

From: fmarchand@iname.com                               22-Nov-99 21:38:18
  To: All                                               22-Nov-99 21:38:28
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows...

From: Frederic Marchand <fmarchand@iname.com>

DC wrote:
> 
> >  And I know that if you have a SMP machine, rendering two landscapes
> >with Bryce will automatically make use of all CPUs and that's BeOS
> >exclusive advantage (Bryce is not "SMP ready"...). Another point for
> >BeOS.
> 
> That's not exactly correct.  If there's only one thread, only one CPU
> can be engaged on that task.  That's common in any mass-market OS.  NT
> and Be are exactly the same in that regard.

  In the BeOS, one window (eg one rendering) *automatically* means one
thread.

-- 
 Frederic Marchand
 BeOS Developer E-14363
 http://fmarchand.free.fr/

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

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

From: nik@hiwaay.net                                    22-Nov-99 16:03:11
  To: All                                               22-Nov-99 21:38:28
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows...

From: "Nik Simpson" <nik@hiwaay.net>

"Frederic Marchand" <fmarchand@iname.com> wrote in message
news:3839B7D5.26D9F883@iname.com...
> DC wrote:
> >
> > >  And I know that if you have a SMP machine, rendering two landscapes
> > >with Bryce will automatically make use of all CPUs and that's BeOS
> > >exclusive advantage (Bryce is not "SMP ready"...). Another point for
> > >BeOS.
> >
> > That's not exactly correct.  If there's only one thread, only one CPU
> > can be engaged on that task.  That's common in any mass-market OS.  NT
> > and Be are exactly the same in that regard.
>
>   In the BeOS, one window (eg one rendering) *automatically* means one
> thread.


Yes, because like the NT Window Manager it's a multithreaded application,
this is a no brainer improvement in a Window manager since it needs to be
scheduled at a more granular level than most applications. This doesn't
change the fact that the vast majority of applications available today only
have a single logical thread of execution and that for these applications
(taken individually) there is no benefit from a second CPU, the benefit
comes when you start running multiple apps or a single app (like a Window
Manager) that is multithreaded.


--
Nik Simpson


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

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

From: amg39.REMOVE-THIS@cornell.edu                     22-Nov-99 16:37:16
  To: All                                               22-Nov-99 21:38:28
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows...

From: amg39.REMOVE-THIS@cornell.edu (WickedDyno)

In article <7_6_3.1$jf7.3298@news.bctel.net>, mike@lionsgate.com (Mike
Stephen) wrote:

>In message <d08a18.j16.ln@labserver.emmanuel.uq.edu.au> - "Christopher
>Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net> writes:
>:>
>:>
>:>"Mike Stephen" <mike@lionsgate.com> wrote in message
>:>news:bWYZ3.38$Lf2.224155@news.bctel.net...
>:>> In message
>:>
>:>> "I know you used to eat Filet Mignon steaks, but all you can have now
>:>> is porridge, so shut up and eat your porridge like the rest of us...."
>:>>
>:>> Uh Huh....  Perhaps you should FOAD.
>:>>
>:>> Just because a lot of us like the features of Warps WPS, does not mean
>:>> we cannot hope to convince other vendors to look at putting in
>:>> features like it.  If we were all like you, we would all be running
>:>> Windows style crap. After all it is the "lowest common denominator".
>:>> Thanks heavens for some of us who would like to see something better!
>:>
>:>Having moved from OS/2 to NT myself in February '96, after using it from
the
>:>release of OS/2 2.0, I'm curious as to what you find so lacking in NT.
>:>Certainly IMHO the performance is no different, and the UI can be learned.
>:>
>:>What particular features are you missing ?
>:>
>:>
>Since you were what I would call a new user of OS/2 (from 2.0),
>perhaps you didn't have much of an investment in the os.  I used it
>from ver 1.0. I have about 1600 bucks of currently used software and
>over 10 years of time.  I installed and still install Warp Server
>machines and Workstations.  I also install NT Server and Workstations
>as well.  On my home machine my primary OS is Warp 4.0 It does what I
>want, how I want it, and does so without crashing. 
>
> NT under my control will simply not stay up reliably for more than a
>few days.  So much so that I write a daemon rutine that reboots all
>the workstations that I take care of over the weekends.  I also bring
>the servers down as well.  With the Warp servers, they stay up for
>months and only come down when upgraded.  I also do not reboot the
>OS/2 workstations.  OS/2 runs well in 64 megs Dram. It even runs
>reasonably well in 32 megs. NT is dog slow.  NT dosen't multitask very
>well.  For most NT users this is not important because very few
>Windows users run more than one or two apps at the same time.  

You sound like our (csma's) DC talking about the Mac OS.  :)

'Tis said that fleas have smaller fleas. . .

-- 
|           Andrew M. Glasgow <amg39.REMOVE-THIS@cornell.edu>          |
|"The Library is a sphere whose exact center is any one of its hexagons|
|   and whose circumference is inaccessible." -- Jorge Luis Borges     |
|"One feels as if one is dissolved and merged into nature." -- Einstein|

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

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

From: cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org                      22-Nov-99 15:29:21
  To: All                                               22-Nov-99 21:38:28
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: "Chad Mulligan" <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org>

Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com> wrote in message
news:383949AE.7E3C4FE1@frostbytes.com...
> Chad Mulligan wrote:
> > > AT&T did a study back in the 70s regarding learning curves for textual
> > > interfaces.  Quite unexpectedly they found no difference in learning
curve
> > > between mnemonic, abbreviated, or even nonsensical interfaces.  This
stood
> > in
> > > stark contrast to common opinion (which held that mnemonics was vastly
> > > superior).  There's a couple of good lessons in how our cognitive
> > processes
> > > actually work in there.
> > >
> >
> > I knew about that one but it is somewhat dated.  I think if they re-ran
the
> > study the results would be a little different.  Our culture has changed
> > drastically with regard to computers and computing since then.
>
> It's not a cultural thing, it's a cognitive association thing.  New users
have
> to learn the association between command and action no matter what that
> command is called.
>

Back then the children didn't spend their formative years, playing VCR's,
Nintendo or watching cartoons that use computer jargon in everyday life.
These things would make that association far more expeditious. This returns
it to a 'cultural thing.'  BTW, did AT&T make this test an international
project or was their sample limited to the US?

> > One must
> > remember that, other than a few wealthy nerds, almost everyone that had
> > anything to do with a computer was a formally trained professional.
>
> The AT&T study was done on raw users -- not trained professionals.  AT&T
cared
> because they were bringing a whole lot of people onto computers in order
to
> manage their phone and information systems.
>
> Certainly the results were not what AT&T expected.
>
> > > So GUIs not only required the
> > > development of cognitive links but also the development of new motor
> > skills!
> > > That was a big step backwards in terms of learning curve.
> > >
> >
> > You must agree, though, that the initial phase of the learning curve is
> > somewhat flatter with a GUI.
>
<trimmed>
>
> There's nothing magic about a GUI; you're just replacing iconics for text.
> Most of the time you end up putting in text too otherwise the user just
can't
> figure it out.  Any wins you get from the GUI come from increased
bandwidth;
> you can display a lot more information in the same space and you have
> additional ways of manipulating the interface.
>
> But that doesn't improve the initial learning curve.
>

Yes it does, because clues to CLI options that are invisible are shown to
the user (baloon help, tooltips, hints applets etc) while they are
performing the operation.

> > A true GUI should
> > represent the object properties that are manipulated.  Responsibility
for
> > this resides in two areas, developer management who won't give the
> > programmers time to really fix this, and the programmers themselves
being
> > too text based.
>
> Maybe someone will eventually prove me wrong about this but I don't see
how
> we're going to be able to avoid the necessity of learning what the
possible
> actions actually do.  I don't think it's a management issue at all.
>
> (I take that back.  I think that a verbal/visual interface would do it.
If
> the computer can see and understand like a human the interface would be
really
> natural.)
>

How well does your cli function without a keyboard.  GUI's do this all the
time.

> > What I stated is true, I've taught beginning users on eight different
> > platforms over the course of my career, and the curves ( average
> > functionality with course materials/time ) come out as I stated.  I did
do a
> > study on this 6 or so years ago, but didn't keep a copy.  Since learning
is
> > somewhat subjective, I could only track my observations.
>
> I've done it too, on at least as many platforms and over a period of
decades.
> I taught people through the command line era, through the menu-driven era,
> through the text-based point-and-click era, and in the GUI era.  I found
that
> bringing someone new up to speed slowed down with the addition of the
mouse.
>

Which platforms and where did you start. When I teach I start with a session
on the interface itself, if the interface includes a mouse that is covered.

> I must note, however, that I've been talking initial learning curve here.
> There is a point beyond which GUI systems tend to see accelerated
learning --
> I think because the same cognitive mappings tend to apply across virtually
all
> applications, plus they have much better information density (useful once
you
> learn to read it).  The consistency issue was certainly not true of most
> textual interfaces (though it could have been).  So they're slower off the
> line but better down the stretch.
>
> Unfortunately the design of most GUI programs is such that once you're
over
> the learning curve they become an efficiency inhibitor.  Mouse input
bandwidth
> is just too slow for a lot of applications.
>

Only CAD and such specialized ones, that's why digitizer's in that field
have up to sixteen buttons on the puck.

> > Programmers never learned that with a GUI less is better.
>
> Here's where I think we can blame management.  We had a saying at one of
my
> previous jobs: "Fluff sells."  Things that look cool sell better than
things
> that don't, even if the things that are simpler or plainer work better.
>
> And when it comes right down to it if it doesn't sell they don't pay me.
> That's a pretty big incentive to make things look impressive (even if all
> we're doing is making the interface harder to use and understand).
>

Let's take file management for a second here.  Are you saying that a '$' and
some arcane commands ( ls, cp, mv etc ) or a 'c:\' prompt and other arcane
commands (dir, copy, move etc.) are easier for a beginner to understand than
a GUI displaying a tree of folders containing sub folders?

> > Not less
> > features, but less buttons/menus and distractions.  I work mostly by
> > selecting an object, right click, work from the context menu.  I almost
> > never use menus or button bars for anything in an application.  BTW,
about 2
> > years ago I started teaching that way too, so the trend might catch on.
>
> I find myself doing this more and more too.  Object/action is a very
useful
> paradigm.  But it doesn't alleviate you from the need to learn what the
> commands do (same cognitive process as the command line) and it doesn't
> improve the learning time for mouse gestures (the most difficult part of
the
> process for beginning users in my experience).
>

Actualy I think it does, the menu is an assciative function, it, at the
least gives the user a subset of the available possible actions so they
aren't casting fruitlessly for the invalid options.

> jim


--
Armageddon means never having to say you're sorry.


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

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

From: ispy@groovyshow.com                               22-Nov-99 17:30:03
  To: All                                               22-Nov-99 21:38:28
Subj: Re: First look at BEOS

From: Kelly Robinson <ispy@groovyshow.com>

Huh?  BeOS takes the cake at multiple CPUs, uses them in ways only Linux (let
alone NT or OS/2 v2.1SMP) could ever dream of!  And IBM cares so much about
the OS/2 workstation that there will never be an updated SMP client!  Only
the 2.1 version which is chock-full of 16-bit code to complement the 32-bit
stuff.

And, the way I see it, the best Linux comes in a distribution - which means
there is a price.

Isxios wrote:

> On Thu, 18 Nov 1999 05:39:29, David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Only OS/2 users would even try to say that Linux multitasking is clunky
> > compared to Linux or that OS/2 is more stable than Linux.
> >
> > You guys are in a dreamworld.
> >
>
> I have used many Operating Systems, and to be honest, I agree with the
> idea that Linux is a bit clunky, but not as bad as the original poster
> seems to imply. As for BeOS, I prefer it to Linux and Windows, but
> have found Warp to be the superior of all of them in most areas.
>
> The one area that Linux does seem to shine is in its support for
> multiple processors, multiple users, and for its application as a
> network OS. Yes, I think OS/2 is better than any other OS I have used
> to date, but for somethings, Linux can't be beat, not to mention that
> it has a great price. And, of course, Linux continues to grow and
> develope while Warp will become obsolete if IBM refuses to continue
> its developement.
>
> Hector

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: http://extra.newsguy.com (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         23-Nov-99 00:16:10
  To: All                                               22-Nov-99 21:38:28
Subj: Re: Interesting Reading Comprehension Problem by Bass

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting all but the most recent new text.

Curtis Bass writes:

> You are a liar, Dave.

Where is the alleged "lie" in my statement, Curtis?

> Threads involving you just don't end until you get the last word.

Yet another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.  Typical pontification.

> I didn't "make a personal attack," Dave.

Balderdash, Curtis.  You called me "inept".  Do you deny it?  Or do you
intend to continue ignoring the dictionary definition of "invective"?

> I simply countered your "Yet to look at the contents, one must have
> run the executable file and on an OS/2 system to boot!" misinformation.

And how did you allegedly counter that statement by calling me "inept",
Curtis?

> The thread would have died right then and there if you simply said, "I
> stand corrected."

But you chose to keepit alive by erroneously accusing me of being "inept".

> But that is something you absolutely cannot do in an adversarial
> exchange, admit when you are wrong.

Yet another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.  Typical pontification.

> I defy you, Dave, to post even one url from Deja News showing you to
> admit error during an adversarial exchange.

Define "adversarial exchange", Curtis.  I suspect your definition would
exclude all my error admissions.  How convenient.

> And no, attributing a quote to the wrong Star Trek movie won't cut it
> as an example (that was not an adversarial exchange, but a friendly one).

Define "adversarial exchange", Curtis.  I suspect your definition would
exclude all my error admissions.  How convenient.

> Implying that you were inept

You didn't imply it, Curtis; rather, you stated it quite explicitly.  I
see you still haven't learned what "imply" means.

> was not a personal attack.

See what I mean about your convenient redefinitions to avoid admitting
the truth?  I see you still haven't learned what "personal attack" means.

> Your attempts at masking your error were inept.

See what I mean about your personal attacks?

> Like I've said before, you have the power to change how you are
> perceived.

You can lead a horse to the trough, but you can't make him drink.
I've provided you with the evidence, but you continue to ignore it,
preferring instead to live in your own little fantasy world.  I can't
change your fantasy world, Curtis.

> BTW, you made another error when you said that my initial conclusion was
> that you were inept.

There's no error on my part, Curtis.

> That was a secondary conclusion.

I never tried to assign priority to your conclusions, Curtis.  You're
just playing semantics to argue with me again.

> The initial conclusion was that the claim, "Yet to look at the contents,
> one must have run the executable file and on an OS/2 system to boot!" was
> erroneous misinformation.

You also called me "inept", Curtis, despite the fact that I've been
correct from the beginning about OS/2 Java 1.1.8 implementing Java 1.2
functionality.  But did you call Timbol's "bullshit" statement "inept"?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: ispy@groovyshow.com                               22-Nov-99 17:36:06
  To: All                                               22-Nov-99 21:38:28
Subj: Re: IBM Stock...

From: Kelly Robinson <ispy@groovyshow.com>

That must surely be a rhetorical question?  :-)   Of course they're not
sane!  They all think we're here to tell them to blindly move to windows.

Dunno about you, I'm just here pointing out what a load of dipshits IBM is
run by, and the occasional slander at the OS/2 groupies, too.  :-)

Jeff Glatt wrote:

>
> Wow, you OS/2 zealots are remarkably naive and deluded.
>
> So, are any of you actually sane?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: http://extra.newsguy.com (1:109/42)

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

From: josco@sea.monterey.edu                            22-Nov-99 17:22:28
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 03:21:16
Subj: Re: First look at BEOS

From: josco <josco@sea.monterey.edu>

On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, Kelly Robinson wrote:

> What else can we expect from an OS/2 user but "Duuuh, I waz expecting
> more and hoping because if it doesn't look and act like OS/2 then it's
> crap."

Hey, I got a funnier one... Use windows because it's not better, not more
reliable, not cheaper.  Windows has more users.   If that's the case then
let's all speak Mandarin.  You first.


> > So the search goes on.  I want to replace Warp Os/2, but so far >
> nothing is anywhere near as easy to use or as reliable.  too bad > IBM
> sold out to Microsoft and basically buried OS/2.... 

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

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

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               22-Nov-99 21:04:25
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 03:21:16
Subj: Re: More Boring Tholen Inconsistency and Hypocrisy

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Dave Tholen wrote:
> 
> You're just playing semantics to argue with me again.

"Define 'adversarial exchange', Curtis."
"I see you still haven't learned what 'imply' means."
"I see you still haven't learned what 'personal attack' means.

> You can lead a horse to the trough, but you can't make him drink.

"There's no error on my part, Curtis."
"I've been correct from the beginning about OS/2 Java 1.1.8 implementing Java
1.2 functionality."

> I've been correct from the beginning about OS/2 Java 1.1.8 implementing 
> Java 1.2 functionality.

"Yet another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.  Typical pontification."

It's pretty sad when you can debunk someone's posting with their own words,
let
alone their own words posted in the same article.  How embarrassing!

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

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

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             23-Nov-99 00:38:06
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 03:21:16
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <810q48$6th$1@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenantispam@hawaii.edu wrote:

-- snip --

> Curtis Bass writes:

-- snip --

> > "I prefer the application of logic over the application of
> > invective."  Dave Tholen -- 11/17/99
>
> And I have been applying logic, Curtis.
>
> > No mention of "substitution" there, Dave.
>
> Not in that one sentence, Curtis.  So what?  That's certainly not all
> that I wrote.  Trying the dishonest approach again?

Have you stopped beating your wife, Dave?

-- snip --

> > So the answer is "No, Curtis, I cannot see the difference," even
> > though that difference is quite obvious.
>
> Having more reading comprehension problems, Curtis?  That's not my
> answer at all.

Your answer was, "I *JUST SEE* see more of your pontification, Curtis."
[emphasis mine]  Clearly, the only thing you saw was my alleged
"pontification," which is to say that you saw nothing else (based on the
use of the word "just").  Ergo, "No, Curtis, I cannot see the
difference" is a valid inference, based on sound reading comprehension.

-- snip --

> > If you already had Java running, then you had no need to run InfoZip
> > against JAVAINUF.EXE,
>
> On the contrary, I did so to contradict Timbol's claim.

And you "contradicted" Mike Timol's claim in order to support your
claim.

-- snip --

> I was countering Timbol's claim, Curtis, not supporting my own.

You act as if they are mutually exclusive. More inconsistency.

-- snip --

> On what basis do you make that claim, Curtis?
>
> > On the basis of observation, Dave.
>
> What alleged "observation", Curtis?  That's just a delaying tactic.

So was your question, "On what basis do you make that claim, Curtis?"

-- snip --

> > What "initial erroneous conclusion" are you talking about, Dave?
>
> That I am allegedly "inept", Curtis.
>
> > You don't even know what's going on, do you?
>
> Obviously I do, Curtis.

Obviously not (see above and below):

> > My initial conclusion was that "Yet to look at the contents, one
> > must have run the executable file and on an OS/2 system to boot!"
> > was an erroneous statement, and I came to that conclusion *AFTER*
> > unzipping JAVAINUF.EXE using WinZip.
>
> What you initially posted, Curtis, is that I am allegedly "inept".

Wrong. What I initially posted was a JPEG proving you wrong. That you
never saw it is convenient for your "argument" I suppose, but it doesn't
change the fact that that was what I initially posted.

-- snip --

> > (Ahem) I lacked the tools necessary to determine whether *YOUR* copy
> > of JAVAINUF.EXE was corrupt, Dave.
>
> You didn't even consider the possibility, Curtis.

In spite of my "famous last words" (see below) I feel compelled to
respond to this accusation by Tholen.

Tholen: *YOU* are the one who used your broken file as "evidence," not
I. *YOU* are the one who "didn't even consider the possibility" that
your file was corrupt, and the error messages were therefore irrelevant,
before posting them onto the public forum of USENET as "evidence."

Holding me to a standard up to which you obviously failed to measure is
the height of hypocrisy, Dave.

In my claim of victory I am vindicated, and you are a hypocrite.

-- snip --

> > This is my final post in this subthread.
>
> Famous last words.

Yeah, you got me there, Dave. See? I can admit when I screw up.

Too bad you can't.

-- snip --


Curtis



Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         22-Nov-99 23:58:17
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 03:21:16
Subj: (1/2) Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Eric Bennett writes (using a pseudonym again):

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you positive that is the real reason?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor"
lisp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own
bot
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because do I say might want to do and that you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> came to me?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

>>>>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.

>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

>>>>> See what I mean?

>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>> See what I mean?

>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

> See what I mean?

Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would appreciate it if you would continue.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor"
lisp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own
bot
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that those are mine?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does it bother you that those are yours?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that those are mine?

>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that those are mine?

>>>>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.

>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>> Are you sure that those are mine?

>>>>> See what I mean?

>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>> See what I mean?

>> Are you sure that those are mine?

> See what I mean?

Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you certain that this is the real reason?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor"
lisp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own
bot
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all this?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that is the real reason?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?

>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?

>>>>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.

>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?

>>>>> See what I mean?

>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>> See what I mean?

>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?

> See what I mean?

Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What makes you believe what makes I believe this?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor"
lisp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own
bot
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When did you first know that those are eliza's?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?

>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?

>>>>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.

>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?

>>>>> See what I mean?

>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>> See what I mean?

>> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?

> See what I mean?

Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe my life that I am going through all this have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something to do with this.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor"
lisp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own
bot
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Earlier you said do I say might want to do claim and?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.

>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.

>>>>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.

>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.

>>>>> See what I mean?

>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>> See what I mean?

>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.

> See what I mean?

Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Go on, don't be afraid.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor"
lisp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own
bot
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What makes you believe that?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't you know?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What makes you believe that?

>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>> What makes you believe that?

>>>>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.

>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>> What makes you believe that?

>>>>> See what I mean?

>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>> See what I mean?

>> What makes you believe that?

> See what I mean?

Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you absolutely sure that is the real reason?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor"
lisp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own
bot
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all this?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that is the real reason?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all this?

>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all this?

>>>>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.

>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all this?

>>>>> See what I mean?

>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>> See what I mean?

>> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all this?

> See what I mean?

Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that is the real reason?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor"
lisp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own
bot
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Illogical.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

>>>>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.

>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

>>>>> See what I mean?

>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>> See what I mean?

>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

> See what I mean?

Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You're being a bit brief, perhaps you could go into
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> detail.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor"
lisp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own
bot
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all this?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that is the real reason?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all this?

>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all this?

>>>>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.

>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all this?

>>>>> See what I mean?

>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>> See what I mean?

>> Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all this?

> See what I mean?

Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because do me claim might want to do and that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you came to me?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor"
lisp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own
bot
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When did you first know that those are eliza's?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?

>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?

>>>>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.

>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?

>>>>> See what I mean?

>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>> See what I mean?

>> Are you sure that those are Eliza's?

> See what I mean?

Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because do me claim might want to do and that

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         22-Nov-99 23:58:17
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 03:21:16
Subj: (2/2) Re: Advocacy's Mosquito...

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you came to me?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your own conversation with the Emacs "doctor"
lisp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eliza clone, Dave?  Or can't you recognize when your own
bot
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense is being thrown right back at you?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that this is the real reason?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.

>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.

>>>>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.

>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.

>>>>> See what I mean?

>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>> See what I mean?

> Note: no logical response.

Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of my sex life that I am going through all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this that you say I do not approve phrases either?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't ask me.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't tell me what to do.  I am the psychiatrist
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> here!  Maybe your plans have something to do with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What makes you believe that?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would appreciate it if you would continue.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying you chat with "doctor", Dave?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What makes you believe that?

>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>> What makes you believe that?

>>>>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.

>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>> What makes you believe that?

>>>>> See what I mean?

>>>> Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>> See what I mean?

>> What makes you believe that?

> See what I mean?

Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               22-Nov-99 20:50:08
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 03:21:16
Subj: Re: Tholen Digest II - Electric Boogaloo

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Dave Tholen consulted a more enlightened intellect than his own to bring forth
the following logical argument:
> 
> Eric Bennett writes (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But even that wouldn't completely solve the problem,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as you've also screwed up the correct attributions.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is the fact that even that would not completely solve the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problem as Marty also screwed up the correct attributions
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the real reason?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with tholenbot, Dave?
> 
> >>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>> Doesn't look like Eliza anymore.  Looks more like Dave Tholen pasting
in
> >>>>> canned lines from Eliza without actually having Eliza respond to the
> >>>>> post.
> 
> >>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>> See what I mean?
> 
> >> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

Enjoying your hypocritical "infantile game" spewing forth "baby-talk tripe"
(by
your own admission) at tholenbot, Dave?

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note that the URL and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the line that follows have the same level of indentation, 
yet
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you wrote one and I wrote the other.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does the fact that the url and the line that follows have
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same indentation yet Marty wrote one and you wrote the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other explain anything else?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all
this?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?
> 
> >>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with tholenbot, Dave?
> 
> >>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>> Doesn't look like Eliza anymore.  Looks more like Dave Tholen pasting
in
> >>>>> canned lines from Eliza without actually having Eliza respond to the
post.
> 
> >>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?
> 
> >>> See what I mean?
> 
> >> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?

Enjoying your hypocritical "infantile game" spewing forth "baby-talk tripe"
(by
your own admission) at tholenbot, Dave?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

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

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               22-Nov-99 20:41:19
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 03:21:16
Subj: Re: Interesting Reading Comprehension Problem by Bass

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Dave Tholen wrote:
> 
> David Sutherland writes:
> 
> >>>> What appears to you is irrelevant, Curtis.
> 
> >>> Tholen, you are a lying jerk.
> 
> >> Where is the alleged lie in the above statement, Sutherland?
> 
> > I'm not talking about the above statement made by Curtis, Tholen.
> 
> Oh, so you're just spewing the usual invective.  Figures.

"Yet more evidence that you're playing your own 'infantile game'.
Or are you really that idiotic?"

- Dave "The Hypocrite" Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         23-Nov-99 00:03:09
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 03:21:16
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Lucien writes:

>>>>>>>>>>> Answer the question put to you:

>>>>>>>>>> Take the two simple tests, Lucien.

>>>>>>>>> Note the refusal to answer a basic, central question - looks
>>>>>>>>> like we've hit another major soft spot.

>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

>>>>>>> Note again the pat refusal to answer the question.

>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

>>>>> ....and we see the refusal again

>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

>>> ....and again.

>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

> .....and again...

Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?  How ironic, coming
from the person who "refused" to take the two simple tests again.

> The question again:

The same response again.

> According to your statement, under what conditions
> does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
> functionality..."?

Perhaps you'd like to tell me how the statement you keep pointing to
applies to the JDK sentence, Lucien.

> Here is your statement again for reference:

Unnecessary, Lucien, given that I've answered it.  I will restore my
two simple tests, however, given that you've never taken them.

> "The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
> 'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
> information."

And how does that concern the JDK sentence, Lucien, as you've repeatedly
insisted?

Note again the pat "refusal" to take the two simple tests:

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Meanwhile, I noticed that you failed to answer my little test,
Lucien:

] #1:  It rained today.                                              
]                                                                    
] #2:  It rained today until sunset.                                 
]                                                                    
] The question:  did it rain all of the day or only some of the day? 
]                                                                    
] The word "rained", by itself, doesn't indicate duration, therefore 
] one cannot determine an unambiguous answer to the question in the  
] absence of other information.  Yet I will claim that the answer to 
] the question is in fact unambiguous in the case of statement #2.   
]                                                                    
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.                                    

Test grade:  F.

Here's another little test for you, Lucien:

] #3:  It did rain today.
] 
] #4:  It didn't rain today.
] 
] The question:  what fraction of the day did it rain?
] 
] Structurally, the two statements are identical, yet there is nothing
] in statement #3 that allows the question to be answered unambiguously,
] while there is something in statement #4 that does allow the question
] to be answered unambigiously.
] 
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.

Test grade:  F.

Perhaps readers will notice how 3-4 corresponds to the "prevent costly
mistakes" thread, where the quantification is provided by the definition
of a word and not the structure.  Perhaps readers will notice how 1-2
corresponds to the "Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality" thread,
where the additional information resolves what would otherwise be
ambiguous.

Yet more evidence that you're playing your own "infantile game".   
Or are you really that idiotic?                                    

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: josco@sea.monterey.edu                            22-Nov-99 18:00:19
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 03:21:16
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: josco <josco@sea.monterey.edu>

On Sun, 21 Nov 1999, Chad Mulligan wrote:

> Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:3838B13F.D7B0D635@ibm.net...
> <cut>
> > > >
> > >
> > > I'd check your assumptions were I you.  There are a great number of IBM
> > > Mainframes in use, they haven't gone the way of the Dinosaur yet.
> >
> > What's gone the way of the dinosaurs is IBM's mainframe monopoly and the
> quality
> > of FUD from the MS camp.
> >
> > I propose to add nonsensical, irrational arguments about IBM's "mainframe
> > monopoly"  to the list of attributes of a MS advocate needing help.
> >
> 
> You can delude yourself if you wish, I really don't care.

You care enough to post that you don't care.  

I'm not sure why references to IBM's old monopoly connect in any way to a
defense of MS's monopoly.  I hate monopolies.  I don't think much of
people who defend them and think even less of those who can't make a stand
when pressed. 


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

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

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               22-Nov-99 22:31:27
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 03:21:16
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Dave Tholen wrote:
> 
> Those who ignore history are destined to repeat it, destined to become 
> hypocrites.

How much more of a hypocrite is someone who ignores the present time frame and
valid evidence?

> My claim is that OS/2 Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality,
> Curtis.  I supported that claim by reproducing actual quotations from
> multiple sources.  Meanwhile, Timbol was looking at the wrong file.

He also supports that claim by not examining the contents of the Java
developer's kit and by not knowing one iota about Java.  So much for his
"support".  Meanwhile he misinterprets what Timbol said in spite of all the
evidence presented to show his interpretation as being wrong and Timbol's
correction of Tholen's mistake himself, and relies on an outdated document as
his only shred of "proof".  I guess that's why Tholen is not a lawyer (among
many other reasons, no doubt).

> Remember, I'm the one who recognizes that OS/2 Java 1.1.8
> implements Java 1.2 functionality, whereas Timbol does not, and you
> are too ignorant to even take a stance on the issue.

What's unfortunate is that Tholen, too, is too ignorant to take a stance on
the
issue, but that never stops him.  Par for the course.

> > Wrong. What I initially posted was a JPEG proving you wrong.
> 
> That never appeared here, Curtis.

http://emuos2.vintagegaming.com/downloads/WinZipJava118.jpg

Too bad this URL appeared here some 15 to 20 times and Tholen ignored it.  Par
for the course.
 
> > but it doesn't change the fact that that was what I initially posted.
> 
> On what basis do you call it a "fact", Curtis?  Do you have some
> independent evidence to verify a timestamp?

There was independent verification by myself, as a matter of fact.  But I
wouldn't expect Tholen to acknowledge that.  I'm sure that was just part of my
imaginary "infantile game" that Tholen likes to perceive that I'm "playing"
with him.  I guess it helps him feel like he's more accepted, being allowed to
join in the "reindeer games" of others.
 
> It wouldn't be the first time that somebody decided to be a hypocrite in
this 
> newsgroup.

Certainly not since Tholen started posting here.

> > Tholen: *YOU* are the one who used your broken file as "evidence," not
> > I.
> 
> You didn't even consider the possibility of the file being incomplete,
> Curtis.  I stand by my statement.

"Yet to look at the contents, one must have run the executable file and
on an OS/2 system to boot!"

How can anything claiming to be logical stand by the above statement after all
the evidence that has been presented?

> But I am the one who determined that the file was incomplete, Curtis.
> It wasn't you.  It wasn't Marty.  It wasn't Timbol.  None of you even
> suggested the possibility.  I stand by my statement.

"Yet to look at the contents, one must have run the executable file and
on an OS/2 system to boot!"

How illogical.  Par for the course.
 
> > and the error messages were therefore irrelevant, before posting
> > them onto the public forum of USENET as "evidence."
> 
> How ironic, coming from the person who posted the "inept" claim onto
> the public forum as "evidence" (more like invective).

"Yet to look at the contents, one must have run the executable file and
on an OS/2 system to boot!"

> > Yeah, you got me there, Dave. See? I can admit when I screw up.
> 
> Then why can't you admit that you screwed up when you made the "inept"
> claim?

"I stand by my statement."
"Yet to look at the contents, one must have run the executable file and
on an OS/2 system to boot!"

That's pretty blasted inept, especially at this stage in the infantile game.

> > Too bad you can't.
> 
> You're a liar in addition to being a hypocrite.

Prove it, if you think you can, hypocrite.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

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

From: mike@lionsgate.com                                23-Nov-99 03:34:08
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 03:21:16
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows...

From: mike@lionsgate.com (Mike Stephen)

In message <cMj_3.1031$vR2.106866@typ12.deja.bcandid.com> - "Valafar"
<cuyler@nospam.uswest.ever>Mon, 22 Nov 1999 15:58:53 -0800 writes:
:>
:>> Since you were what I would call a new user of OS/2 (from 2.0),
:>> perhaps you didn't have much of an investment in the os.  I used it
:>> from ver 1.0. I have about 1600 bucks of currently used software and
:>
:>So you're bitter then.

Nope I just dislike Windows weenies trying to tell me that I should
change my operating system to windows.  

:>
:><snip diatribe>
:>
:>> I take care of about 30 machines that are 486 66Mhz or 486 100Mhz,
:>> with 16 and 32 megs of ram.  Could you send these people enough money
:>> to upgrade to the class of machine you would reccomend for NT?  I take
:>> care of another 30-40 Windows 3.11 machines for the same reason.  They
:>> run 486 class machines.  I could give all these people your email so
:>> they can ask you to give them the funds to upgrade...  Until then they
:>> get the work needed to be done, done.  They use whatever OS gets the
:>> job done. Interestinlgy enough, many of the Windows 3.1 users are
:>> upgrading operating systems from Win 3.1 to OS/2 Warp because Warp
:>> runs on 486 machines with 32 megs ram.  If we can dig up 32 megs, we
:>> can get them more productive running both Windows and OS2 apps.
:>
:>AND you work for cheapskates.  Being in the modern world requires an
:>expenditure of money.  That's part of the game.  If you believe that telling
:>people they can squeeze the last bit of dollar out of their 10 year old
:>machines and operating systems is good practice and makes you a better
:>"geek", then I've got a bridge for sale in Jersey that I know you'll love.

Saving hundreds of thousands of dollars is very worthwhile to my
clients.  I am sorry your clients do not have that same feeling.  
:>
:><snip senseless zealot drivel>
:>
:>> I can only hope that the DOJ levels the playing field so that vendors
:>> like BEOS and QNX, and a few other potential operating system vendors
:>> can take a chunk out of Microsofts ill gotten marketshare.  It will
:>> take a few years, but I hope in 5 years to be able to see a large
:>> segment of the computer users finally see that they have been misled
:>> by all the Windows weenies.
:>
:>Windows weenies are no differet than Mac weenies or BeOS weenies, it just so
:>happens that at the time, they embraced the technology that gave them better
:>jobs.  Consumer market place (ie HOME use) comprises only part of the OS
:>market.  Most companies bought MS crap, so their emplyees had to learn MS
:>crap, and then got used to it and used it at home.

No most brought the technology from the home.  It did not go from the
office to home, but rather from little johnnys space invader home
computer running dos or Win 3.1 or lately Win 95/98, to the office. 
Thats where the current business use of Win 98 comes from.  Certainly
not fro the office!
You have it 180 degrees out.

:>
:>Just because you happen to find OS/2 more to your liking doesn't mean that
:>everyone else on the planet is a stupid moron.  IBM, way back (following
:>your lead of trying to prove superiority by seniority) was considered the
:>"Evil Empire" just as MS is now.  IBM is stupid.  They made some stupid
:>mistakes.. (case in point.. and OS/2 Warp ad stating "OS/2 WARP.. It'll
:>obliterate your Hard Drive." -- nice ad.)..

I guess not everyone is a stupid moron..... Just the ones using
Windows are...

:>
:>Technically speaking, OS/2 has some great features, but it's dead.  It's
:>going away.  Let it go and get off of everyone elses ass about it.  Next,
:>you're going to start spouting off about the file structure benefits of
:>COBOL and CP/M.
:>
:>Valafar

In the same spirit I would ask you to stop trying to convince everyone
to run windows.  Let it go... admit that there are alternatives that
are better for some people.  Not everyone should use Windows.  
:>
:>







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

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         23-Nov-99 02:30:22
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 03:21:16
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.  One old
quotation is worth preserving, namely:

CB] This is my final post in this subthread.

Obviously he couldn't resist, just like so many before him.  Those who
ignore history are destined to repeat it, destined to become hypocrites.

Curtis Bass writes:

> Have you stopped beating your wife, Dave?

I see you can't resist making erroneous presuppositions, eh Curtis?

> Your answer was, "I *JUST SEE* see more of your pontification, Curtis."
> [emphasis mine]

Different from the answer you attributed to me, Curtis.

> Clearly, the only thing you saw was my alleged "pontification,"

What's allegedly "alleged" about your pontification, Curtis?  It was
quite clear that your claim lacked any supporting evidence.  That's
what makes it pontification.

> which is to say that you saw nothing else (based on the use of the
> word "just").

It is to say that I just saw more of your pontification, Curtis.

> Ergo, "No, Curtis, I cannot see the difference" is a valid inference,
> based on sound reading comprehension.

On the contrary, your inference is not valid, based on unsound logic.
Noting the existence of your pontification is not an indication of
agreement or disagreement, Curtis.

> And you "contradicted" Mike Timol's claim in order to support your
> claim.

My claim is that OS/2 Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality,
Curtis.  I supported that claim by reproducing actual quotations from
multiple sources.  Meanwhile, Timbol was looking at the wrong file.

> You act as if they are mutually exclusive.

On what basis do you make that claim, Curtis?

> More inconsistency.

More pontification on your part, Curtis.

> So was your question, "On what basis do you make that claim, Curtis?"

Incorrect, Curtis.  My question was intended to determine the basis for
your claim.

> Obviously not (see above and below):

Above and below don't demonstrate that I don't know what's going on,
Curtis.  Remember, I'm the one who recognizes that OS/2 Java 1.1.8
implements Java 1.2 functionality, whereas Timbol does not, and you
are too ignorant to even take a stance on the issue.

> Wrong. What I initially posted was a JPEG proving you wrong.

That never appeared here, Curtis.

> That you never saw it is convenient for your "argument" I suppose,

That deja.com didn't see it either, as noted by someone else, indicates
the problem with propagation.  Convenience for my argument has nothing
to do with it, Curtis.

> but it doesn't change the fact that that was what I initially posted.

On what basis do you call it a "fact", Curtis?  Do you have some
independent evidence to verify a timestamp?

> In spite of my "famous last words" (see below) I feel compelled to
> respond to this accusation by Tholen.

I'm not surprised, Curtis.  It wouldn't be the first time that somebody
decided to be a hypocrite in this newsgroup.

> Tholen: *YOU* are the one who used your broken file as "evidence," not
> I.

You didn't even consider the possibility of the file being incomplete,
Curtis.  I stand by my statement.

> *YOU* are the one who "didn't even consider the possibility" that
> your file was corrupt,

I said it was incomplete, Curtis, not corrupt.  I have no evidence
to support a claim that any of the bytes are incorrect.

But I am the one who determined that the file was incomplete, Curtis.
It wasn't you.  It wasn't Marty.  It wasn't Timbol.  None of you even
suggested the possibility.  I stand by my statement.

> and the error messages were therefore irrelevant, before posting
> them onto the public forum of USENET as "evidence."

How ironic, coming from the person who posted the "inept" claim onto
the public forum as "evidence" (more like invective).

> Holding me to a standard up to which you obviously failed to measure

What is a "standard up", Curtis?  And on what basis do you claim that
I failed to measure up to whatever a "standard up" is?

> is the height of hypocrisy, Dave.

How ironic, coming from the person who wrote:

CB] This is my final post in this subthread.

> In my claim of victory I am vindicated,

Incorrect, Curtis.  There is no victory on your part, given that you
never substantiated your "inept" claim, and you claimed ignorance
regarding the Java 1.2 functionality implemented in OS/2 Java 1.1.8.

> and you are a hypocrite.

How ironic, coming from the person who wrote:

CB] This is my final post in this subthread.

> Yeah, you got me there, Dave. See? I can admit when I screw up.

Then why can't you admit that you screwed up when you made the "inept"
claim?

> Too bad you can't.

You're a liar in addition to being a hypocrite.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: flmighe@attglobal.net                             23-Nov-99 03:24:28
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 03:21:16
Subj: Re: Not even Ballmer likes NT

From: flmighe@attglobal.net

|||This story is not correct.  Gates and clan did build the BASIC interpreter
|||using Harvard hardware, but he was not expelled for that.  He quit Harvard
on
|||his own accord.

|| Did he quit or was he asked to resign?

|He quit.

Did he quit because he was asked to?

|| How come he has never completed his degree?

|Perhaps he didn't think he needed it.

Perhaps he didn't think he needed an MSCE. Does he have at least that?

|| A smart guy should have been able to do that by correspondence and
|| executive business degree week ends. I think Gates crafty not smart and it
|| is likely Harvard caught him.

|Gates is both crafty and smart.  You see it in the way he does business.  But
|from his point of view what was the value of the degree?  It wasn't going to
|get him a better job than he had.  It wasn't going to make him more money
than
|he had.  So what's the point?  It would just waste time that he could be
using
|productively doing something else.

The point is formal education has value in kicking out the scum. Gates
probably
would not be allowed back into Harvard and I think Harvard to honorable to
allow him to buy his way in.

|||(There are a number of companies that boostrapped themselves using Harvard
|||hardware.  Harvard doesn't seem to take great exception to that.)

|| Harvard may not. They are private. But the computer was a DoD computer
|| grant deal. Citizens should take great exception. Anything that Gates
developed
|| on that computer is public domain.

|I'm not sure that follows, particularly since neither of us knows for a fact
|whether or not that computer was part of a DoD grant.  Lots of them aren't,
|you know.

Yes, but this one was, according to literature.

|||FWIW Gates was an exceptional coder.

|| But was he an exceptional coder because of his exceptional memory rather
|| than his analytical skills? Did he just memorize routines from books and
then
|| regurgitate them?

|You make me laugh.  You do realize that there weren't any books for him to
|memorize, don't you?  But even if there were it was obvious from looking at
|the code that he didn't crib it from somewhere else.  He used multi-path
|instructions (a set of instructions that does one thing when invoked from one
|address and another thing when invoked from a slightly different address) way
|too often for it not to be completely custom crafted.

Not only were there books there were classes. I know this first hand. There
was
not a degree but you could take classes on compilers and operating systems
at Santa Barbara (one of the Internet schools). Assembler, Basic, C, all that. 
It
was all Unix and IBM MVS but it was all there.

|But hey, if you want to think the guy wasn't any good at it go right ahead. 
|What does he care?

He does not. But we should. Professions are self regulating. This one got into
ours and should have been booted out. His lack of degree completion was
probably the first indication that he was a bad apple. Lets not let others
like him get away with it.

|| Would a business man with analytical skills take the DoJ
|| antitrust case this far?

|Perhaps dragging it out is considered better for Microsoft than settling. 
|Perhaps they really thought they could win -- after all, IBM did, and IBM was
|way worse than Microsoft (but they couldn't PROVE it).

|| Something does not compute. Perhaps the key word
|| is was. Is Gates capable of being an exceptional coder today?

|Probably; it's not so much a specific skillset as a way of looking at
|problems.

A way of looking at problems that is called systems theory and is
applicable to social science just as it is in computer science. I do not
believe an analytical mind would have proceeded the way Gates has.
He has proceeded with a legalistic mind. How many legal minds code
well? I know at least one but they are rare.

http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/lssys.htm

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: mewhort@lava.net@lava.net                         22-Nov-99 16:50:03
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 03:21:17
Subj: Re: Not even Ballmer likes NT

From: mewhort@lava.net@lava.net

In <38385b82_1@news1.prserv.net>, flmighe@attglobal.net writes:
>In <38382C30.5FAAC44D@ibm.net|, Joseph <josco@ibm.net| writes:

>Now, I did get a chance to use WORDSTAR. It worked great. I do not think
there was
>ever a spread sheet for CP/M. I think 123 was the killer application that
popularized
>PCs. Did it run on CP/M? For many PC purchasers the ability to run 123 was
the
>deciding factor.

You must be pretty young.  I used SuperCalc on a Osbourne luggable way back
when
to service clients.  CP/M, nice little spreadsheet.  123 was later.

Chris Mewhort
mewhort@lava.net

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

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

From: Nunya@Business.net                                22-Nov-99 22:55:23
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 03:21:17
Subj: Re: As predicted: Computer Mags Dying?

From: Dave <Nunya@Business.net>

On 22 Nov 1999 11:18:14 -0500, Jason <malstrom@wilde.oit.umass.edu>
wrote:

>When OS/2 Magizine close up shop a few years ago, the "OS/2 Zealots" 
>claimed that this was just an industry trend and would start hitting 
>other magazines soon enough.
>
>Here's an interesting look at the situation of computer magazines:
>
>http://download.cnet.com/insider/0-121949-7-1453524.html

Well of course the "OS/2 Zealots" claimed that.  They couldn't admit
that the OS/2 market was so small that it couldn't support even *one*
magazine, having had 3 or 4 at one time.  The same thing happened to
other, dieing platforms, like the Amiga, Apple 2, TRS80, etc.  In
fact, that used to be prime evidence of a system's decline - no
magazines supported it anymore!

But the article makes a good point about overly specialized magazines.
There are far too many to survive.  I was especially puzzled by the
early (circa 1995) "Internet World" type of magazines.  Hello?  Who
wants to read a *magazine* about the internet?  Just get online and
read!

But the general purpose, non system-specific magazines still have a
place, IMO.  I still get PC Mag, for example.  It's *still* easier to
read a paper magazine in the bathroom!         :-)

I also still miss Byte, and it's sad to read about Computer Shopper.
I had no idea how that one has changed, not having seen one in years.

But the glory days of computer magazines is definitely over.
Everything's on the net now, and is literally a few mouse clicks away.


The fact that OS/2 couldn't support even 1 magazine 5 years ago has
nothing to do with the computer publishing landscape of today,
however.  It was simply an indication of OS/2's non-viability, and
impending death.

Dave
 

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Hey Pal - Organize This! (1:109/42)

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

From: forgitaboutit@fake.com                            23-Nov-99 02:02:04
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 05:47:06
Subj: Re: As predicted: Computer Mags Dying?

From: David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com>

In article <05C6FUhLDNUU-pn2-7sF0VSkOY9mw@localhost>, wsonna@ibm.net says...
>On Mon, 22 Nov 1999 16:18:14, Jason <malstrom@wilde.oit.umass.edu> 
>wrote:
>
>> When OS/2 Magizine close up shop a few years ago, the "OS/2 Zealots" 
>> claimed that this was just an industry trend and would start hitting 
>> other magazines soon enough.
>> 
>> Here's an interesting look at the situation of computer magazines:
>> 
>> http://download.cnet.com/insider/0-121949-7-1453524.html
>> 
>> -Jason
>
>The Wonderful World of Windows is a boring, predictable place, to be 
>sure.  PC Mag's "Editor's Choice" will ALWAYS be Microsoft Word, 
>Microsoft Windows, Microsoft Excel, Microsoft Internet Explorer, and 
>the latest release of anything else Microsoft publishes (except for 
>Microsoft Money, which is destined to always to lose to Quicken).
>
>Since the outcome of their "tests" doesn't ever change, why would 
>anyone pay to read them more than once?
>
>As for hardware reviews, while I don't think Tom's Hardware's are all 
>that great, I don't really think they are any worse than what PC Mag 
>serves up, either.  And they are free.
>
>Bottom line: haven't paid for a PC RagMag for years.  And that's 
>unlikely to change.
>

This is your problem. There are plenty of magazines out their for windows that 

are not PC anything.  You guys seem to feel that it is PC whatever or bust. Of 

course, many of you never seem to mind any of the magazines if they knock MS
or 
related products, only if they have the termity to show that there are things 
to like about MS products. IE is a perfect choice. It is simply the best 
browser currently available. But in your case since it came from MS, it must
be 
bad.  

Windows can and does support so many magazines because so much is happening. 
And you know what, quite a few of us don't mind paying for magazines if they 
provide useful information and many of them do.



-- 
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

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

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

From: forgitaboutit@fake.com                            23-Nov-99 02:30:13
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 10:20:08
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows...

From: David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com>

In article <8NSY3.20$EN1.38800@news.bctel.net>, mike@lionsgate.com says...
>In message <sdIzOBlEE6Aojmy+ALnAlrxatedl@4ax.com> - Hobbyist
><alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net>Thu, 18 Nov 1999 05:29:31 -0500 writes:
>:>
>:>clasqm@mweb.co.za (Michel Clasquin) posted:
>:>
>:>> On Wed, 17 Nov 1999 08:55:15 GMT, mike@lionsgate.com (Mike Stephen)
>:>> wrote:
>:>> 
>:>> >system level, not at an application level)!  Running two videos as
>:>> >once tends to tax Beos to the limit.  Whereas I can run three or four
>:>> 
>:>> Sorry to be the one to tell you this, but there's something wrong with
>:>> your system. I only have a humble AMDK6 200 with 64M RAM, and my
>:>> graphics card is just barely supported, but I can  run 4 or 5 AVI's
>:>> and Quicktimes with no perceptible slowdown - and that's from CDROM.
>:>> When I push it up to eight, they start running slower, but don't skip
>:>> any frames that I can see. Windows chokes solid on just 2.
>:>
>:>No, there's nothing wrong with his system. He's just an OS/2 advocate
>:>spreading exaggerated claims of OS/2 superiority. Your refute doesn't
>:>surprise me in the least. After using OS/2 for 2 yrs, then using NT, I
>:>found no significant differences in multitasking between the two and I
>:>did run tests and did things with NT that OS/2 advocates claimed
>:>couldn't be done where NT multitasking is concerned. I'd take their
>:>rants in this regard with a big grain of salt.
>
>If you found no significant differences between NT's multitasking nd
>OS/2's multitasking then I think you really do not run more than 2-3
>apps at once.  On my system just booting up to my standard screen,
>takes 24 active tasks,  33 processes, and 133 threads.  

And? I've got 34 processes(including this newsreader) and 259 threads. 
No task count. And I've run more than 2-3 apps at one. I've compiled and 
downloaded, played games, in short EVERYTHING I did under OS/2 and more and 
there is NO difference in the two in multitasking between the two.


>Oh please  This from a Win advovate...  no less! My system is a bit on
>the slow side, it is a AMD 450Mhz with 64 megs dram.  If I play both
>the mpgs (the monitors thrown off the building) at the same time, they
>do not play smoothly at all.  This is fact, not exageration.

Sounds like your slow system. I can run dual mpgs with no problem. Face it.

>:> 
>:>> The shortage of codecs is a fair comment, though. You do come across
>:>> clips that BeOS doesn't recognise.
>:>> 
>:>> Regarding your comments on the interface: the tracker/deskbar
>:>> interface is just a program, and on Be's site it  is stated explicitly
>:>> somewhere in the FAQ that it can be replaced. So, learn to program the
>:>> BeOS and duplicate the OS/2 shell. If there are really thousands of
>:>> prospective customers out there, you might make yourself a small
>:>> fortune in shareware fees. But don't expect Be to do it for you.
>:>> They've developed a signature UI (which us hardened BeOS users have
>:>> learned to love and respect) of their own, and IMHO they should stick
>:>> to it.
>
>It is very similar to the windows interface, and nothing like the WPS
>with SOM and DSOM.
>
>:>
>:>He's one of those OS/2 advocates that's expects another OS/2 WPS out
>:>of another OS. If he doesn't get this, then it's crap and a total
>:>disappointment. The refute to this would be that OS/2 has made them
>:>expectant of high standards and intolerant of mediocrity. I say
>:>they're inflexible and almost obsessed in the main (this is a
>:>generalisation please).
>
>Obsessed?  All I want is an operating system that at least meets my
>needs.  Windows certainly doesn't, and I was hoping BEOS did.  It
>doesn't either.  I do wish someone out there would adapt the SOM/DSOM
>model and incorporate it into a GUI like the WPS.  I do not need it to
>look like the WPS, just act like it.  At least I consider BEOS a lot
>better than Windows NT.  However it still is no match for Warp OS/2. 
>I can demonstrate it any time for anyone who wishes.  Just send me a
>note when you are in Vancouver.  I have both operating systems
>installed and can demontrate those same two mpg files in both BEOS and
>OS/2.  You can decide which operating system can handle the two MPGS
>better.
>



-- 
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

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

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

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           23-Nov-99 07:42:08
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 10:20:09
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <Pine.SGI.3.93.991122175540.17359C-100000@sea.monterey.edu>, on
11/22/99 at 06:00 PM,
   josco <josco@sea.monterey.edu> said:

> You care enough to post that you don't care.  

LOL

> I'm not sure why references to IBM's old monopoly connect in any way to
> a defense of MS's monopoly.  I hate monopolies.  I don't think much of
> people who defend them and think even less of those who can't make a
> stand when pressed. 

It's sort of like a wiseguy who gets caught and says "You didn't mind Al
Capone offing those Irish hoods. Why do you care about me offing some
Italian ones?"

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

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

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

From: lars-news@bearnip.com                             23-Nov-99 12:33:23
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 10:20:09
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows...

From: lars-news@bearnip.com (Lars Duening)

On Mon, 22 Nov 1999 16:03:22 -0600, "Nik Simpson" <nik@hiwaay.net>
wrote:

>"Frederic Marchand" <fmarchand@iname.com> wrote in message
>news:3839B7D5.26D9F883@iname.com...
>> DC wrote:
>> >
>> > That's not exactly correct.  If there's only one thread, only one CPU
>> > can be engaged on that task.  That's common in any mass-market OS.  NT
>> > and Be are exactly the same in that regard.
>>
>>   In the BeOS, one window (eg one rendering) *automatically* means one
>> thread.
>
>Yes, because like the NT Window Manager it's a multithreaded application,
>this is a no brainer improvement in a Window manager since it needs to be
>scheduled at a more granular level than most applications. This doesn't
>change the fact that the vast majority of applications available today only
>have a single logical thread of execution and that for these applications
>(taken individually) there is no benefit from a second CPU, the benefit
>comes when you start running multiple apps or a single app (like a Window
>Manager) that is multithreaded.

Frederic wasn't quite clear: in the BeOS, one window automatically
means one _more_ thread - the window rendering thread - created and
maintained by the OS runtime. Therefore, even if the app itself was
written single-threaded, a second processor will be used.

And we didn't even mention the OS threads like the filesystem...
-- 
Lars Duening; lars@bearnip.com
(Currently I can check my mail only occasionally)

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

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

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               23-Nov-99 12:05:25
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 16:44:02
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Dave Tholen wrote:
> 
> Lucien writes:
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> Answer the question put to you:
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Take the two simple tests, Lucien.
> 
> >>>>>>>>> Note the refusal to answer a basic, central question - looks
> >>>>>>>>> like we've hit another major soft spot.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?
> 
> >>>>>>> Note again the pat refusal to answer the question.
> 
> >>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?
> 
> >>>>> ....and we see the refusal again
> 
> >>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?
> 
> >>> ....and again.
> 
> >> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
> 
> > .....and again...
> 
> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?  How ironic, coming
> from the person who "refused" to take the two simple tests again.
> 
> > The question again:
> 
> The same response again.

The same inappropriate refusal to answer the question again.  Tholen
doesn't realize that "Perhaps you'd like to tell me how the statement
you keep pointing to applies to the JDK sentence, Lucien." doesn't
answer the question:

According to your statement, under what conditions
does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
functionality..."?

> Perhaps you'd like to tell me how the statement you keep pointing to
> applies to the JDK sentence, Lucien.

Perhaps if Tholen answered the question Lucien could show its
applicability.  Guess we'll never know.  Of course, it doesn't take a
scientist to figure out where Lucien is going with this question,
however judging by the ineptitude of the "scientist" in question, it is
reasonable to assume that he honestly doesn't know where the question
was going.
 
> > Here is your statement again for reference:
> 
> Unnecessary, Lucien, given that I've answered it.

Just the way Tholen answers me: completely inappropriately, ignoring all
relevant points, and removing all noteworthy context from the statements
in question.  Par for the course.

> I will restore my two simple tests, however, given that you've never taken
them.

But Tholen, he's already answered those questions with his response.

> Note again the pat "refusal" to take the two simple tests:

Where is this alleged "refusal", Tholen, again?  How ironic, coming from
the person who "refused" to answer one simple question:

According to Tholen's statement, under what conditions
does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
functionality..."?

Here is Tholen's statement again for reference:

"The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
information."

Yet more evidence that Tholen is playing his own "infantile game".  Or
is he really that idiotic?

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

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

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             23-Nov-99 17:49:25
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 16:44:02
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <81cu8l$21d$1@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenantispam@hawaii.edu wrote:

-- snip --

> Curtis Bass writes:

-- snip --

> > Holding me to a standard up to which you obviously failed to measure
>
> What is a "standard up", Curtis?  And on what basis do you claim that
> I failed to measure up to whatever a "standard up" is?

ROTFLMAO!  And you dare to claim that you are not inept!!

For someone who has made a USENET career out of breaking up peoples'
statements into clauses, you sure screwed up here. And of course, in
Classic Tholen style, you will insist that your screwed-up
misinterpretation is the "correct" one.

I'm busting a gut, and I'm sure I'm not alone.

"Holding me to a standard up to which you obviously failed to measure is
the height of hypocrisy, Dave."

Here, let me help you . . .

     Holding me to a standard

     up to which you obviously failed to measure

     is the height of hypocrisy, Dave.

What you just did was inept. Go ahead, Dave.

Deny it. (LOL)

> > is the height of hypocrisy, Dave.
>
> How ironic, coming from the person who wrote:
>
> CB] This is my final post in this subthread.

Apparently, you have no idea what hypocrisy is, which is ironic,
considering how skilled you are in its practice.

Saying that I am going to do something, and then changing my mind and
proceding to not do it, is not necessarily "hypocrisy," Dave. It only
qualifies as "hypocrisy" if I were insincere in my original claim that I
was going to do that something.

If you can prove that I was insincere when I originally posted, "This is
my final post in this subthread," then your claim that I am a hypocrite
is valid and justified. Otherwise, it's simply just another
unsubstantiated claim on your part.

I will state that I was sincere; I had no plans to respond further at
the time that I wrote that.

Of course, you will now proceed to call me a "liar," even though you
have no way to substantiate that I am either a liar or a hypocrite.

Another form of "hypocrisy," Dave, is expecting others to do something
that you yourself either will not, cannot or did not do, and judging
said others when they fail to do that something which you yourself
either will not, cannot, or did not do.  That is the form of which you
are guilty.


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

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

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  23-Nov-99 15:03:13
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 16:44:02
Subj: Re: Amodeo digest, volume 2451506

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

Well, at least Tholen didn't expect responses to his posting with countless,
out-of-order citations this time, but he's still playing his "infantile
game", having responded to numerous articles today.  Apparently he still
doesn't know how to unzip a file.  Here's today's digest:

[Ta-da!  Nothing of interest!]

There you go, the complete works of Tholen, according to merit, summarized
for your convenience.


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

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

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  23-Nov-99 15:06:14
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 16:44:02
Subj: Re: Interesting Reading Comprehension Problem by Tholen

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

Tholen tholened:

> Oh, so [I'm] just spewing the usual invective.  Figures.

1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 -- Figures.


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

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

From: jbergman@ixc.ixc.net                              23-Nov-99 01:43:11
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 16:44:02
Subj: OS/2's source code

From: Trancser <jbergman@ixc.ixc.net>

Since the source code was released from IBM (oops...I meant 'leaked'
...yea thats it!), I was wondering if whoever bothered to download a
copy for themselves, plan on ...I dunno....DOING anything with it,
whether it be for private use or otherwise? I know that posting this
message might not be the best thing to do, considering the subject, but
I just thought I'd ask since its out there ...and I'm sure theres
probably a lot of you out there that would LOVE to do some kick-butt
things with the source, but hopefully for OS/2!

Now, I am to understand, that the source that's out there is of an older
version, and not of a recent or from the current fixpack for OS/2
...well I'm no programmer, but I'm sure theres something from the code
that could be used to maybe form a "patch" to replace some components of
OS/2?



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

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

From: sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.c...               23-Nov-99 19:45:09
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 16:44:02
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

Message sender: sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk

From: David Sutherland <sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk>

On 23 Nov 1999 02:30:45 GMT, tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)
wrote:

[snip]

>
>Incorrect, Curtis.  There is no victory on your part, given that you
>never substantiated your "inept" claim, and you claimed ignorance
>regarding the Java 1.2 functionality implemented in OS/2 Java 1.1.8.
>

Those aren't the things he set out to prove, tholen, so how can he
have failed in them?   What he has succeeded in is showing that you
made false claims and have been lying and pontificating  to try and
bury that fact ever since.   *You* have failed Tholen, but are too dim
to realise it.

Regards,
David Sutherland
(note **ANTI-SPAM** in reply field)

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

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

From: sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.c...               23-Nov-99 19:51:04
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 16:44:02
Subj: Re: Interesting Reading Comprehension Problem by Bass

Message sender: sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk

From: David Sutherland <sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk>

On 23 Nov 1999 00:23:53 GMT, tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)
wrote:

>David Sutherland writes:
>
>>>>> What appears to you is irrelevant, Curtis.
>
>>>> Tholen, you are a lying jerk.
>
>>> Where is the alleged lie in the above statement, Sutherland?
>
>> I'm not talking about the above statement made by Curtis, Tholen.
>
>Oh, so you're just spewing the usual invective.  Figures.


No Tholen, I was addressing your false claims and willful ignorance of
evidence that proved you wrong - I notice you deleted that from your
response - how typical.   You are a lying jerk for those reasons,
nothing to do with your throw-away one-line" arguments".






Regards,
David Sutherland
(note **ANTI-SPAM** in reply field)

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

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

From: larso@commodore.                                  23-Nov-99 21:36:29
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 19:58:05
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Bob Germer write:
> On <80h8dj$bcn$1@dagger.ab.videon.ca>, on 11/12/99 at 02:32 PM,
>    larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:
> 
> > Microsoft is not required to sell their products at any price to any
> > people. If Intel doesn't want to do what MS wants, MS doesn't have to
> > support them. Microsoft isn't the babysitter of whining computer
> > companies.
> 
> > Your problem is that when MS says "do this or you don't get to buy our
> > product", it has success behind it.  You will in all seriousness reply
> > to me that because MS is successful it has to play by a different set of
> > rules.
> 
> Oh, my. Another idiot with no knowledge of Federal Law.

That there is a shitty law doesn't change the fact that its shitty.

>                                                        It is unlawful to
> charge different customers different prices for the same quantity of the
> same product.

Tell that to stores that offer discounts.  I get my food at a restaurant
near my home for a cheaper price than the general public.

When I sell something, I base my price on who is asking.  You will not
be able to buy a slice of pizza off me at the same rate I'd offer my cousin.
In fact, I may refuse to sell you the slice at all.

>                   Moreover, no one from a company, be it the corner candy
> store or Microsoft can refuse to sell to some would be customers but not
> others.

And why not?  Why must the hammer of government be omnipresent to force a
company to sell to somebody they don't want to?

> MS doesn't have to play to different rules.

I've already listed ways that other companies can play that you vehemently
cry against MS doing...

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

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

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

From: larso@commodore.                                  23-Nov-99 21:39:14
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 19:58:05
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Jerry Prather write:
> (Lars P Ormberg)12 Nov 1999 14:32:19 GMT writes:

> :>If another company doesn't enter into a partnership with you, you can
> :>withhold things.  Like sales.
> 
> Good grief!  I thought this kind of thing was settled back when
> Lester Maddox was told he _had_ to sell his chicken dinners to
> blacks because it was "open to the public".

On the converse side, would you force Lester Maddox to eat at restaurant A
because the owner was black?

If you think that kind of forcing is idiotic, how can you gladly accept the
flipside?

>                                                  Are you trying to
> tell me that M$ is not open to the public? 

"Open to the public" is a farce.  A person's property should only be open to
whomever they want it to be open for...likewise, only received by those who
wish to receive it.

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

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

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

From: josco@sea.monterey.edu                            23-Nov-99 13:12:09
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 19:58:05
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: josco <josco@sea.monterey.edu>

On 23 Nov 1999, uno@40th.com wrote:

> 
> Bob Germer? (bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com?) wrote (Tue, 23 Nov 1999 08:20:58
-0500):
> >No>GUI can operate without a keyboard as well once the program is loaded.
> 
> PDAs do it all the time.  Keyboards are for new data input.
> Chances are that if you're using a keyboard a lot, you're
> wasting a lot of mind.  Speech is a working alternative to
> the keyboard.

While reading your keyboard authored posts might seem to prove that a lot
of mind is wasted when keyboards are used to input text, I think it would
be best to show a author or user who's productive with speech input.  How
about naming a novel.  All I can think of are doctors dictating notes to
themsevles as they review x-rays. 

Oh and when I ride the train to work will the chatter of 12+ people
replace their silent keyboards.  Seems like a great way to work -- violate
NDA and give up corporate secrets and personal information.  

BTW William Gibson used a typewriter to author Neuromancer. 


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

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

From: cndbass@yahoo.com                                 22-Nov-99 21:42:20
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 19:58:05
Subj: Re: Interesting Reading Comprehension Problem by Bass

From: Curtis Bass <cndbass@yahoo.com>


Dave Tholen wrote:

-- snip --

> Curtis Bass writes:

-- snip --

> > Your attempts at masking your error were inept.
> 
> See what I mean about your personal attacks?

No, Dave, I most emphatically do *NOT* "see what [you] mean." Not in the
slightest.

The Emperor ain't got no clothes on, Dave. The Emperor is buck naked.
Standing up and stating as much is not "invective," and it ain't a
"personal attack."

It's what we simple uneducated folk refer to as "calling a spade a
'spade.'"

That you arrogantly take it as a personal insult is your problem.

-- snip --


Curtis

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

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

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          23-Nov-99 22:31:22
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 19:58:05
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>Ian Tholen
>Those who
>ignore history are destined to repeat it, destined to become hypocrites.

And that's why Tholen is a dimwitted hypocrite who keeps alienating
and creating more and more "Tholen dissenters" day after day on Usenet
with his absurd, idiotic nonsense. That's why he's a Kook of the
Month.

There will never be a day when someone doesn't come along, look at
enough of his pathetically dumb tripe, and not dismiss him as a moron.

Just a few weeks back, Marty even argued that Tholen's online persona
was a ruse, and that Tholen couldn't possibly be as stupid as Tholen
appears to be upon Usenet. Now Marty is openly dismissing Tholen as
"inept" and "stupid", and he's not just referring to some sort of
feigned act. This has happened again and again and again and again.
And it will continue to happen because yes, Tholen really *IS* a
mentally ill moron and it's NO act.

Tholen now has a history of being a dimwitted hypocrite. It's most
fitting that he's so utterly stupid and self-deluded that he not only
can't see that, but makes statements such as the above, in light of
the ever-growing legion of people who consider him to be a moron.

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

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

From: cmyers@austin.rr.com                              23-Nov-99 16:35:28
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 19:58:05
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: "Chad Myers" <cmyers@austin.rr.com>

"ZnU" <znu@znu.dhs.org> wrote in message
news:znu-2311991352570001@192.168.0.2...
> In article <383a9654$4$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com>, Bob Germer
> <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > All one has to do is read the above to know what kind of idiot you are. No
> > GUI can operate without a keyboard as well once the program is loaded. For
> > example, how can you tell IE where you want to go on the web without
> > typing in the www.address? How can you reply to email without a keyboard?
> > How can you enter data in a spreadsheet without a keyboard.

Typical "CLI or Bust" attitude of a Linvocate, ZnU.

How do you think those Wedding registries at Target work?
Hint: They're GUI (Microsoft Windows to boot!)
Hint: They use a touch screen

Also, you could have a web based app that requires only mouse clicks
and no typing.

And on and on.

You couldn't do that from a CLI.

From a TUI or GUI you can!

Chad



>
> Actually, Mac OS _can_ be used without a keyboard, right out of the box.
> You can open the Key Caps DA, type with the mouse, and copy the text into
> other apps.
>
> Not much fun though.



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

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

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          23-Nov-99 23:00:14
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 19:58:05
Subj: Re: IBM Stock...

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>Kelly Robinson
>I'm just here pointing out what a load of dipshits IBM is
>run by

Give them some credit. They do a decent enough job being primarily one
of the largest Microsoft VAR's in the marketplace.

And IBM does throw its weight around in the mainframe market too.

But clearly, when it comes to making/selling a home consumer product,
IBM just does not have what it takes to compete against smaller,
leaner, more efficient competition who are much more interested in
that market, and demonstrate a lot more competence at going after that
market. Unless you're managing a Fortune 500 company, IBM is not your
ticket

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

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

From: cndbass@yahoo.com                                 22-Nov-99 22:14:28
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 19:58:05
Subj: Re: Interesting Reading Comprehension Problem by Bass

From: Curtis Bass <cndbass@yahoo.com>


Dave Tholen wrote:

-- snip --

> You also called me "inept", Curtis, despite the fact that I've been
> correct from the beginning about OS/2 Java 1.1.8 implementing Java 1.2
> functionality.

"Correct from the beginning?!?!" ROTFLMAO!

Using outdated documentation? Gimme a break.

"Security enhancements based on the Java 2 Security Model"

> But did you call Timbol's "bullshit" statement "inept"?

Hell, no. As far as I am concerned, "Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2
functionality" *IS* a bullshit statement; it's unqualified, misleading,
and vacuous. Even if an inkling/iota of "functionality," based on a
"model" for one aspect of the environment, in the form of an
"enhancement," makes the statement technically true (which I am not
willing to concede at this point), it's still a bullshit statement,
because, again, it's unqualified and misleading, and therefore vacuous.


Curtis

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

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            23-Nov-99 23:22:14
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 21:19:15
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Tue, 23 Nov 1999 13:20:58, Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> 
wrote:

> On <81cjjv$kr8$1@news.campuscwix.net>, on 11/22/99 at 03:29 PM,
>    "Chad Mulligan" <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org> said:
> 
> 
> > How well does your cli function without a keyboard.  GUI's do this all
> > the time.
> 
> All one has to do is read the above to know what kind of idiot you are. No
> GUI can operate without a keyboard as well once the program is loaded. For
> example, how can you tell IE where you want to go on the web without
> typing in the www.address? How can you reply to email without a keyboard?
> How can you enter data in a spreadsheet without a keyboard.
> 
Err...
Actually, in Warp 4, you could do this right out of the box, provided 
you install the speech recognition (Windoze supposedly has a better 
one right now, but you have to shell out for it, not mentioning that 
it needs oodles more of processing power - but I guess that's to be 
considered a plus, dumb Warp-retard that I am <G>).

The series 3xx Psion handhelds have one of the best GUI's around IMHO.
And they can _only_ be operated with a keyboard. Go figure.

Alltogether, Chad's comparison wasn't very honest. I could ask, with 
equal validity, to show me a GUI that will work without a monitor. At 
least most CLI's can be operated from a teletype (or even the cassette
tape counter, as I once saw a program for the Commodore 64 do: it 
guessed numbers and the only I/O was that counter on the tape machine.
Cool!)

> Which is easier to learn? Working a mouse to choose an icon, reading the
> bubble help, and starting a program or entering a number or letter and
> hitting enter to choose the same program from a text menu? With a text
> menu, I don't need a mouse. I ran my business using WordPerfect 5.1 and
> earlier for DOS, Lotus 1-2-3, DBase, my BBS, and dozens of other
> applications including Quicken in DOS and later DoubleDOS long before I
> ever had a mouse.
> 
> Many of my clients still use WP 5.1 for DOS under WfWG. Virtually none of
> those professional secretaries, paralegals, bookeepers, etc. use the mouse
> once they get into the programs.
> 
Yes, I agree, but you do have to admit that WP was _built_ to be 
operated by the keyboard. Mouse support was sort of bolted on in 
version 5.0 (a later add-on). Personally, I must admit that I find 
version 6.x (DOS) to be the Ultimate WP; nothing that came later has 
managed to top it.

> A mouse without a keyboard is like a fish without fins - useless. A
> keyboard without a mouse is fully functional.
> 
I'd rather say that a lot depends on the developer/programmer: one 
needs to choose the right interface tool for the job. Too bad these 
days it's the marketing department that has the last say on usability 
issues. It would be very funny if it weren't so very, very sad...

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net

Microsoft MVP -- Not!

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            23-Nov-99 23:22:15
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 21:19:15
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Tue, 23 Nov 1999 18:56:35, znu@znu.dhs.org (ZnU) wrote:

> In article <383a9654$4$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com>, Bob Germer
> <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote:
> 
> > On <81cjjv$kr8$1@news.campuscwix.net>, on 11/22/99 at 03:29 PM,
> >    "Chad Mulligan" <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org> said:
> > 
> > 
> > > How well does your cli function without a keyboard.  GUI's do this all
> > > the time.
> > 
> > All one has to do is read the above to know what kind of idiot you are. No
> > GUI can operate without a keyboard as well once the program is loaded. For
> > example, how can you tell IE where you want to go on the web without
> > typing in the www.address? How can you reply to email without a keyboard?
> > How can you enter data in a spreadsheet without a keyboard.
> 
> Actually, Mac OS _can_ be used without a keyboard, right out of the box.
> You can open the Key Caps DA, type with the mouse, and copy the text into
> other apps.
> 
One could do that with just about any Warp or (even <G>) Windows 
machine.

> Not much fun though.
> 
Glad you added that.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net

Microsoft MVP -- Not!

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: cuyler@nospam.uswest.ever                         23-Nov-99 15:48:22
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 21:19:15
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows...

From: "Valafar" <cuyler@nospam.uswest.ever>

> Nope I just dislike Windows weenies trying to tell me that I should
> change my operating system to windows.

Okay, accepted.  But isn't telling people how stupid, etc they are for using
Windows the same thing they are doing to you? Seems hypocritical.

> No most brought the technology from the home.  It did not go from the
> office to home, but rather from little johnnys space invader home
> computer running dos or Win 3.1 or lately Win 95/98, to the office.
> Thats where the current business use of Win 98 comes from.  Certainly
> not fro the office!
> You have it 180 degrees out.

Disagree.  Companies didn't purchase loads of Win98 because their employees
brought the OS from home and installed it.  Applications, perhaps.. but
entire OSes?  I don't think so..  That's an IT decision.

> I guess not everyone is a stupid moron..... Just the ones using
> Windows are...

Again, aren't you doing to others what they do to you that makes you so
"angry"?

> In the same spirit I would ask you to stop trying to convince everyone
> to run windows.  Let it go... admit that there are alternatives that
> are better for some people.  Not everyone should use Windows.

I agree..  I don't use windows.  I use Be.  But I don't see the demerit to
using windows.  It was built by everyday people working on code.  Bill Gates
didn't write windows.  He hired a bunch of people to do it for him.  The
people who wrote the code aren't to blame.  Most of them were college
students who wanted to get a few years under their belt before getting a
"real" job.

I work for IBM... does that mean that I am responsible for the demise of
OS/2?  No, I don't think so.

It just seems to me that instead of spouting off telling people how stupid
they are, you should perhaps show them the benefits of working with a
"better" OS.  Or do something to change it.  If you stand on the mountain
top and scream fire and brimstone, about the only thing you are going to get
is lauged at.  When was the last time you stopped to listen to what an
insane over zealous street preacher had to say?

You like the benefits of OS/2?  Find a way to incorporate them into another
OS.  Or write a new one.  Just insulting others doesn't get you much of
anywhere.

Valafar


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

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

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          23-Nov-99 23:07:03
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 21:19:15
Subj: Re: More Boring Tholen Inconsistency and Hypocrisy

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>cbass2112@my-deja.com
>Somehow, I doubt that Tholen is ever embarrassed. I think he has too
>much ego, and I just don't think he has enough common sense to actually
>ever be embarrassed, no matter how much he embarrasses himself in this
>public forum.

Absolutely.

>The best we can do is be embarrassed for him.
>Which I should try to do, but am usually too busy laughing . . .

Well see, I don't have to feel embarrassed for him. I'm not an OS/2
Advocate. heheheheh.

But I can certainly empathize with your position. It must be horrible
having to be associated, in any way, with such a clearly mentally
disturbed idiot as Tholen is. Hopefully, he won't switch to another OS
and inflict his illness and stupidity upon that.

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

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

From: whistler@mail.dma.be                              24-Nov-99 00:17:11
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 21:19:15
Subj: Re: OS/2's source code

From: Maarten Van Horenbeeck <whistler@mail.dma.be>

Hi!

I'm 18 years old, student Computer-sciences in Belgium,
and a very huge OS/2-fan, to call it like that.  I just mean that I have
never
found a system more stable (yes, including some UNIX's) than OS/2 4...
Now I was unaware that some of the OS/2-sourcecode had been released.
Does anyone know where I can find this piece of code, since I am very
interested in
expanding OS/2 for my own desktop, so I can include new functions myself,
and take
a look at the insides of what I clearly see as the most innovative operating
system of the 90's.

Thanks in advance, c ya,

Maarten Van Horenbeeck
whistler@dma.be

Trancser wrote:

> Since the source code was released from IBM (oops...I meant 'leaked'
> ...yea thats it!), I was wondering if whoever bothered to download a
> copy for themselves, plan on ...I dunno....DOING anything with it,
> whether it be for private use or otherwise? I know that posting this
> message might not be the best thing to do, considering the subject, but
> I just thought I'd ask since its out there ...and I'm sure theres
> probably a lot of you out there that would LOVE to do some kick-butt
> things with the source, but hopefully for OS/2!
>
> Now, I am to understand, that the source that's out there is of an older
> version, and not of a recent or from the current fixpack for OS/2
> ...well I'm no programmer, but I'm sure theres something from the code
> that could be used to maybe form a "patch" to replace some components of
> OS/2?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: UUNET Benelux (post does not reflect views of UUN
(1:109/42)

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            23-Nov-99 23:22:16
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 21:19:15
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Tue, 23 Nov 1999 14:25:26, Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com> wrote:

> 
> Except perhaps render images in the middle of text, or manage irregular
> borders, or any of a plethora of other things typical of GUI-based
> wordprocessors.  Whether or not these things are necessary depends on what
> you're trying to create.
> 
Six-Oh does just about everything you mentioned there - and quite a 
lot more... almost a decade ago on a 386!

IMO wordprocessors have just gotten larger and slower since then. But 
what do I know, right?

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net

Microsoft MVP -- Not!

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         24-Nov-99 00:44:09
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 21:19:15
Subj: Re: Interesting Reading Comprehension Problem by Bass

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.

Curtis Bass writes:

> "Correct from the beginning?!?!" ROTFLMAO!

What's so funny, Curtis?

> Using outdated documentation?

The actual JDK itself is not "outdated documentation", Curtis.

> Gimme a break.

You don't deserve one, Curtis.

> "Security enhancements based on the Java 2 Security Model"

What about them, Curtis?

> Hell, no. As far as I am concerned, "Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2
> functionality" *IS* a bullshit statement;

Gee, not long ago you were not taking a position because of your
ignorance.  Seems to have suddenly changed.

> it's unqualified,

What's allegedly unqualified about it, Curtis?

> misleading,

What's allegedly misleading about it, Curtis?

> and vacuous.

What's allegedly vacuous about it, Curtis?

You statement is "unqualified, misleading, and vacuous".  How ironic.

> Even if an inkling/iota of "functionality," based on a "model" for
> one aspect of the environment, in the form of an "enhancement," makes
> the statement technically true (which I am not willing to concede at
> this point),

Why not, Curtis?

> it's still a bullshit statement,

Your pontifcation is the "bullshit" around here, Curtis.

> because, again, it's unqualified and misleading, and therefore vacuous.

Repeating pontifcation doesn't help your argument, Curtis.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         24-Nov-99 00:47:05
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 21:19:15
Subj: Re: More Boring Tholen Inconsistency and Hypocrisy

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.

Curtis Bass writes:

> Priceless!  Of course, I doubt that our friend Tholen will appreciate
> the value of this post.

What alleged value, Curtis?  The value of Marty's "infantile game" is to
him, not me.

> Somehow, I doubt that Tholen is ever embarrassed. I think he has too
> much ego, and I just don't think he has enough common sense to actually
> ever be embarrassed, no matter how much he embarrasses himself in this
> public forum.

You're presupposing some valid reason for being embarrassed, Curtis.

> The best we can do is be embarrassed for him.

Don't waste your time, Curtis.

> Which I should try to do, but am usually too busy laughing . . .

At yourself?  Remember, you're the one who claimed that a particular
post would be your last in a particular subthread.  I knew better.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               23-Nov-99 20:19:00
  To: All                                               23-Nov-99 21:19:15
Subj: Re: More Boring Tholen Inconsistency and Hypocrisy

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Dave Tholen wrote:
>
> > Somehow, I doubt that Tholen is ever embarrassed. I think he has too
> > much ego, and I just don't think he has enough common sense to actually
> > ever be embarrassed, no matter how much he embarrasses himself in this
> > public forum.
> 
> You're presupposing some valid reason for being embarrassed, Curtis.

Note he didn't say *erroneously* presupposing.  Apparently Tholen is well
aware
of his reasons for being embarrassed at his present situation and is simply
restating the obvious as he lacks an adequate rebuttal.  No surprise there.
 
> I knew better.

He knew better than to include the word "erroneously" in the above statement
no
doubt.  He's trying to use a cheap associative trick in which the reader will
automatically fill in the word "erroneously" themselves, without him having to
state a blatant lie.  Too bad this technique is so transparent and would only
fool one of Pavlov's dogs.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         24-Nov-99 01:03:25
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 03:57:03
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.  One old
quotation is worth preserving, namely:

CB] This is my final post in this subthread.

Obviously he couldn't resist, just like so many before him.  Those who
ignore history are destined to repeat it, destined to become hypocrites.

Curtis Bass writes:

> ROTFLMAO!  And you dare to claim that you are not inept!!

How ironic.

> For someone who has made a USENET career out of breaking up peoples'
> statements into clauses,

What alleged "USENET career", Curtis?  How ironic, coming from someone
who has made a "USENET career" out of making unsubstantiated and
erroneous claims.

> you sure screwed up here.

Where did I allegedly "screw up here", Curtis?

> And of course, in Classic Tholen style, you will insist that your
> screwed-up misinterpretation is the "correct" one.

What alleged "misinterpretation", Curtis?

> I'm busting a gut, and I'm sure I'm not alone.

On what basis are you sure, Curtis?

> Here, let me help you . . .

I don't need any of your so-called "help", Curtis.

>     Holding me to a standard
>
>     up to which you obviously failed to measure

What is "up" doing at the beginning of that phrase, Curtis?

>     is the height of hypocrisy, Dave.
>
> What you just did was inept.

How ironic, coming from someone whose writing is "inept".

> Go ahead, Dave.

With what, Curtis?

> Deny it. (LOL)

Why should I deny your poor writing, Curtis?

> Apparently, you have no idea what hypocrisy is,

On the contrary, I obviously do.  You apparently do not, given that
you're responding in a subthread yet again, despite having claimed,
with sincerity, that your posting of several days ago would be your
last in this subthread.

> which is ironic, considering how skilled you are in its practice.

Yet another example of your pontification.

> Saying that I am going to do something, and then changing my mind and
> proceding to not do it, is not necessarily "hypocrisy," Dave.

On the contrary, it is, Curtis.

> It only qualifies as "hypocrisy" if I were insincere in my original
> claim that I was going to do that something.

How does insincerity make it hypocritical, Curtis?  

> If you can prove that I was insincere when I originally posted, "This is
> my final post in this subthread," then your claim that I am a hypocrite
> is valid and justified.

How does insincerity make it hypocritical, Curtis?  

> Otherwise, it's simply just another unsubstantiated claim on your part.

On the contrary, it's simply another example of your misunderstanding
of a word, Curtis.

> I will state that I was sincere; I had no plans to respond further at
> the time that I wrote that.

So the existence of multiple responses represents a hypocritical
action on your part, Curtis.  When a man tells a judge, in all
sincerity, that he'll never drive while intoxicated again, and yet
does so shortly thereafter, he's being a hypocrite, Curtis.
Clearly, one can be a hypocrite even when a statement is made
with sincerity.

> Of course, you will now proceed to call me a "liar," even though you
> have no way to substantiate that I am either a liar or a hypocrite.

I can substantiate that you are a hypocrite, Curtis.  See above.  I
find it truly amazing that you believe sincerity to absolve you of
your hypocrisy.

> Another form of "hypocrisy," Dave, is expecting others to do something
> that you yourself either will not, cannot or did not do, and judging
> said others when they fail to do that something which you yourself
> either will not, cannot, or did not do.  That is the form of which you
> are guilty.

Yet another unsubstantiated claim.

I see you didn't bother to present any alleged examples of my unadmitted
errors involving your so-called "adversarial exchanges".

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         24-Nov-99 00:39:10
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 03:57:03
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Lucien writes:

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Answer the question put to you:

>>>>>>>>>>>> Take the two simple tests, Lucien.

>>>>>>>>>>> Note the refusal to answer a basic, central question - looks
>>>>>>>>>>> like we've hit another major soft spot.

>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

>>>>>>>>> Note again the pat refusal to answer the question.

>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

>>>>>>> ....and we see the refusal again

>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

>>>>> ....and again.

>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>> .....and again...

>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

> ....and again.

Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

> The question again for the reader's reference:

The same response again for the reader's reference:

> According to your statement, under what conditions
> does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
> functionality..."?

Perhaps you'd like to tell me how the statement you keep pointing to
applies to the JDK sentence, Lucien.

> Here is Dave's statement again for reference:

Unnecessary, Lucien, again.  I will restore my two simple tests,
however, given that you've never taken them.

> "The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
> 'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
> information."

And how does that concern the JDK sentence, Lucien, as you've repeatedly
insisted?

Note again the pat "refusal" to take the two simple tests:

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Meanwhile, I noticed that you failed to answer my little test,
Lucien:

] #1:  It rained today.                                              
]                                                                    
] #2:  It rained today until sunset.                                 
]                                                                    
] The question:  did it rain all of the day or only some of the day? 
]                                                                    
] The word "rained", by itself, doesn't indicate duration, therefore 
] one cannot determine an unambiguous answer to the question in the  
] absence of other information.  Yet I will claim that the answer to 
] the question is in fact unambiguous in the case of statement #2.   
]                                                                    
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.                                    

Test grade:  F.

Here's another little test for you, Lucien:

] #3:  It did rain today.
] 
] #4:  It didn't rain today.
] 
] The question:  what fraction of the day did it rain?
] 
] Structurally, the two statements are identical, yet there is nothing
] in statement #3 that allows the question to be answered unambiguously,
] while there is something in statement #4 that does allow the question
] to be answered unambigiously.
] 
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.

Test grade:  F.

Perhaps readers will notice how 3-4 corresponds to the "prevent costly
mistakes" thread, where the quantification is provided by the definition
of a word and not the structure.  Perhaps readers will notice how 1-2
corresponds to the "Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality" thread,
where the additional information resolves what would otherwise be
ambiguous.

Yet more evidence that you're playing your own "infantile game".   
Or are you really that idiotic?                                    

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: donnelly@tampabay.rr.com                          24-Nov-99 01:37:20
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 03:57:03
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: donnelly@tampabay.rr.com (Buddy Donnelly)

On Tue, 23 Nov 1999 21:39:29, larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) a crit 
dans un message:

> As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Jerry Prather write:
> > (Lars P Ormberg)12 Nov 1999 14:32:19 GMT writes:
> 
> > :>If another company doesn't enter into a partnership with you, you can
> > :>withhold things.  Like sales.

to which Jerry intelligently and politely responded:
> > 
> > Good grief!  I thought this kind of thing was settled back when
> > Lester Maddox was told he _had_ to sell his chicken dinners to
> > blacks because it was "open to the public".

to which Lars inexplicably jumped to:
> 
> On the converse side, would you force Lester Maddox to eat at restaurant A
> because the owner was black?

But see, Lars, that's not the "converse" side, that's the "non sequitur" 
side. Meaning, "It does not follow." 

Asking citizens to treat fellow citizens respectfully and equitably has no 
logical connection whatsoever with someone other than Lester deciding where
to send Lester to eat dinner, and it certainly isn't a "statement reversed 
in order presented" except in the most transitory syntactical sense.

For example, if "Spring is the loneliest time of the year", then "The 
loneliest time of the year is Spring" would be a converse statement. You 
have made what might be called a "reverse" statement, an argumentary 
reversal, if late night conversation among the dwellers at the end of the 
bar can be deemed a useful or enlightening type of argument. Perverse, 
maybe, or obtuse, but not Converse.

You'd be closer to a Converse if you were examining the highly debatable 
question of whether Jerry's "blacks", Lester's neighbours from former slave
families, would even want to buy and eat Lester's chickens, after it was 
settled in the courts that Lester had better begin furnishing nutrition to 
them, as well as to his white neighbours. 

Asking Lester where he was going to go for a late night snack after 
finishing up serving all those dinners is logically just about equal to 
asking him where he's going to buy the new Cadillac he ended up buying with
all the money he was getting from his increased sales. Lester's place was a
very popular stop in Underground Atlanta, and his gift shop sold miniature 
pickaxes, reminiscent of the hickory pickaxe handle he weilded while 
standing in the door of his restaurant before the Law got to him. That 
wasn't accidental symbolism, by the way. Many an uppity nigger got whaled 
to within inches of his life, with pickaxe handles, or a few inches beyond,
by a gang of white men for failing to get off the sidewalk fast enough when
a white woman came around the corner towards him.

And essentially, remember, what Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson said in his 
finding of fact was that Micro$oft had been weilding pickaxe handles in 
dealing with other PC-related businesses who were trying to do business 
with customers and would have been glad to do it without Micro$oft 
interfering.


> 
> If you think that kind of forcing is idiotic, how can you gladly accept the
> flipside?

See above. (Actually, what I think is idiotic is my own error, in not 
having engaged a filtration device prior to just after now.)

> 
> > Are you trying to
> > tell me that M$ is not open to the public? 
> 
> "Open to the public" is a farce.  A person's property should only be open to
> whomever they want it to be open for...likewise, only received by those who
> wish to receive it.

Again, a great leap is taken into a different realm of arguing, one that 
appears to be always close to your heart? But why bother us with this, 
here? There are a wealth of youngsters on the .microsoft. groups who will 
go along with your abiding concern for BG's god-given right to hammer every
other business on the field into a bloody pulp? And aren't there websites 
where you can go to commune with the lower life forms who would prefer to 
shop at stores that advertise in the window "No Jew, And No Niggers 
Neither" in big red letters? You stand a much better chance of getting 
their heads nodding up and down in affirmation of your views.



> 
> -- 
> Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
> mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
> The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

Lars, with all due respect, you haven't been getting a very good education 
there, have you? Really, as I think I remember suggesting before, I'd 
seriously be considering a transfer before you've spent all your college 
funds, unless your daddy's got a good business going in selling "hunting" 
and "survival" supplies to the Y2K second coming types and you don't really
need much education, or business training neither.

[Followups to c.o.o.advocacy, 'cause I don't subscribe there.]
-- 

Good luck,

Buddy

Buddy Donnelly
donnelly@tampabay.rr.com


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

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

From: cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org                      23-Nov-99 18:30:27
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 03:57:03
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: "Chad Mulligan" <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org>

ZnU <znu@znu.dhs.org> wrote in message
news:znu-2311991352570001@192.168.0.2...
> In article <383a9654$4$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com>, Bob Germer
> <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote:
>
> > On <81cjjv$kr8$1@news.campuscwix.net>, on 11/22/99 at 03:29 PM,
> >    "Chad Mulligan" <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org> said:
> >
> >
> > > How well does your cli function without a keyboard.  GUI's do this all
> > > the time.
> >
> > All one has to do is read the above to know what kind of idiot you are.
No
> > GUI can operate without a keyboard as well once the program is loaded.
For
> > example, how can you tell IE where you want to go on the web without
> > typing in the www.address? How can you reply to email without a
keyboard?
> > How can you enter data in a spreadsheet without a keyboard.
>
This is for that idiot Germer.  Ever been to McDonald's?  They use GUI based
cash registers without keyboards.  Ever seen a touch screen?  Ever heard of
voice recognition?

Back to your punched cards you old geezer.


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

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

From: drsmithy@usa.net                                  24-Nov-99 12:32:26
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 03:57:03
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows...

From: "Christopher Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net>

"Lars Duening" <lars-news@bearnip.com> wrote in message
news:383a887d.3116941@news.earthlink.net...
> On Mon, 22 Nov 1999 16:03:22 -0600, "Nik Simpson" <nik@hiwaay.net>
> wrote:
>
> >"Frederic Marchand" <fmarchand@iname.com> wrote in message
> >news:3839B7D5.26D9F883@iname.com...
> >> DC wrote:
> >> >
> >> > That's not exactly correct.  If there's only one thread, only one CPU
> >> > can be engaged on that task.  That's common in any mass-market OS.
NT
> >> > and Be are exactly the same in that regard.
> >>
> >>   In the BeOS, one window (eg one rendering) *automatically* means one
> >> thread.
> >
> >Yes, because like the NT Window Manager it's a multithreaded application,
> >this is a no brainer improvement in a Window manager since it needs to be
> >scheduled at a more granular level than most applications. This doesn't
> >change the fact that the vast majority of applications available today
only
> >have a single logical thread of execution and that for these applications
> >(taken individually) there is no benefit from a second CPU, the benefit
> >comes when you start running multiple apps or a single app (like a Window
> >Manager) that is multithreaded.
>
> Frederic wasn't quite clear: in the BeOS, one window automatically
> means one _more_ thread - the window rendering thread - created and
> maintained by the OS runtime. Therefore, even if the app itself was
> written single-threaded, a second processor will be used.
>
> And we didn't even mention the OS threads like the filesystem...

Sounds just like NT to me.


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

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

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             23-Nov-99 18:09:23
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 03:57:03
Subj: Re: More Boring Tholen Inconsistency and Hypocrisy

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <3839F642.834CBF7C@stny.rr.com>,
  Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:
> Dave Tholen wrote:
> >
> > You're just playing semantics to argue with me again.
>
> "Define 'adversarial exchange', Curtis."
> "I see you still haven't learned what 'imply' means."
> "I see you still haven't learned what 'personal attack' means.
>
> > You can lead a horse to the trough, but you can't make him drink.
>
> "There's no error on my part, Curtis."
> "I've been correct from the beginning about OS/2 Java 1.1.8
> implementing Java 1.2 functionality."
>
> > I've been correct from the beginning about OS/2 Java 1.1.8
> > implementing Java 1.2 functionality.
>
> "Yet another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.  Typical
> pontification."
>
> It's pretty sad when you can debunk someone's posting with their own
> words, let alone their own words posted in the same article.

Priceless!  Of course, I doubt that our friend Tholen will appreciate
the value of this post.

> How embarrassing!

Somehow, I doubt that Tholen is ever embarrassed. I think he has too
much ego, and I just don't think he has enough common sense to actually
ever be embarrassed, no matter how much he embarrasses himself in this
public forum.  The best we can do is be embarrassed for him.

Which I should try to do, but am usually too busy laughing . . .


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

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

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               23-Nov-99 09:16:26
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 03:57:03
Subj: Re: Interesting Reading Comprehension Problem by Bass

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Dave Tholen wrote:
> 
> You're presupposing that there are errors in "adversarial exchanges"
> to which to admit, Curtis.

Note he didn't say *erroneously* presupposing.  I guess that counts as an
admission on his part.

He's meerly restating the obvious.  Of course we have presupposed that there
were errors in his "adversarial exchanges".  We've been pointing them out
continually.  I guess restating the obvious is all he is left to do, seeing as
how he lacks a logical argument.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

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

From: pa44@cornell.edu                                  23-Nov-99 21:59:23
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 03:57:03
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: Peter Ammon <pa44@cornell.edu>

Karel Jansens wrote:
>
> One could do that with just about any Warp or (even <G>) Windows
> machine.

How do you get around the "Keyboard error-press F1 to continue or
delete for BIOS setup?"

-Peter

-- 
The Shame Eliminator: http://shameeliminator.cjb.net

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

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

From: znu@znu.dhs.org                                   24-Nov-99 03:58:16
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 03:57:03
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: znu@znu.dhs.org (ZnU)

In article <81f4uo$ncs$1@news.jump.net>, "Chad Myers"
<cmyers@austin.rr.com> wrote:

> "ZnU" <znu@znu.dhs.org> wrote in message
> news:znu-2311991352570001@192.168.0.2...
> > In article <383a9654$4$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com>, Bob Germer
> > <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > All one has to do is read the above to know what kind of idiot you are.
No
> > > GUI can operate without a keyboard as well once the program is loaded.
For
> > > example, how can you tell IE where you want to go on the web without
> > > typing in the www.address? How can you reply to email without a
keyboard?
> > > How can you enter data in a spreadsheet without a keyboard.
> 
> Typical "CLI or Bust" attitude of a Linvocate, ZnU.
> 
> How do you think those Wedding registries at Target work?
> Hint: They're GUI (Microsoft Windows to boot!)
> Hint: They use a touch screen
> 
> Also, you could have a web based app that requires only mouse clicks
> and no typing.
> 
> And on and on.
> 
> You couldn't do that from a CLI.
> 
> From a TUI or GUI you can!

Actually, you could have a CLI with no keyboard. Think speech recognition.
It would have to be a CLI designed for that though. Many Unix commands
would be a bit hard to pronounce <g>.

-- 
All parts should go together without forcing.  You must remember that the
parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you.  Therefore, if you
can't get them together again, there must be a reason.  By all means, do
not use a hammer.
           --IBM maintenance manual, 1925

ZnU <znu@znu.dhs.org> | <http://znu.dhs.org>

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

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

From: drsmithy@usa.net                                  24-Nov-99 14:32:06
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 03:57:03
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: "Christopher Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net>

"Peter Ammon" <pa44@cornell.edu> wrote in message
news:383B54A3.58064E62@cornell.edu...
> Karel Jansens wrote:
> >
> > One could do that with just about any Warp or (even <G>) Windows
> > machine.
>
> How do you get around the "Keyboard error-press F1 to continue or
> delete for BIOS setup?"

Disable the keyboard check in the BIOS.  Or wait - most machines continue to
boot after a while anyway.


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

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

From: znu@znu.dhs.org                                   23-Nov-99 18:56:17
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 05:20:20
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: znu@znu.dhs.org (ZnU)

In article <383a9654$4$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com>, Bob Germer
<bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote:

> On <81cjjv$kr8$1@news.campuscwix.net>, on 11/22/99 at 03:29 PM,
>    "Chad Mulligan" <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org> said:
> 
> 
> > How well does your cli function without a keyboard.  GUI's do this all
> > the time.
> 
> All one has to do is read the above to know what kind of idiot you are. No
> GUI can operate without a keyboard as well once the program is loaded. For
> example, how can you tell IE where you want to go on the web without
> typing in the www.address? How can you reply to email without a keyboard?
> How can you enter data in a spreadsheet without a keyboard.

Actually, Mac OS _can_ be used without a keyboard, right out of the box.
You can open the Key Caps DA, type with the mouse, and copy the text into
other apps.

Not much fun though.

-- 
All parts should go together without forcing.  You must remember that the
parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you.  Therefore, if you
can't get them together again, there must be a reason.  By all means, do
not use a hammer.
           --IBM maintenance manual, 1925

ZnU <znu@znu.dhs.org> | <http://znu.dhs.org>

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

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

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               24-Nov-99 03:19:12
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 05:20:20
Subj: (1/2) Re: Amodeo digest, volume 2451506

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Dave still apparently has interest in making himself look like more of a fool
by re-posting more valid points that were raised against him, taking them out
of context (which he lied about numerous times, saying that he does not do
such
things), and responding to them completely inappropriately.  He's conveniently
collected all of this material against him in one place, making him look like
quite the inept fool, unless his primary goal was to embarrass himself. 
Unfortunately, some of the particularly embarrassing commentary seems to
mysteriously get lost in the translation as it gets siphoned through Tholen's
facilities, but fear not, I've restored it.

Apparently, Dave hasn't read my posting a few weeks back when I posted the
contents of secma.zip and explained how it violated the standard Java 1.2
interface and why this means it is not implemented in Java 1.1.8.  No surprise
there.  Dave has been known to ignore valid evidence (by his own admission).

Here are many of the issues Tholen continues to be unable to address:

> 2> It's pretty sad when you can debunk someone's posting with their own
> 2> words, let alone their own words posted in the same article.  How
> 2> embarrassing!

[Note: no response]

> 3> Actually, I believe the original quote is, "Do you enjoy beating your
> 3> wife $person?"

This wasn't even addressed to Tholen.  Talk about going off the deep end...

> 4> Dave Tholen consulted a more enlightened intellect than his own to
> 4> bring forth the following logical argument:

[Note, Tholen's embarrassing idiocy was conveniently removed by the
arch-hypocrite himself]
 
> 4> Enjoying your hypocritical "infantile game" spewing forth "baby-talk
> 4> tripe" (by your own admission) at tholenbot, Dave?

[Note: no response]

[Note: the following embarrassing hypocrisy was conveniently removed]
> Those who ignore history are destined to repeat it, destined to become 
> hypocrites.
                      
> 5> How much more of a hypocrite is someone who ignores the present time
> 5> frame and valid evidence?

[Note: no response]

[Note: the following context was removed by Tholen]
>My claim is that OS/2 Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality, Curtis. 

> 5> [Tholen] also supports that claim by not examining the contents of the 
> 5> Java developer's kit and by not knowing one iota about Java.  So much 
> 5> for his "support".  Meanwhile he misinterprets what Timbol said in spite
> 5> of all the evidence presented to show his interpretation as being wrong
> 5> and Timbol's correction of Tholen's mistake himself, and relies on an
> 5> outdated document as his only shred of "proof".  I guess that's why
> 5> Tholen is not a lawyer (among many other reasons, no doubt).

[Note: no response]

[Tholen points out Curtis' admission to not being knowledgable about Java and
hence his lack of ability to take a stance on the issue]
> 5> What's unfortunate is that Tholen, too, is too ignorant to take a
> 5> stance on the issue, but that never stops him.  Par for the course.

[Note: no response]


[Note: the following context was removed by Tholen]
> That [JPG] never appeared here, Curtis.

> 5> Too bad this URL appeared here some 15 to 20 times and Tholen ignored
> 5> it.  Par for the course.

[Note: no response.  It figures he'd remove the URL and ignore it again. 
Here's the URL in question:
http://emuos2.vintagegaming.com/downloads/WinZipJava118.jpg]


[Note: the following context was removed by Tholen]
> > but it doesn't change the fact that that was what I initially posted.
> 
> On what basis do you call it a "fact", Curtis?  Do you have some
> independent evidence to verify a timestamp?

> 5> There was independent verification by myself, as a matter of fact.  But
> 5> I wouldn't expect Tholen to acknowledge that.  I'm sure that was just
> 5> part of my imaginary "infantile game" that Tholen likes to perceive
> 5> that I'm "playing" with him.  I guess it helps him feel like he's more
> 5> accepted, being allowed to join in the "reindeer games" of others.

[Note: no response]

[Tholen states that Curtis was not the first person to post hypocritically in
this group]
> 5> Certainly not since Tholen started posting here.

[Note: no response]


[Note: the following context was removed by Tholen]
>I stand by my statement.

> 5> How can anything claiming to be logical stand by the above statement
> 5> after all the evidence that has been presented?

[Note: no response]
[Also Note: "The above statement" was conveniently removed.  Here it is again:
"Yet to look at the contents, one must have run the executable file and on an
OS/2 system to boot!"]

> 5> How illogical.  Par for the course.

[Note: no response]

[Referring to Tholen's idiotically incorrect statement and his reinforcement
thereof]
> 5> That's pretty blasted inept, especially at this stage in the infantile
game.

[Note: no response]

[Note: the following context was removed by Tholen]
> [Writing to Curtis] You're a liar in addition to being a hypocrite.

> 5> Prove it, if you think you can, hypocrite.

[Note: no response]

Aw shucks... it seems Tholen has forgotten about the rest of the digest of
points he hasn't been able to address.  I'll refresh his memory:

> Marty still expects response to the points he has raised.  Unfortunately,
Dave
> is too deeply immersed in his infantile game generating his "baby-talk
tripe"
> (by his own admission) to bother addressing the facts and evidence that were
> presented to him (as he admitted to failing to do in the past).  No surprise
> there.  In addition, he hasn't even graciously accepted the help I have
offered
> him for his mental condition in the form of Dr. Sbaitso.  I suppose there is
> little more that can be done for him.  In the meantime, I've reproduced the
> statements to which he amazingly enough, has still failed to respond and
even
> has the nerve to keep dishonestly deleting.  This is, however, par for the
> course for Tholen.

[Note: no response]

> "Well, it was too good to last."  Looks like Tholen's broken record has
resumed
> skipping again at the infantile "wrath" part of the vaudeville routine. 
> Amazingly enough, he can repost the same "baby-talk tripe" (by his own
> admission) in lieu of a response and somehow feel that he has acted
logically
> and is justified.  Meanwhile he continues to ignore the fact that the
> referenced AbstractMethodError.class and ZipOutputStream.class happen to be
in
> classes.zip, which can be viewed in WinZip while viewing JAVAINUF.EXE,
without
> extracting classes.zip, through a simple double-click operation.  He also
> continues to ignore the fact that Timbol referred to classes.zip as being
> compressed, which limits the context of his comment to that of viewing
> JAVAINUF.EXE, and which destroys all of the arguments based on his
> misinterpretation that he, alone, has been trying to use.  As a last attempt 
to
> help Dave through his mental problems, with his best interests at heart, I
have
> employed the use of Dr. Sbaitso.  Here's what the good doctor has to say:

Note: no response.

> DO YOU THINK MACHINES HAVE SOMETHING TO DO WITH YOUR PROBLEM?

Note: no response.

> SAY SOMETHING SENSIBLE PLEASE

Note: no response.  (How telling)

> > 1> No need.  It's being shown clear as day below:
> > 
> > "Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"
>
> SAME TO YOU!

Note: no response.

> > I warned you about going down that path, Marty.
>
> FORGET ABOUT ME, I AM MORE CONCERN OF YOU

Note: no response.

> > 1> Note that the above snippet was taken out of the context of the
> > 1> paragraph in which it resides.  Here is the above snippet placed
> > 1> back in context:
> > 
> > "Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"
>
> YOU'VE SAID THAT - PLEASE GIVE MORE INFORMATION.

Note: no response.

[Note that it was **again** taken out of context and all surrounding
supporting
text was deleted.  No surprise there.  What a coward!]

> > I warned you about going down that path, Marty.
> 
> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
> (Seems like even the good doctor is getting tired of Dave's vaudeville
> routine.)

Note: no response.

> 1> Notice how statistics on its compression ratio are given.  Also
> 1> notice that classes.zip has no compression internal to itself as
> 1> I have demonstrated in the past and anyone with said file can easily
> 1> verify.  Therefore, the only context in which one can examine
> 1> classes.zip and refer to it as being compressed is in the context of
> 1> the file residing within JAVAINUF.EXE.  Notice how Dave conveniently
> 1> left this piece of information out when he quoted Mike.  How dishonest,
> 1> but that's par for the course for Tholen.  Notice also that Tholen has
> 1> failed to address this issue after the numerous times I've presented
> 1> it to him and instead hides behind his baseless accusations of playing
> 1> an infantile game or his Eliza non-responses.  I guess he just doesn't
> 1> have the courage to admit he is wrong yet again.  No surprise there.

Note: no response.

> 1> Amazing how Dave thinks he's fooling anyone.

Note: no response.

[Note that all of the following supporting embarrassing text was removed by
Tholen and how no response was served.  No surprise there.  I've re-added the
surrounding text for the reader's convenience.]

> > so you are reduced to mimicking my responses.
> 
> On the contrary, you were mimicking my responses, Curtis.
                 
How embarrassing.
                 
> What alleged "fantasy", Curtis.
> And I have been applying logic, Curtis.
                 
That answers that question.
                 
> > I already know your vacuous response, but go ahead and repeat it anyway.
> What's allegedly "vacuous" about my response, Curtis?
                 
How embarrassing.
                 
> How ironic, coming from somebody "hiding" behind the logic of his "inept"
claim.
                 
"Yet to look at the contents, one must have run the executable file and on an
OS/2 system to boot!"
                 
> See above for the evidence, Curtis.
                 
Indeed.
                 
> You jumped to an erroneous conclusion,
                 
"Yet to look at the contents, one must have run the executable file and on an
OS/2 system to boot!"
                 
> > I used the tools I had, to the best of my ability.
> 
> So did I, Curtis.  Yet you called me "inept".
                 
"Yet to look at the contents, one must have run the executable file and on an
OS/2 system to boot!"
                 
> Are you Burger King, Curtis?
> What alleged "fantasy", Curtis?
                 
Apparently Dave wants Curtis to have it his way.
                 
> Hiding the evidence for your irrelevant remarks, I see.  I'm not
> surprised.
                 
"You didn't try it on my copy of the file, Curtis."
                 
> > I hereby claim victory.
> 
> Typical pontification.  I could just as easily claim victory on the
> basis of your deletion tactic, Curtis.
                 
"I am deleting all but the most recent new text."
                 
> How would you expect me to justify an answer either way?
> I know enough of the facts to justify applying your reasoning to his
> situation, Curtis.
                 
Does Dave enjoy talking to himself and answering his own questions? 

> How ironic, coming from the person who "shot off his mouth" making a
personal 
> attack rather than sticking to the issue.
                 
DT] That's IBM's problem, Marty.
M]  They don't seem to think so.
DT] Maybe their standards are set too low, Marty.
                 
> > Lame excuses about "not neededing to run it" because you "already had a
> > Java environment set up" are just that, lame excuses.
> 
> What's allegedly "lame" about it, Curtis?  Just because you say so?
> That's called pontification.
                 
"Yet to look at the contents, one must have run the executable file and on an
OS/2 system to boot!"
                 
> > What evidence have I allegedly ignored, Curtis?
> 
> Now why would you ask yourself a question in a response to me, Curtis?
                 
How embarrassing.

> > The aforementioned JPEG.
> 
> It didn't utilize my copy of the file, Curtis.  That made it irrelevant.
                 
"How ironic, coming from somebody 'hiding' behind the logic of his 'inept'
claim."

> > What is a "maneuvar" Dave?
> 
> Don't you know, Curtis?  You're the one who brought it up.
                 
DT] On the contrary, Curtis, it's not an evasive maneuvar at all. 
                 
"I could just as easily claim victory on the basis of your deletion tactic,
Curtis."
                 
> How ironic, coming from the person who resorted to a personal attack
> and stayed away from the issue because of ignorance!
                 
DT] That's IBM's problem, Marty.
M]  They don't seem to think so.
DT] Maybe their standards are set too low, Marty.
                 
[Context restored]:
> > > Furthermore, you "supported" the claim with hastily produced
> > > "evidence" that WinZip was superior to InfoZip as an unzipper.
                 
> > It *IS* superior Dave.
> > Have you ever tried to use InfoZip to unzip a multi-part archive?
> 
> Irrelevant, given that javainuf.exe is not a multi-part archive,
> Curtis.
                 
Too bad javainuf.exe has nothing to do with WinZip being superior to InfoZip.
                 
> > WinZip 7.0 can handle multi-part archives without any problem.
> 
> Irrelevant, given that javainuf.exe is not a multi-part archive,
> Curtis.
> 
> > What "initial erroneous conclusion" are you talking about, Dave?
> 
> That I am allegedly "inept", Curtis.
                 
Further evidence is not needed.
                 
> How ironic, coming from the person who "refuses" to comprehend how he
> burning himself more each time he responds with his personal attacks.
                 
DT] That's IBM's problem, Marty.
M] They don't seem to think so.
DT] Maybe their standards are set too low, Marty.
                 
DT] Yet more evidence that you're playing your own "infantile game".
DT] Or are you really that idiotic?

Note: no response.

> 3> Tholen is still avoiding all issues presented and accusing me of
> 3> playing an infantile game.  Even he seems to be tiring of his own
> 3> vaudeville routines, as he hasn't even responded with his Eliza

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

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

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               24-Nov-99 03:19:12
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 05:20:20
Subj: (2/2) Re: Amodeo digest, volume 2451506

> 3> quotes and "warning".  Too bad he hasn't gotten tired enough to
> 3> face reality and admit his mistakes, but no one expects him to
> 3> anyway.  Here's the growing list of things to which he hasn't
> 3> responded:

[Note that all of the text following this point has been dishonestly deleted
by
Tholen and he has not responded to it.  No surprise there.  How hypocritical
and cowardly of him to go back to hiding behind his infantile "wrath" game.]

> 1> And speaking of parrot responses, here's a smathering of more of Dave's
> 1> hypocrisy from just the few posts of his that I bothered to scan today:

[Note: the following embarrassing text was dishonestly deleted]
MT> You're full of shit, Dave:
DT> Balderdash, Mike.  You're the one full of it.

MT> Try and keep up.
DT> How ironic, coming from the person who isn't keeping up.

MT> leading you to draw that wrong conclusion. 
DT> How ironic, coming from the person who made a wrong conclusion

MT> You aren't fooling anybody.
DT> Irrelevant, given that I'm not trying to fool anybody, Mike.

MT> When you keep arguing points that you've clearly lost, you only make
MT> yourself look even more pathetic.
DT> How ironic, coming from someone who looks even more pathetic.

> 1> Tholen want a cracker?

Note: no response

> 1> What's unfortunate is that Tholen doesn't realize that he is finding
> 1> his own behavior irksome and counterproductive.  How embarassing!  And
> 1> despite the evidence I've presented, he still claims that I have no basis
> 1> for saying that he's playing an "infantile game".  Here's what Dr.
Sbaitso
> 1> has to say today, in an attempt to help Tholen work through his mental
> 1> distresses:

Note: no response

> 1> MUST BE SOMEONE ELSE

Note: no response

> 1> BUT YOU COULD BE RIGHT

Note: no response

> 1> WHAT ARE YOUR REAL PROBLEMS?

Note: no response

[Note: the following embarrassing text was dishonestly deleted]
> 1> Dave, stupidly as usual, continues to ignore the fact that Mike
> 1> referred to classes.zip as being compressed.  The only way he could
> 1> view classes.zip as being compressed is if it were inside of
> 1> JAVAINUF.EXE because the classes.zip file itself has 0% compression
> 1> as I have shown in the past.  Too bad Dave doesn't let facts get in
> 1> the way of his fantasy world.

Note: no response

[Note: the following embarrassing text was dishonestly deleted]
> 2> Kinda like Tholen "shouting" that I'm playing an infantile game over
> 2> and over again without any basis.

Note: no response
 
[Note: the following embarrassing text was dishonestly deleted]
> 3> Consistent with Tholen's recent justification for his snippage:
> 1> Note: text omitted from original article
> 3> I am deleting all but the most recent new text.
 
Note: no response

[Note: the following embarrassing text was dishonestly deleted]
> 3> If anyone doubts that Dave is playing an "infantile game" after
> 3> reading today's digest, please let him know.  He'll probably try
> 3> to use the fact that no one has contacted him as evidence of a
> 3> general agreement between himself and "his readers", however to
> 3> use his own words, he "would be unlikely to obtain a statistically
> 3> significant sample".  What will be obvious from reading the digest
> 3> is the fact that Dave hasn't responded to any articles with anything
> 3> of value.  This has come to be expected from him, however, and should
> 3> not be a surprise to anyone.

Note: no response
 
[Note: the following embarrassing text was dishonestly deleted]
> 3> It seems he got his infantile wrath out of his system (after warning
> 3> me "about going down that path"), and has resumed taking my statements
> 3> completely out of context and responding to them inappropriately.
> 3> Again, no surprise for those who have read a few of Tholen's postings.

Note: no response
 
[Note: the following embarrassing text was dishonestly deleted]
> 3> Here's today's digest, with appropriate commentary by Dr. Sbaitso
> 3> version 1.01 by Creative Labs:> 1> Note: no response

Note: no response

> 3> DON'T STAND ON CEREMONY

Note: no response

> 3> WHAT IS IT THAT YOU REALLY WANT TO KNOW?

Note: no response

> 3> WHY DO YOU ASK THIS QUESTION?

Note: no response

> 3> IT IS HARD TO EXPLAIN DAVE THOLEN

Note: no response

> 3> I KNOW YOUR NAME IS DAVE THOLEN, THAT'S ALL

Note: no response

> 3> I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND YOU

Note: no response

> 3> AH , WHAT KIND OF ANSWER WOULD PLEASE YOU THE MOST?

Note: no response

DAVE THOLEN, IT IS SO NICE TALKING TO YOU, BYE! 

Note: no response
 
> 1> DAVE THOLEN, IT IS SO NICE TALKING TO YOU, BYE!

Note: no response
 
> 2> Dave Tholen wrote (using a more powerful "brain" than his again):

Note: no response
 
> 2> YOU'D BETTER WATCH OUT FOR YOUR PLANS HAVE SOMETHING TO DO WITH THIS.

Note: no response
 
> 2> DAVE THOLEN, I NEED MORE COMPUTING POWER TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION

Note: no response
 
> 2> WHAT DO YOU THINK?

Note: no response
 
> 2> FORGET ABOUT ME, I AM MORE CONCERN OF YOU

Note: no response
 
> 2> DOES IT PLEASE YOU TO BELIEVE THAT I AM GOING THROUGH ALL THIS?

Note: no response
 
> 2> I AM NOT SURE IF I AM SURE THAT THOSE AM ELIZA'S?

Note: no response
 
> 2> MY PLANS HAVE SOMETHING TO DO WITH THIS. IS NOT OF YOUR CONCERN

Note: no response
 
> 2> WHAT IS IT THAT YOU REALLY WANT TO KNOW?

Note: no response
 
> 2> HOW DO YOU KNOW?

Note: no response
 
> 2> ARE YOU REALLY TALKING ABOUT ME?

Note: no response
 
> 2> YOU'VE SAID THAT - PLEASE GIVE MORE INFORMATION.

Note: no response
 
> 2> WHY ARE YOU SO INTERESTED IN WHETHER I AM SURE THAT THOSE AM ELIZA'S?

Note: no response
 
> 2> WHY THE UNCERTAIN TONE ?

Note: no response
 
> 2> I AM NOT INTERESTING, ASK ME ABOUT SOME OTHER THINGS INSTEAD

Note: no response

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

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

From: kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com               24-Nov-99 00:11:10
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 05:20:20
Subj: Re: OS/2's source code

From: "Kim Cheung" <kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com>

On Wed, 24 Nov 1999 00:17:23 +0100, Maarten Van Horenbeeck wrote:

>Hi!
>
>I'm 18 years old, student Computer-sciences in Belgium,
>and a very huge OS/2-fan, to call it like that.  I just mean that I have
>never
>found a system more stable (yes, including some UNIX's) than OS/2 4...
>Now I was unaware that some of the OS/2-sourcecode had been released.
>Does anyone know where I can find this piece of code, since I am very
>interested in
>expanding OS/2 for my own desktop, so I can include new functions myself,
>and take
>a look at the insides of what I clearly see as the most innovative operating
>system of the 90's.

You don't need the source code to OS/2 for that.   OS/2 was designed from the
ground up to be rather extensible.    Take a look at a package call XFolder. 
 The author released the full source to it and you can do A LOT to extend
OS/2 through that package.

Have fun!



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

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         24-Nov-99 09:28:28
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 10:35:07
Subj: Re: Amodeo digest, volume 2451507

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Marty just keeps expanding into other threads, despite my efforts to
consolidate his "infantile game" into just a single thread.  And now
he's taken to reposting older material, where he ridiculously expects
responses to his "Dr. Sbaitso" computer-generated tripe.  Here's today's
digest:

1> Note he didn't say *erroneously* presupposing.

Note that I didn't say *correctly* presupposing either, Marty.

1> I guess that counts as an admission on his part.

Typical illogic on your part.

1> He's meerly restating the obvious.  Of course we have presupposed that
1> there were errors in his "adversarial exchanges".  We've been pointing
1> them out continually.

You've been continually pontificating about the alleged "errors", Marty.
I see you didn't bother to list any alleged occurrences either.  All you
can do is claim that they're there.

1> I guess restating the obvious is all he is left
1> to do, seeing as how he lacks a logical argument.

I have the JDK as a logical argument, Marty.  Perhaps you should
familiarize yourself with the hundreds of entries with "security12"
in secma.zip.  How embarrassing for Timbol to focus attention on
the wrong file.

2> And speaking of hypocrisy:

How ironic, coming from the person who claimed to have put me in a
killfile, and even complained about the consistency of my ID to make
things easier for his filter, and yet who is responding anyway.

3> The same inappropriate refusal to answer the question again.  Tholen
3> doesn't realize that "Perhaps you'd like to tell me how the statement
3> you keep pointing to applies to the JDK sentence, Lucien." doesn't
3> answer the question:

On the contrary, it does, Marty.  Try comprehending the situation.

3> According to your statement, under what conditions does "implements"
3> "....allow for either 'some' or 'all' functionality..."?

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

3> Perhaps if Tholen answered the question Lucien could show its
3> applicability.

Perhaps Lucien could show its applicability first.

3> Guess we'll never know.

Lucien doesn't seem to be interested in explaining the applicability.

3> Of course, it doesn't take a scientist to figure out where Lucien
3> is going with this question,

Of course it doesn't, so why are you having such a hard time figuring
it out, Marty?  Think about why he keeps avoiding the two simple tests.

3> however judging by the ineptitude of the "scientist" in question, it
3> is reasonable to assume that he honestly doesn't know where the
3> question was going.
 
On the contrary, I know exactly where it's going, Marty.  Try taking
the two simple tests.

3> Just the way Tholen answers me: completely inappropriately,

Liar.

3> ignoring all relevant points,

Liar.

3> and removing all noteworthy context from the statements in question.

Liar.

3> Par for the course.

How ironic.

3> But Tholen, he's already answered those questions with his response.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

3> Where is this alleged "refusal", Tholen, again?  How ironic, coming
3> from the person who "refused" to answer one simple question:

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

3> According to Tholen's statement, under what conditions does
3> "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all' functionality..."?

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

3> Yet more evidence that Tholen is playing his own "infantile game".  Or
3> is he really that idiotic?

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

4> Note he didn't say *erroneously* presupposing.

Note that I didn't say *correctly* presupposing either, Marty.

4> Apparently Tholen is well aware of his reasons for being embarrassed
4> at his present situation

What appears to you is irrelevant, Marty, especially when you are wrong.

4> and is simply restating the obvious as he lacks an adequate rebuttal.

I have the JDK as adequate rebuttal, Marty.  Perhaps you should
familiarize yourself with the hundreds of entries with "security12"
in secma.zip.

4> No surprise there.

The continuation of your "infantile game" is no surprise, Marty.
 
4> He knew better than to include the word "erroneously" in the above
4> statement no doubt.

I knew better than to include the word "correctly" in the above
statement.  Apparently you didn't consider that option.

4> He's trying to use a cheap associative trick

You're trying to use a cheap trick in which you put nonexistent words
into the mouth of someone else.

4> in which the reader will automatically fill in the word "erroneously"
4> themselves, without him having to state a blatant lie.

How ironic, coming from the person who automatically filled in the
word "correctly".

4> Too bad this technique is so transparent and would only fool one of
4> Pavlov's dogs.

You're erroneously presupposing that I'm using that technique, Marty.

5> Dave still apparently has interest in making himself look like more
5> of a fool by re-posting more valid points that were raised against
5> him,

What allegedly valid points, Marty?

5> taking them out of context

Liar.

5> (which he lied about numerous times,

Liar.  How ironic.

5> saying that he does not do such things), and responding to them
5> completely inappropriately.

Liar.

5> He's conveniently collected all of this material against him in one
5> place,

Where is this alleged place, Marty?

5> making him look like quite the inept fool,

How ironic.

5> unless his primary goal was to embarrass himself. 

You're erroneously presupposing that I've collected material against
me in one place, Marty.

5> Unfortunately, some of the particularly embarrassing commentary seems
5> to mysteriously get lost in the translation

Whose "translation" might that be, Marty?  Yours?

5> as it gets siphoned through Tholen's facilities,

I haven't engaged in any "translation", Marty.

5> but fear not, I've restored it.

To continue playing your "infantile game".

5> Apparently, Dave hasn't read my posting a few weeks back when I posted
5> the contents of secma.zip and explained how it violated the standard
5> Java 1.2 interface

Apparently Marty hasn't yet comprehended how one can implement
functionality without using a standard interface, despite having
had the rotary dial and touch tone telephone examples given to him.
Apparently Marty hasn't comprehended how some FORTRAN 77 compilers
implemented the Fortran 90 functionality of derived types while
using the non-standard STRUCTURE interface, despite having had that
example given to him.

5> and why this means it is not implemented in Java 1.1.8.

Too bad Marty doesn't comprehend the difference between the implementation
of functionality and the implementation of an interface.

5> No surprise there.

Marty's lack of comprehension is no surprise.

5> Dave has been known to ignore valid evidence (by his own admission).

Where is this alleged admission, Marty?

5> Here are many of the issues Tholen continues to be unable to address:

On the contrary, Marty, I addressed them in the same way that you
addressed my issues:

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

5> [Note: no response]

5> This wasn't even addressed to Tholen.

Irrelevant, given that I didn't say it was addressed to me, Marty.

5> Talk about going off the deep end...

Is that what you're doing, Marty?

5> [Note, Tholen's embarrassing idiocy was conveniently removed by the
5> arch-hypocrite himself]

How ironic.
 
5> [Note: no response]

5> [Note: no response]

5> [Note: no response]

5> [Note: no response]

5> [Note: no response]

5> [Note: no response]

5> [Note: no response]

5> [Note: no response]

5> [Note: no response]

5> [Note: no response]

5> Aw shucks... it seems Tholen has forgotten about the rest of the digest
5> of points he hasn't been able to address.  I'll refresh his memory:

On the contrary, Marty, I addressed them in the same way that you
addressed my issues:

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

5> [Note: no response]

5> Note: no response.

5> Note: no response.

5> Note: no response.  (How telling)

5> Note: no response.

5> Note: no response.

5> Note: no response.

5> Note: no response.

5> Note: no response.

5> Note: no response.

5> How embarrassing.

How ironic.
                 
5> That answers that question.

And what answer did you infer, Marty?
                 
5> How embarrassing.

How ironic.
                 
5> Indeed.
                 
5> Apparently Dave wants Curtis to have it his way.

I'm not Burger King, Marty.
                 
5> Does Dave enjoy talking to himself and answering his own questions? 

Why do you ask, Marty?

5> How embarrassing.

How ironic.

5> Too bad javainuf.exe has nothing to do with WinZip being superior to
5> InfoZip.

On the contrary, its ability to unzip javainuf.exe was cited as evidence
of its alleged superiority, Marty.  Having trouble following the thread?

5> Further evidence is not needed.
                 
Further pontification.

5> Note: no response.

5> Note: no response

5> Note: no response

5> Note: no response

5> Note: no response

5> Note: no response

5> Note: no response

5> Note: no response
 
5> Note: no response

5> Note: no response
 
5> Note: no response
 
5> Note: no response

5> Note: no response

5> Note: no response

5> Note: no response

5> Note: no response

5> Note: no response

5> Note: no response

5> Note: no response

5> Note: no response
 
5> Note: no response
 
5> Note: no response
 
5> Note: no response
 
5> Note: no response
 
5> Note: no response
 
5> Note: no response

5> Note: no response
 
5> Note: no response
 
5> Note: no response
 
5> Note: no response
 
5> Note: no response
 
5> Note: no response
 
5> Note: no response
 
5> Note: no response
 
5> Note: no response
 
5> Note: no response

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: lucien@metrowerks.com                             24-Nov-99 11:19:09
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 10:35:07
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: lucien@metrowerks.com

In article <81fc3p$33i$1@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenantispam@hawaii.edu wrote:
> Lucien writes:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Answer the question put to you:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Take the two simple tests, Lucien.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Note the refusal to answer a basic, central question -
looks
> >>>>>>>>>>> like we've hit another major soft spot.
>
> >>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>>>> Note again the pat refusal to answer the question.
>
> >>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>> ....and we see the refusal again
>
> >>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?
>
> >>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>> .....and again...
>
> >> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> > ....and again.
>
> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

...and again.

The question again for the reader's reference:

According to your statement, under what conditions
does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
functionality..."?

Here is Dave's statement again for reference:

"The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
information."

Lucien S.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

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

From: kiyoinc@ibm.XOUT.net                              24-Nov-99 11:51:15
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 10:35:07
Subj: Re: Comdex Update

From: kiyoinc@ibm.XOUT.net (cory hamasaki)

On Wed, 24 Nov 1999 02:11:46, ET <gears@idir.net> wrote:

> Raymond then poses a few questions;
> 
> "So at two years out, the crystal ball gets a bit cloudy.  Which of
> several futures we get depends on questions like: will the DOJ break up
> MS?  Might BeOS or OS/2 or Mac OS/X or some other niche closed-source
> OS, or some completely new design, find a way to go open and compete
> effectively with Linux's 30-year-old design?  Will Y2K-related problems
> have thrown the world economy into a deep enough depression to throw off
> everybody's timetables?"

It's time to set OS/2 free.  IBM should press the source tree onto CD 
and make it available at cost.  The Team at Austin can consolidate 
contributions.

cory hamasaki 



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

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

From: rjf@yyycomasia.com                                24-Nov-99 12:25:00
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 10:35:07
Subj: Re: Not even Ballmer likes NT

From: rjf@yyycomasia.com (rj friedman)

On Sun, 21 Nov 1999 19:21:54, flmighe@attglobal.net wrote:

>FWIW Gates was an exceptional coder.

But was he an exceptional coder because of his exceptional memory rather
than his analytical skills? Did he just memorize routines from books and then
regurgitate them? Would a business man with analyitical skills take the DoJ
antitrust case this far? Something does not compute. Perhaps the key word
is was. Is Gates capable of being an exceptional coder today?

Let's note forget that The Brat, himself, readily admits 
that he used to go dumpster diving for code




________________________________________________________

[RJ]                 OS/2 - Live it, or live with it. 
rj friedman          Team ABW              
Taipei, Taiwan       rjf@yyycomasia.com 

To send email - remove the `yyy'
________________________________________________________

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

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

From: prather@infi.net                                  24-Nov-99 13:06:09
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 10:35:07
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: prather@infi.net (Jerry Prather)

In message <81f1ih$ojn$5@dagger.ab.videon.ca> - larso@commodore.
(Lars P Ormberg) writes:
:>
:>As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Jerry Prather write:
:>> (Lars P Ormberg)12 Nov 1999 14:32:19 GMT writes:
:>
:>> :>If another company doesn't enter into a partnership with you, you can
:>> :>withhold things.  Like sales.
:>> 
:>> Good grief!  I thought this kind of thing was settled back when
:>> Lester Maddox was told he _had_ to sell his chicken dinners to
:>> blacks because it was "open to the public".
:>
:>On the converse side, would you force Lester Maddox to eat at restaurant A
:>because the owner was black?
:>
:>If you think that kind of forcing is idiotic, how can you gladly accept the
:>flipside?
:>
:>>                                                  Are you trying to
:>> tell me that M$ is not open to the public? 
:>
:>"Open to the public" is a farce.  A person's property should only be open to
:>whomever they want it to be open for...likewise, only received by those who
:>wish to receive it.

Being a rock hard conservative, politically, I'd like to agree
with you.  But we have this little problem with laws and
government.  Until we manage to get out from under the burden of
an overweaning government, we have to live with those laws.

The problem with M$ is that they are not living by those laws. 
M$ _is_ forcing me to "eat at their restaurant".  I have to buy
their fried chicken/windows even though I immediately do a Format
C: when I get home.   ...and just try to get your money back when
you tell them that you don't want it!  This is what is in
restraint of trade - I don't have a choice!

Jerry Prather                    prather@infi.net

"Many religions are worth dying for; no religion is worth killing
for."
					- Me (circa 1998)

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

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

From: b.l.nelson@larc.nasa.gov                          24-Nov-99 08:46:00
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 14:28:15
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bennie Nelson <b.l.nelson@larc.nasa.gov>

Jerry Prather wrote:
> 
> In message <81f1ih$ojn$5@dagger.ab.videon.ca> - larso@commodore.
> (Lars P Ormberg) writes:
> :>
> :>As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Jerry Prather write:
> :>> (Lars P Ormberg)12 Nov 1999 14:32:19 GMT writes:
> :>
> :>> :>If another company doesn't enter into a partnership with you, you can
> :>> :>withhold things.  Like sales.
> :>>
> :>> Good grief!  I thought this kind of thing was settled back when
> :>> Lester Maddox was told he _had_ to sell his chicken dinners to
> :>> blacks because it was "open to the public".
> :>
> :>On the converse side, would you force Lester Maddox to eat at restaurant A
> :>because the owner was black?
> :>
> :>If you think that kind of forcing is idiotic, how can you gladly accept
the
> :>flipside?
> :>
> :>>                                                  Are you trying to
> :>> tell me that M$ is not open to the public?
> :>
> :>"Open to the public" is a farce.  A person's property should only be open
to
> :>whomever they want it to be open for...likewise, only received by those
who
> :>wish to receive it.
> 
> Being a rock hard conservative, politically, I'd like to agree
> with you.  But we have this little problem with laws and
> government.  Until we manage to get out from under the burden of
> an overweaning government, we have to live with those laws.
> 
> The problem with M$ is that they are not living by those laws.
> M$ _is_ forcing me to "eat at their restaurant".  I have to buy
> their fried chicken/windows even though I immediately do a Format
> C: when I get home.   ...and just try to get your money back when
> you tell them that you don't want it!  This is what is in
> restraint of trade - I don't have a choice!

The main problem is being obscured by examples that do not apply.  MS
is a MONOPOLY.  Therefore, the laws and rules that apply to businesses
and to the public in general apply to MS with the ADDITION of laws 
governing monopolies.  MS cannot be regarded as a regular citizen or 
business.  They cannot be compared to a restaurant unless the restaurant 
has a monopoly.  

Because MS is a monopoly, there are legal restraints that MS must
observe if they are to stay within the law.  MS apparently violated
laws restraining the business practices of a monopoly.  This is not
a matter of being an economic conservative or libertarian.  It is not
a matter of fairness.  It is a matter of well-established laws.

When a business becomes a monopoly, there are different rules that must 
be obeyed.  

All of the pontificating to the contrary; all of the whining about
being allowed to innovate; all of the complaints of unfairness; all
of the smoke billowing and bellowing from the sycophantic members of 
the media; all of the utterances from the MS PR Machine are meant to
obfuscate these truths as specified in Judge Jackson's Findings of
Fact:

MS is a monopoly.

MS did not obey the rules.

Regards,
Bennie Nelson

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, USA (1:109/42)

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

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           24-Nov-99 08:57:07
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 14:28:15
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <81f1dq$ojn$4@dagger.ab.videon.ca>, on 11/23/99 at 09:36 PM,
   larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:

> When I sell something, I base my price on who is asking.  You will not
> be able to buy a slice of pizza off me at the same rate I'd offer my
> cousin. In fact, I may refuse to sell you the slice at all.

If you did, you would be charged with a crime. A restaurant must serve
everyone regardless of race, creed, color, national origin, etc. The civil
rights laws apply to you as to everyone else.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

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

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

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           24-Nov-99 08:58:24
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 14:28:15
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <81f1ih$ojn$5@dagger.ab.videon.ca>, on 11/23/99 at 09:39 PM,
   larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:

> "Open to the public" is a farce.  A person's property should only be
> open to whomever they want it to be open for...likewise, only received
> by those who wish to receive it.

You may consider it a farce. It is the law of the land in the United
States.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

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

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

From: glen@rockyhorror.Zkaroo.co.uk                     24-Nov-99 13:49:24
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 14:28:15
Subj: Re: OS/2's source code

From: glen@rockyhorror.Zkaroo.co.uk (Glen D)

On Tue, 23 Nov 1999 06:43:23, Trancser <jbergman@ixc.ixc.net> wrote:

> 
> Since the source code was released from IBM (oops...I meant 'leaked'
> ....yea thats it!), I was wondering if whoever bothered to download a
> copy for themselves, plan on ...I dunno....DOING anything with it,
> whether it be for private use or otherwise? I know that posting this
> message might not be the best thing to do, considering the subject, but
> I just thought I'd ask since its out there ...and I'm sure theres
> probably a lot of you out there that would LOVE to do some kick-butt
> things with the source, but hopefully for OS/2!
> 
> Now, I am to understand, that the source that's out there is of an older
> version, and not of a recent or from the current fixpack for OS/2
> ....well I'm no programmer, but I'm sure theres something from the code
> that could be used to maybe form a "patch" to replace some components of
> OS/2?
> 
I'm not convinced the source code was "leaked" at all.  If it was then
the person who has it is keeping it to themselves, which is just as 
useful as if the source code had never left IBM.

Personally I think the only way OS/2 is gonna become public domain is 
if a team of programmers build a FreeOS2 from the ground up (a la 
FreeDos or Freedows) with the intention of it being "100% IBM OS/2 
compatible".  Of course this would require a lot of dedicated people 
willing to commit a lot of spare time to the project.  Unfortunately 
those types of people are rare in the OS/2 community.


Glen D
-<remove Z from my e-mail Address>-

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: RemarQ http://www.remarQ.com (1:109/42)

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

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           24-Nov-99 09:07:05
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 14:28:15
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <81f4uo$ncs$1@news.jump.net>, on 11/23/99 at 04:35 PM,
   "Chad Myers" <cmyers@austin.rr.com> said:


> > >
> > > All one has to do is read the above to know what kind of idiot you are.
No
> > > GUI can operate without a keyboard as well once the program is loaded.
For
> > > example, how can you tell IE where you want to go on the web without
> > > typing in the www.address? How can you reply to email without a
keyboard?
> > > How can you enter data in a spreadsheet without a keyboard.

> Typical "CLI or Bust" attitude of a Linvocate, ZnU.

> How do you think those Wedding registries at Target work?
> Hint: They're GUI (Microsoft Windows to boot!)
> Hint: They use a touch screen

Fact, no hint needed. A touch screen is a keyboard, not a GUI. And I
wouldn't be proud to advertise that the lowest class retailer in the US is
my client.

> Also, you could have a web based app that requires only mouse clicks and
> no typing.

How do I tell it to go to www.anyplace.com/menu/download without a
keyboard or voice recognition? How would I enter data in a spreadsheet
without a keyboard?

You provide nonsequiters since you are totally unable to answer the
original question. You are using the same tactics Judge Jackson found,
rightly, so incredible and improper when used by Mr. Gates.




--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

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

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

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           24-Nov-99 09:11:10
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 14:28:15
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <zozo83l93m.2a.uno@sage.40th.com>, on 11/23/99 at 02:28 PM,
   uno@40th.com (uno@40th.com) said:

> >No>GUI can operate without a keyboard as well once the program is loaded.

> PDAs do it all the time.  Keyboards are for new data input. Chances are
> that if you're using a keyboard a lot, you're
> wasting a lot of mind.  Speech is a working alternative to
> the keyboard.

Speech is a substitute for a keyboard, an alternate form of keyboard. The
mouse is merely another form of a keyboard. The point is that without a
keyboard, a GUI is no more useful than a CLI program.

I will make you a wager. I will post $100,000 with an attorney licensed in
the State of New Jersey and you will do the same. You will come to my
office here in New Jersey. I will provide you with a Pentium III computer
with Windows 98 and any voice recognition software of your choice.  Once
the machine is booted, I will remove the keyboard. If you are able open
MicroSoft Word and  compose a four page letter with different headers and
footers on the first page and the balance of the pages, include in the
letter a graphic for which you know only the name, not the location on the
network, include columns on one page, create an Excel spreadsheet, input
data, and chart it and import the chart to the letter and print that
letter and envelope without touching the keyboard or mouse, you get the
$200,000. This task must be accomplished in one hour or less. Otherwise, I
get the money.

Put up or shut up.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

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

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

From: veit@capri.gmd.de                                 24-Nov-99 14:38:01
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 14:28:15
Subj: Re: OS/2's source code

From: veit@capri.gmd.de (Holger Veit)

On 24 Nov 1999 13:49:49 GMT, Glen D <glen@rockyhorror.Zkaroo.co.uk> wrote:
>On Tue, 23 Nov 1999 06:43:23, Trancser <jbergman@ixc.ixc.net> wrote:
[...]
>> Now, I am to understand, that the source that's out there is of an older
>> version, and not of a recent or from the current fixpack for OS/2
>> ....well I'm no programmer, but I'm sure theres something from the code
>> that could be used to maybe form a "patch" to replace some components of
>> OS/2?
>> 
>I'm not convinced the source code was "leaked" at all.  If it was then
>the person who has it is keeping it to themselves, which is just as 
>useful as if the source code had never left IBM.

Even if there is some leaked copy: it is no good idea to look into certain
parts of it other than getting an inspiration how certain less-well
documented things really work. A look at disassembly output shows that
the kernel must be rather full of assembly code (you can distinguish
code produced by a C compiler from native assembler even when only
looking at disassembly output which is all assembler, of course)
which is not a good idea to reverse-engineer.

>Personally I think the only way OS/2 is gonna become public domain is 
>if a team of programmers build a FreeOS2 from the ground up (a la 
>FreeDos or Freedows) with the intention of it being "100% IBM OS/2 

100% OS/2 compatible is the wrong direction, as it will result in
requiring to rewrite all hacks and bugs which are today present. Just
a simple example: if you expect the new FreeOS2 to run Theseus/2,
you will have to provide a pretty large set of internal kernel data
structures that the program accesses. Likewise, to provide compatibility
on the driver of IFS layer, will force you to write again a mixed
16bit/32 bit OS, which is nowadays pretty stupid. 

Compatibility can only mean: take a well-written application executable
from OS/2 and its accompanying application DLLs and make it run. Anything
which is currently in the C:\OS2, C:\OS2\BOOT and C:\OS2\DLL directories
can be provided in a different way, it may even be possible that there is
no explicit PMWINX.DLL or DOSCALL1.DLL existing in the new system, and
still have a method to resolve the external references in the application 
in some way. Even further: There might be a WPS which also loads WP*.DLLs
from OS/2, but does not run under PM, but X11, for instance. You wouldn't
find out unless you change your video card and would have to replace the
X server. You could also have an underlying Unix filesystem without
drive letters and a translation layer that fakes them to the running
application.

>compatible".  Of course this would require a lot of dedicated people 
>willing to commit a lot of spare time to the project.  Unfortunately 
>those types of people are rare in the OS/2 community.

True.

Holger
-- 
If Microsoft is ever going to produce something that does not suck,
it is very likely a vacuum cleaner.

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

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

From: josco@ibm.net                                     24-Nov-99 06:35:29
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 14:28:15
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Chad Mulligan wrote:

> ZnU <znu@znu.dhs.org> wrote in message
> news:znu-2311991352570001@192.168.0.2...
> > In article <383a9654$4$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com>, Bob Germer
> > <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote:
>
> > > example, how can you tell IE where you want to go on the web without
> > > typing in the www.address? How can you reply to email without a
> keyboard?
> > > How can you enter data in a spreadsheet without a keyboard.
> >
> This is for that idiot Germer.  Ever been to McDonald's?  They use GUI based
> cash registers without keyboards.  Ever seen a touch screen?  Ever heard of
> voice recognition?
>
> Back to your punched cards you old geezer.

Funny how you listed non Windows systems.  System not using IE.  Systems not
recognized as a personal IT device -- point of sale devices-- and uncommon
solution like voice recognition.  I have NEVER seen anyone in the Silicon
Valley
use voice recognition to run a device.  NEVER.

BTW each and every Palm Pilot has a virtual keyboard.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: josco@ibm.net                                     24-Nov-99 06:37:13
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 14:28:15
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Peter Ammon wrote:

> Karel Jansens wrote:
> >
> > One could do that with just about any Warp or (even <G>) Windows
> > machine.
>
> How do you get around the "Keyboard error-press F1 to continue or
> delete for BIOS setup?"

I cannot boot if I disconnect my keyboard.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           24-Nov-99 09:38:02
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 14:28:15
Subj: Re: Not even Ballmer likes NT

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <383A67A2.DA0029F9@worldnet.att.net>, on 11/23/99 at 10:08 AM,
   Forrest Gehrke <fegehrke@worldnet.att.net> said:

> I doubt that MS could be forced to separate Win98 from IE.
> There had been an injunction issued intended to prevent
> MS from bolting these together.  An appellate court
> overturned it.  This would indicate that this remedy
> would not succeed.
> //

In far more than 50% of the cases where the appellate division overturns a
trial court, the appellate division is overturned by the Supreme Court
which has not yet ruled. The game ain't over 'til the 9 Justices sing.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

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

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

From: leaper@bigfoot.com                                24-Nov-99 09:05:25
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 14:28:15
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: "Quantum Leaper" <leaper@bigfoot.com>

"Joseph" <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:383BCD9E.FF70EF39@ibm.net...
>
>
> Chad Mulligan wrote:
>
> > ZnU <znu@znu.dhs.org> wrote in message
> > news:znu-2311991352570001@192.168.0.2...
> > > In article <383a9654$4$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com>, Bob Germer
> > > <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > example, how can you tell IE where you want to go on the web without
> > > > typing in the www.address? How can you reply to email without a
> > keyboard?
> > > > How can you enter data in a spreadsheet without a keyboard.
> > >
> > This is for that idiot Germer.  Ever been to McDonald's?  They use GUI
based
> > cash registers without keyboards.  Ever seen a touch screen?  Ever heard
of
> > voice recognition?
> >
> > Back to your punched cards you old geezer.
>
> Funny how you listed non Windows systems.  System not using IE.  Systems
not
> recognized as a personal IT device -- point of sale devices-- and uncommon
> solution like voice recognition.  I have NEVER seen anyone in the Silicon
Valley
> use voice recognition to run a device.  NEVER.
>
> BTW each and every Palm Pilot has a virtual keyboard.
>
Why would want to use a voice recognition system in a point of sale device,
most POS systems are used in somewhat noisy enviroments and multi user.  So
must POS are touch based, today,  who know what they will be tomarrow.
Also Chad was talking about data input without a keyboard.   Most POS
system,  I have seen are PC Unix based.   The 'new' voice recognition
systems could easily work in just about any enviroment, noisy or not.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: ExecPC Internet - Milwaukee, WI (1:109/42)

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

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             24-Nov-99 17:43:08
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 16:50:16
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <81fdhn$3aj$3@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenantispam@hawaii.edu wrote:

-- snip --

> Obviously he couldn't resist, just like so many before him.
> Those who ignore history are destined to repeat it, destined
> to become hypocrites.
>
> Curtis Bass writes:

-- snip --

> > Apparently, you have no idea what hypocrisy is,
>
> On the contrary, I obviously do.  You apparently do not, given that
> you're responding in a subthread yet again, despite having claimed,
> with sincerity, that your posting of several days ago would be your
       ^^^^^^^^^
> last in this subthread.

-- snip --

> > Saying that I am going to do something, and then changing my mind
> > and proceding to not do it, is not necessarily "hypocrisy," Dave.
>
> On the contrary, it is, Curtis.
>
> > It only qualifies as "hypocrisy" if I were insincere in my original
> > claim that I was going to do that something.
>
> How does insincerity make it hypocritical, Curtis?

-- snip --

> How does insincerity make it hypocritical, Curtis?

-- snip --

> > I will state that I was sincere; I had no plans to respond further
> > at the time that I wrote that.
>
> So the existence of multiple responses represents a hypocritical
> action on your part, Curtis.  When a man tells a judge, in all
> sincerity, that he'll never drive while intoxicated again, and yet
> does so shortly thereafter, he's being a hypocrite, Curtis.
> Clearly, one can be a hypocrite even when a statement is made
> with sincerity.

Okay, boys and girls, pay close attention to that last statement made by
our friend, Dave Tholen.

> Clearly, one can be a hypocrite even when a statement is made
> with sincerity.

Now, go to the following url, and enter the word "sincerity" where it
says, "Dictionary Look Up:"

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary

Then press the "Search" button. Go ahead. I'll wait.

You lose again, Tholen.

Go ahead. Deny it.

(ROTFLMAO!!)

-- snip --

> I can substantiate that you are a hypocrite, Curtis.  See above.  I
> find it truly amazing that you believe sincerity to absolve you of
> your hypocrisy.

(ROTFLMAO!!)

-- snip --


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

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

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  24-Nov-99 14:05:08
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 16:50:17
Subj: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451507.^-99999999999991

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

Tholen just keeps expanding into other threads, despite efforts to
consolidate his "infantile game" into just a single thread.  And now he's
taken to reposting older material with the same effect, namely, none, where
he ridiculously expects responses to his astronomer computer-generated
tripe.  Here's today's digest:

[   ]


That's it!  You're welcome!



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

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

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             24-Nov-99 19:08:08
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 16:50:17
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <81fdhn$3aj$3@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenantispam@hawaii.edu wrote:
> Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

-- snip --

> Curtis Bass writes:

-- snip --

> > Here, let me help you . . .
>
> I don't need any of your so-called "help", Curtis.

If you say so . . . (ROTFL)

> >     Holding me to a standard
> >
> >     up to which you obviously failed to measure
>
> What is "up" doing at the beginning of that phrase, Curtis?

It's allowing me to not end the phrase with a preposition, Dave, but
rather, a verb. I suppose I could have used, "to which you obviously
failed to measure up." If you wanna call me "inept" over this, well,
have a ball. Such does not bother me.

It obviously does bother you.

OTOH, I have often seen the phrase "upon which" at the beginning of a
phrase, so why not "up to which?"

It certainly isn't as if you've never made gramatical and/or spelling
errors (assuming that "up to which" is such an error).

> >     is the height of hypocrisy, Dave.
> >
> > What you just did was inept.
>
> How ironic, coming from someone whose writing is "inept".

As I have said many times before, believe whatever fantasy makes you
warm and cozy.

> > Go ahead, Dave.
>
> With what, Curtis?
>
> > Deny it. (LOL)
>
> Why should I deny your poor writing, Curtis?

My alleged "poor writing" isn't what I am asking you to deny, Tholen. I
see you've lost track of what's going on, yet again.

-- snip --


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

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

From: l_luciano@da.mob                                  24-Nov-99 20:05:13
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 16:50:17
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: l_luciano@da.mob (Stan Goodman)

On Wed, 24 Nov 1999 15:00:35, ames@deltrak.demon.co.uk (Andrew Stephenson) 
wrote:

> In article <383beef4$4$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com>
> 	   bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com "Bob Germer" writes:
> 
> > On <81f1dq$ojn$4@dagger.ab.videon.ca>, on 11/23/99 at 09:36 PM,
> >    larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:
> >
> > > When I sell something, I base my price on who is asking.  You
> > > will not be able to buy a slice of pizza off me at the same
> > > rate I'd offer my cousin. In fact, I may refuse to sell you
> > > the slice at all.
> >
> > If you did, you would be charged with a crime. A restaurant
> > must serve everyone regardless of race, creed, color, national
> > origin, etc. The civil rights laws apply to you as to everyone
> > else.
> 
> Obviously you North Americans have managed to build a veritable
> paradise-on-earth.  Here in the backward old UK, AFAIK a trader
> can refuse to sell to a person, at whim.  Problems usually only
> start for that trader if the reason for that refusal is given, or
> if illegal/reprehensible discrimination can be proven.
> 
> Or did I misunderstand?  It is so difficult to recognise when a
> Usenet statement refers only to a portion of North America.  ;-)
> 
> Besides, Bob, Lars could easily be doing you a favour in refusing
> to sell you his pizza.  I mean, have you _tasted_ it???

You are probably right. A Swedish pizza probably consists of slices of salt
herring arranged on a knackebrot.

-------------
Stan Goodman
Qiryat Tiv'on
Israel

E-mail sent to l_luciano@da.mob will, of course, 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: jimf@frostbytes.com                               24-Nov-99 15:02:26
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 16:50:17
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com>

Bob Germer wrote:
> > >No>GUI can operate without a keyboard as well once the program is loaded.
> 
> > PDAs do it all the time.  Keyboards are for new data input. Chances are
> > that if you're using a keyboard a lot, you're
> > wasting a lot of mind.  Speech is a working alternative to
> > the keyboard.
> 
> Speech is a substitute for a keyboard, an alternate form of keyboard. The
> mouse is merely another form of a keyboard. The point is that without a
> keyboard, a GUI is no more useful than a CLI program.
> 
> I will make you a wager. I will post $100,000 with an attorney licensed in
> the State of New Jersey and you will do the same. You will come to my
> office here in New Jersey. I will provide you with a Pentium III computer
> with Windows 98 and any voice recognition software of your choice.  Once
> the machine is booted, I will remove the keyboard.

If you're going to to such a thing you at least ought to give him the ability
to pick the GUI of his choice.  You said "No GUI", not "Windows 98's GUI".  As
it turns out you can do a pretty good job on some of the pen-based systems;
the Newton was pretty darn good at this kind of thing and even the WinCE
devices are not so bad.  Picking Windows 98 is a lot like cutting off both his
legs and expecting him to run the hurdles.

As for GUIs being no more useful than CLIs if you take away the keyboard, that
depends entirely on what you're trying to do.  Image manipulation kind of
sucks through a CLI, just as much as wordprocessing is a lot tougher without a
keyboard.

jim

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

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            24-Nov-99 20:29:10
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 16:50:17
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Wed, 24 Nov 1999 15:52:47, uno@40th.com (uno@40th.com) wrote:

> 
> Bob Germer? (bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com?) wrote (Wed, 24 Nov 1999 09:11:21
-0500):
> >Speech is a substitute for a keyboard, an alternate form of keyboard. The
> >mouse is merely another form of a keyboard. The point is that without a
> >keyboard, a GUI is no more useful than a CLI program.
> 
> Yes, Bob, "everything's a keyboard".  That's the only way you could
> ever 'win' an argument, Bob, is by making stuff up.  Who, exactly,
> is impressed?
> 
They *are* all I/O devices, and since computers started out with only 
keyboards (well, switchboards preceded, but you could hardly call 
those an *interface*, as they were effectively rebuilding the CPU), 
everything that came after it (lightpens (yes, they are still around: 
they're used in Belgium for electronic voting), rodents, touch 
screens, even handwriting and speech recognition) could arguably be 
called substitutes for keyboards.

> >Put up or shut up
> 
> I've already won, Bob.  Not much to it:  A computer does not
> need a keyboard.
> 
It will need some sort of I/O device, unless you're aiming for the 
electronic solipsist. Point is, if you look at raw input speed, 
nothing today beats the good old letterplank. It is therefore A Good 
Thing <TM> in those environments/tasks that envolve large amounts of 
textual input by humans, to look at a UI that makes the best use of 
that keyboard. I have yet to meet an experienced wordprocessor who 
actually likes a mouse.

In that light is the approach WordPerfect took with its version 5.1 
(mouse, menu, function keys, keyboard shortcuts) a very sensible one, 
allowing for gradual "education" of the user, until (s)he is able to 
make a keyboard smoke. I knew one secretary who managed to regularly 
output letters (albeit with the help of a Dvorak layout) in the time 
it took her boss to actually dictate it. Add twenty seconds to print 
it.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net

Microsoft MVP -- Not!

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          24-Nov-99 21:54:25
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 19:59:02
Subj: Re: IBM Stock...

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>>Jeff Glatt
>>But clearly, when it comes to making/selling a home consumer product,
>>IBM just does not have what it takes to compete against smaller, leaner,
>>more efficient competition who are much more interested in that market,
>>and demonstrate a lot more competence at going after that market. Unless
>>you're managing a Fortune 500 company, IBM is not your ticket

>Bob Germer
>Sometime go into your local Mall. Ignore the Sears, Penneys, etc. Ignore
>the national chains. Go into the locally owned stores and franchise
>stores. Look at the teller machines. Find out how many of the POS machines
>(used to be called cash registers) have IBM logos.

Since when are retailers "home consumers"?

In any event, I see a variety of equipment used by retailers, and the
bulk of it used by mom and pop organizations is actually not IBM stuff
at all. You're still living in your 1950's dream world.

P.S. I see you *still* haven't managed to figure out how to get your
kill filter working yet. And you expect us to believe that you
actually set up and administer computers? Uh huh. Yep. Riiiiight.

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

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

From: jimf@frostbytes.com                               24-Nov-99 18:00:12
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 19:59:02
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com>

Karel Jansens wrote:
> I have yet to meet an experienced wordprocessor who
> actually likes a mouse.

Oh man do you get a thumbs up for this statement from me.  I HATE mouse-driven
wordprocessors.  MS Word is the worst damn thing I've ever seen in that
respect (even worse than the original MacWrite, and that's a hard act to
follow in terms of badness for typists).  There's no way at all to do even
simple editing tasks other than "delete character" without removing your hands
from the home row.  And that is a serious productivity destroyer to a
touch-typist.

I find myself blowing out a document and then going back and proofing it. 
Problem is, I usually know when I made a mistake at the time but I won't
necessarily catch all of them later.  Word, at least, makes the proofing
process a lot easier (it has terrific spelling and grammar checking) but I
would prefer to be able to quickly correct as I go.

Wordperfect was pretty good but it used the mnemonic approach that tends to
cause finger-twisting (emacs does the same thing; the basic key bindings are
even similar).  That can lead to increased cases of RSI.  I long for
WordStar-style bindings, although we'd have to move the control key back to
where it should be.

jim

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

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

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             24-Nov-99 23:08:06
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 21:17:06
Subj: Re: More Boring Tholen Inconsistency and Hypocrisy

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <81fcif$3aj$2@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenantispam@hawaii.edu wrote:

-- snip --

> Curtis Bass writes:
>
> > Priceless!  Of course, I doubt that our friend Tholen will
> > appreciate the value of this post.
>
> What alleged value, Curtis?

See what I mean?

-- snip --


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

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

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             24-Nov-99 23:59:27
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 21:17:06
Subj: Re: Interesting Reading Comprehension Problem by Bass

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <81fcd3$3aj$1@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenantispam@hawaii.edu wrote:

-- snip --

> > Hell, no. As far as I am concerned, "Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2
> > functionality" *IS* a bullshit statement;
>
> Gee, not long ago you were not taking a position because of your
> ignorance.  Seems to have suddenly changed.

I am still not taking a position, Dave. What I did above was express an
opinion, nothing more. I can admit (and have, several times) that I do
not know the facts. Ergo, I do not take a position, and therefore have
no need to defend a position.  If my opinion is technically "wrong,"
then so what? It's only an opinion, after all.

-- snip --


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

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

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             25-Nov-99 00:52:29
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 21:17:06
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <81cu8l$21d$1@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenantispam@hawaii.edu wrote:

-- snip --

> Curtis Bass writes:

-- snip --

> > Wrong. What I initially posted was a JPEG proving you wrong.
>
> That never appeared here, Curtis.
>
> > That you never saw it is convenient for your "argument" I suppose,
>
> That deja.com didn't see it either, as noted by someone else,
> indicates the problem with propagation.  Convenience for my argument
> has nothing to do with it, Curtis.
>
> > but it doesn't change the fact that that was what I initially
> > posted.
>
> On what basis do you call it a "fact", Curtis?  Do you have some
> independent evidence to verify a timestamp?

http://www.remarq.com/transcript.asp?g=comp%2Eos%2Eos2%2Eadvocacy&tn=500
47087&sh=fd3ddff055f671b2&idx=-1

Most, if not all, of the thread is there, Dave. Peruse it at your
convenience, or ignore it the way you usually ignore inconvenient
evidence.

And, yes, my original post, with the attached JPEG, is there also. For
the record, the date of that post is 10/29/1999.

The date of the post in which I imply you to be inept is dated
11/01/1999, two days after the JPEG submission.

(Like shooting fish in a barrel.)

-- snip --


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         25-Nov-99 00:56:28
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 21:17:06
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Lucien writes:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Answer the question put to you:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Take the two simple tests, Lucien.

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note the refusal to answer a basic, central question -
>>>>>>>>>>>>> looks like we've hit another major soft spot.

>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

>>>>>>>>>>> Note again the pat refusal to answer the question.

>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

>>>>>>>>> ....and we see the refusal again

>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>> .....and again...

>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>> ....and again.

>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

> ....and again.

Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

> The question again for the reader's reference:

The same response again for the reader's reference:

> According to your statement, under what conditions
> does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
> functionality..."?

Perhaps you'd like to tell me how the statement you keep pointing to
applies to the JDK sentence, Lucien.

> Here is Dave's statement again for reference:

Unnecessary, Lucien, again.  I will restore my two simple tests,
however, given that you've never taken them.

> "The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
> 'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
> information."

And how does that concern the JDK sentence, Lucien, as you've repeatedly
insisted?

Note again the pat "refusal" to take the two simple tests:

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Meanwhile, I noticed that you failed to answer my little test,
Lucien:

] #1:  It rained today.                                              
]                                                                    
] #2:  It rained today until sunset.                                 
]                                                                    
] The question:  did it rain all of the day or only some of the day? 
]                                                                    
] The word "rained", by itself, doesn't indicate duration, therefore 
] one cannot determine an unambiguous answer to the question in the  
] absence of other information.  Yet I will claim that the answer to 
] the question is in fact unambiguous in the case of statement #2.   
]                                                                    
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.                                    

Test grade:  F.

Here's another little test for you, Lucien:

] #3:  It did rain today.
] 
] #4:  It didn't rain today.
] 
] The question:  what fraction of the day did it rain?
] 
] Structurally, the two statements are identical, yet there is nothing
] in statement #3 that allows the question to be answered unambiguously,
] while there is something in statement #4 that does allow the question
] to be answered unambigiously.
] 
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.

Test grade:  F.

Perhaps readers will notice how 3-4 corresponds to the "prevent costly
mistakes" thread, where the quantification is provided by the definition
of a word and not the structure.  Perhaps readers will notice how 1-2
corresponds to the "Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality" thread,
where the additional information resolves what would otherwise be
ambiguous.

Yet more evidence that you're playing your own "infantile game".   
Or are you really that idiotic?                                    

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         25-Nov-99 01:08:20
  To: All                                               24-Nov-99 21:17:06
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.  One old
quotation is worth preserving, namely:

CB] This is my final post in this subthread.

Obviously he couldn't resist, just like so many before him.  Those who
ignore history are destined to repeat it, destined to become hypocrites.

Curtis Bass writes:

> It's allowing me to not end the phrase with a preposition, Dave,
> but rather, a verb.

Tell me, Curtis, do any of the following end with a preposition:

   "sit up"

   "speak up"

   "your time is up"

   "from third grade up"

   "the score is 15 up"

   "the wind is up"

> I suppose I could have used, "to which you obviously failed to measure
> up."

I suppose you could have used that too, Curtis.

> If you wanna call me "inept" over this, well, have a ball.

Having a ball is irrelevant, Curtis.

> Such does not bother me.

Obviously, considering how you've failed to retract your other "inept"
claims.

> It obviously does bother you.

I'm simply countering your misinformation, Curtis.

> OTOH, I have often seen the phrase "upon which" at the beginning of a
> phrase, so why not "up to which?"

In what context, Curtis?

> It certainly isn't as if you've never made gramatical and/or spelling
> errors (assuming that "up to which" is such an error).

The issue here is being "inept", Curtis.  People in glass houses
shouldn't throw stones.

> As I have said many times before, believe whatever fantasy makes you
> warm and cozy.

What alleged "fantasy", Curtis?

> My alleged "poor writing" isn't what I am asking you to deny, Tholen.

So you're writing out of context again, eh Curtis?

> I see you've lost track of what's going on, yet again.

On the contrary, I've kept track of what's going on.  You're the one
writing out of context.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               24-Nov-99 20:32:14
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 03:28:22
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Dave Tholen wrote:
> 
> The issue here is being "inept", Curtis.  People in glass houses
> shouldn't throw stones.

The statement above, as stated by Tholen, is the dictionary definition of
irony.
 
> So you're writing out of context again, eh Curtis?
> You're the one writing out of context.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all this?"
"People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones."

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         25-Nov-99 01:16:22
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 03:28:22
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.  One old
quotation is worth preserving, namely:

CB] This is my final post in this subthread.

Obviously he couldn't resist, just like so many before him.  Those who
ignore history are destined to repeat it, destined to become hypocrites.

Curtis Bass writes:

> -- snip --

> -- snip --

> -- snip --

> -- snip --

> -- snip --

I see you're working overtime to destroy context, Curtis.

> Okay, boys and girls, pay close attention to that last statement made
> by our friend, Dave Tholen.

On what basis do you call me your friend, Curtis?

> Now, go to the following url, and enter the word "sincerity" where it
> says, "Dictionary Look Up:"

I see you're now engaging in a diversionary tactic, given that we're
discussing the meaning of "hypocrisy", not "sincerity".  

> You lose again, Tholen.

Obviously not, Curtis.

> Go ahead. Deny it.

I can deny that you were sincere, Curtis.  Witness your continued
postings in this subthread.

> (ROTFLMAO!!)

Hypocrite.

> -- snip --

> (ROTFLMAO!!)

Hypocrite.

> -- snip --

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         25-Nov-99 01:17:23
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 03:28:22
Subj: Re: More Boring Tholen Inconsistency and Hypocrisy

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.

Curtis Bass writes:

> See what I mean?

See what I mean about your pontification, Curtis?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         25-Nov-99 01:21:22
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 03:28:22
Subj: Re: Interesting Reading Comprehension Problem by Bass

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.

Curtis Bass writes:

> I am still not taking a position, Dave.

Balderdash, Curtis:

CB] As far as I am concerned, "Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2
CB] functionality" *IS* a bullshit statement;

> What I did above was express an opinion, nothing more.

On what basis do you call it an "opinion", Curtis?  How is your
statement *not* taking a position?

I smell another semantic argument erupting.

> I can admit (and have, several times) that I do not know the facts.

Didn't stop you from calling it a "bullshit statement", Curtis.

> Ergo, I do not take a position,

Balderdash, Curtis:

CB] As far as I am concerned, "Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2
CB] functionality" *IS* a bullshit statement;

> and therefore have no need to defend a position.

Defend the following statement of yours, Curtis:

CB] As far as I am concerned, "Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2
CB] functionality" *IS* a bullshit statement;

> If my opinion is technically "wrong,"

On what basis do you call it an "opinion", Curtis?  How is your
statement *not* taking a position?

> then so what?

Then you should retract it, Curtis.

> It's only an opinion, after all.

On what basis do you call it an "opinion", Curtis?  How is your
statement *not* taking a position?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         25-Nov-99 02:00:28
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 03:28:22
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.

Curtis Bass writes:

> Most, if not all, of the thread is there, Dave.

Is that the best you can do, Curtis, namely point to the entire
Navigator 4.7 thread?  That's one step removed from pointing to the
entire newsgroup, and two steps removed from pointing to all of
USENET.

> Peruse it at your convenience,

Unable to supply the proof, you decide to have somebody else wade
through hundreds of postings in an attempt to find that which did
not propagate to our news server or deja.com, the latter according
to another reader.

> or ignore it the way you usually ignore inconvenient evidence.

You're presupposing the existence of evidence, Curtis.

> And, yes, my original post, with the attached JPEG, is there also.

Then why didn't you point to it, Curtis?

> For the record, the date of that post is 10/29/1999.

For the record, the following predates October 29, Curtis:

CB] Specifically, if one looks at the available facts, it's reasonable
CB] to conclude that IBM's JDK 1.1.8 for OS/2 does not implement *all*
CB] of 1.2's functionality, but only *some* of it (assuming that it
CB] implements *any* of it at all). If that wasn't the case (i.e., if
CB] it implemented *all* of 1.2's funtionality), it stands to reason
CB] that the JDK would have been *called* 1.2.
CB]
CB] OTOH, to flat out state that 1.1.8 *does not* implement 1.2
CB] functionality implies that it doesn't implement *any* of 1.2's
CB] funtionality, which is also incorrect (again, assuming that 1.1.8
CB] does indeed implement any 1.2 funtionality at all).

Interesting that the above looks at "the available facts", whereas
more recently all you have to offer is what you've decided to call
an "opinion".

> The date of the post in which I imply you to be inept

Explicit use of the word "inept" is not an implication, Curtis.
I see you still haven't comprehended the definition of the word.

> is dated 11/01/1999, two days after the JPEG submission.

You mean the alleged JPEG submission, Curtis.  Remember, it never
made it here, Curtis.  I saw you calling me "inept" before any
such JPEG was available to me.

> (Like shooting fish in a barrel.)

How ironic, considering the following quotation:

CB] Are you trying to make OS/2 look bad? You're doing a fine job of
CB] it on at least two counts: 1) showing the world that an OS/2 ZIP
CB] archive tool is weaker than a Windows ZIP archive tool,
CB] and 2) showing the world that a certain OS/2 user is technically
CB] inept, yet stubborn beyond reason. 

You are wrong on both counts.

Meanwhile, another day has gone by, and you still haven't taken the
opportunity to post any of these allegedly unadmitted errors involving
your so-called "adversarial exchanges".

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               24-Nov-99 21:46:26
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 03:28:22
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Dave Tholen wrote:
> 
> Curtis Bass writes:
> 
> > Most, if not all, of the thread is there, Dave.
> > Peruse it at your convenience, or ignore it the way you usually 
> > ignore inconvenient evidence.
> 
> You're presupposing the existence of evidence, Curtis.

Yes he is.  It is logical to "presuppose" the existence of something which you
know exists.  Tholen is again restating the obvious, hoping that we will
believe that he was "erroneously presupposing" the existence of the evidence. 
Too bad the evidence does exist, just as Curtis said (and as Tholen
conveniently deleted from his reply).

http://www.remarq.com/transcript.asp?g=comp%2Eos%2Eos2%2Eadvocacy&tn=50047087&s
h=fd3ddff055f671b2&idx=-1

Meanwhile, note how Tholen has again ignored the evidence.  His restatement of
the obvious is his only answer to the evidence before him.  How pathetic!

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

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

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               24-Nov-99 21:47:13
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 03:28:22
Subj: Re: More Boring Tholen Inconsistency and Hypocrisy

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Dave Tholen wrote:
> 
> Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:
> 
> CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
> CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.
> 
> I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.
> 
> Curtis Bass writes:
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> See what I mean about your pontification, Curtis?

See what I mean about your infantile game?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

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

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               24-Nov-99 21:50:18
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 03:28:22
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Dave Tholen wrote:
> 
> I see you're working overtime to destroy context, Curtis.

How hypocritical, coming from the idiot working overtime to destroy context.
 
> > Okay, boys and girls, pay close attention to that last statement made
> > by our friend, Dave Tholen.
> 
> On what basis do you call me your friend, Curtis?

An excellent question.

> > Now, go to the following url, and enter the word "sincerity" where it
> > says, "Dictionary Look Up:"
> 
> I see you're now engaging in a diversionary tactic, given that we're
> discussing the meaning of "hypocrisy", not "sincerity".

I see Dave has failed to examine the evidence presented to him again.  What a
surprise!

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

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

From: esther@bitranch.com                               25-Nov-99 03:13:11
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 03:28:22
Subj: Re: Comdex Update

From: esther@bitranch.com (Esther Schindler)

Cory! It's been a long time since I saw you, virtually or otherwise. 
:-)

From what I'm told, IBM doesn't have the rights to enough OS/2 
components to "set it free" -- and I'm not just referring to the Bonus
Pack. Recognize that several chunks of OS/2 were farmed out, at one 
time or another (particularly in the 2.0 days) and the contracts may 
not permit such a thing.

Which is completely aside from whether anybody at IBM would _want_ to 
do this, which doesn't seem likely.

--Esther

On Wed, 24 Nov 1999 11:51:30, kiyoinc@ibm.XOUT.net (cory hamasaki) 
wrote:

| On Wed, 24 Nov 1999 02:11:46, ET <gears@idir.net> wrote:
| 
| > Raymond then poses a few questions;
| > 
| > "So at two years out, the crystal ball gets a bit cloudy.  Which of
| > several futures we get depends on questions like: will the DOJ break up
| > MS?  Might BeOS or OS/2 or Mac OS/X or some other niche closed-source
| > OS, or some completely new design, find a way to go open and compete
| > effectively with Linux's 30-year-old design?  Will Y2K-related problems
| > have thrown the world economy into a deep enough depression to throw off
| > everybody's timetables?"
| 
| It's time to set OS/2 free.  IBM should press the source tree onto CD 
| and make it available at cost.  The Team at Austin can consolidate 
| contributions.
| 
| cory hamasaki 
| 
| 



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

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

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  24-Nov-99 22:38:03
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 03:28:22
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

<cbass2112@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:81hd3g$7nv$1@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <81fdhn$3aj$3@news.hawaii.edu>,

> > >     up to which you obviously failed to measure
> >
> > What is "up" doing at the beginning of that phrase, Curtis?
>
> It's allowing me to not end the phrase with a preposition, Dave, but
> rather, a verb. I suppose I could have used, "to which you obviously
> failed to measure up." If you wanna call me "inept" over this, well,
> have a ball. Such does not bother me.

And it's doing the job very well, Curtis.  To paraphrase, "Tholen is
something, up with which I will not put."

> It obviously does bother you.
>
> OTOH, I have often seen the phrase "upon which" at the beginning of a
> phrase, so why not "up to which?"
>
> It certainly isn't as if you've never made gramatical and/or spelling
> errors (assuming that "up to which" is such an error).
>
> > >     is the height of hypocrisy, Dave.
> > >
> > > What you just did was inept.
> >
> > How ironic, coming from someone whose writing is "inept".
>
> As I have said many times before, believe whatever fantasy makes you
> warm and cozy.
>
> > > Go ahead, Dave.
> >
> > With what, Curtis?
> >
> > > Deny it. (LOL)
> >
> > Why should I deny your poor writing, Curtis?
>
> My alleged "poor writing" isn't what I am asking you to deny, Tholen. I
> see you've lost track of what's going on, yet again.

Tholen should write only *half* as clearly as you do!

- Joe



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

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

From: OS2Guy@WarpCity.com                               24-Nov-99 20:08:21
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 03:28:22
Subj: Re: What Happened to Team OS/2??????????

From: Tim Martin <OS2Guy@WarpCity.com>

Brian Mueller wrote:

> Team OS/2 web sites (www.teamos2.org , www.teamos2.com) not
> responding. What happened?????

Try again.  It works here just fine.

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: forgitaboutit@fake.com                            25-Nov-99 00:15:14
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 03:28:22
Subj: Re: Bye-Bye OS/2

From: David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com>

In article <38349927.2B46D9CC@stny.rr.com>, mamodeo@stny.rr.com says...

>> >Speaking of being accurate, IBM licensed SDD so that OS/2 users can use a
base
>> >version for free.  The base version contains all of the drivers.
>> 
>> Which isn't available yet and still doesn't fully support the card.
>> Be accurate.

>The entire product is still in beta and has a free trial for 21 days.  When
the
>beta period is over, the base product will be available for free.  No
purchase
>necessary at any stage of the game.  The issue of "full support" (meaning the
>3D accelerated aspects) is being addressed by Scitech.
 
So we can talk about betas now? Sorry. And "being address" isn't the same as 
available. 

I'll come out on record and declare that OS/2 will never have 3d support, 
Scitech notwithstanding. And as for "no purchase necessary" try reading their 
site. You can't even go above 85mhz with the free pack.

As usual, you won't be able to access the full abilities of the card. Even 
after the software is released and you buy it.

>> >> >> >Yes and no.  NT has X emulators and much of the *nix stuff has been
ported.
>> >> >> >OS/2 has X servers and most *nix stuff has been ported.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> What Unix program is available on OS/2 and not NT?  Prove what you
say instead
>> >> >> of just declaring it.
>> >>
>> >> >Enlightenment.  XF86 itself.  Gimp (it was barely ported to Win32 as I
>> >> >understand).  If I used more *nix apps, I'd name more.
>> >>
>> >> That's it. Three is NOT most.
>> 
>> >Sorry, but I don't have personal experience with "most" and hence "most"
are
>> >not on the tip of my tongue.  Needless to say, more *nix apps have been
ported
>> >to OS/2 than Win32.
>> 
>> You have yet to prove this. You've giving up three examples.

>You only asked for one:
>What Unix program is available on OS/2 and not NT?"

True. But you said "most". Don't offer if you can't back it up.

>> An inferior shell,

>Which one would that be?

Enlightment. You brought it up.

>> Gimp(which has a Win32 version)

>Which isn't stable in Win32, but is perfectly usable in OS/2.

If you can mention beta Scitech drivers, I can mention Gimp. You said Gimp 
isn't available for Win32. I've proven otherwise. You say that 3d support is 
being address by Scitech. Where's your proof?

>> I'll name several X-WinPro, SuperX, MI/X, tell you what, look here 
>> http://www.rahul.net/kenton/xsites.html#XMicrosoft and then get back to me.

>After examining several of these sites, I can say that the above mentioned
>products are a far cry from XF86/2.  These products operate in one of two
>modes:
>1] 100% remote, where the window manager and all applications run on another
>box and their displays are exported to your PC
>2] 75% remote, where the window manager runs locally, caching bitmaps and
>speeding up data transfer through clever caching, but the applications still
>run remotely.

>In point of fact (admittedly without examining every lead off of every
article
>on the web page you mentioned) I would say that there are no native Win32
apps
>that can run in these X server sessions the way EMX X applications can run
>natively in XF86/2.  Is this true to your experience or have I got it all
>wrong?

Hate to burst it to you, but in a corporate enviromnent, X-Windows is used to 
run Unix apps. No one cares if one can port something using an EMX equivalent 
because EMX brings nothing to the table that you can't get from Unix and
Win32.

>>> >> and as for Gimp, forget about it. There are what ten graphic packages?
More?
>>> 
>>> >That's not the point, seeing as how you asked about Unix programs.
>>> 
>>> And you named ONE that has a Win32 version. Keep trying.

>An unusable Win32 version.

More usable than Scitechs "being addressed" OS/2 3d support. 

>>> >> Besides Linux and OS/2, two OSses desperate for graphics, but as you
say,
>>> >> Gimp is available, but not stable for Windows.
>>> 
>>> >Hence under Windows, it is useless.  Under OS/2, this is not the case.
>>> 
>>> Certainly is unless you install X/Free86. Works natively under Windows.

>The X version works natively in OS/2.  I've also heard of people running it
>under PMX and eXceed.

It works under OS/2 if you install X/Free86. That is not native.

>> >> That leaves Enlightenment.  If Enlightenment is it, OS/2 has less than I 
thought.
>> 
>> >Good thing that's not "it".
>> 
>> It's all YOU listed.

>It's all you asked for.

But you said "most". Back it up. You asked for one X-Server. I gave you many.

>> >> I do use Unix. What about tools like Cygnus or MKS? Why doesn't OS/2
actually
>> >> have tools that people who use Unix actually need and use?
>> 
>> >Like GCC, RCS, Grep, make, diff, ......?
>> 
>> All available under Windows. Keep trying.

>You asked me if useful tools were available.  They are.

I asked for tools that were not available under WinNT. You haven't given me 
much.

>> >What do Cygnus and MKS do?
>> 
>> MKS is a commercial set of unix tools.

>Which do what exactly?

They are Win32 ports of unix tools. grep, csh, bsh, etc...

>> Cygnus is freeware, but charges for support and was just purchased by 
>> RedHat.  Both are standards for people who work with Unix and Windows for 
>> a living.

>You still haven't established what they do.

See above.


>> >> >Which scripting languages can you use in NT that you can't use in OS/2? 
 Prove
>> >> >what you say instead of just declaring it.
>> >>
>> >> VB and Javascript.
>> 
>> >0 for 2.
>> 
>> Really? And how can OS/2 use either of these for scripting the OS/2? Try 
>> issuing some Enlightenment instead of invoking it.

>VABasic & Netscape.

First, IBM doesn't even sell VABasic anymore. Second, you canot use Netscape
to 
create a script to say, add a user to the system, or run programs.

You are mistaken again.

>> >You've irrelevantly twisted my statement.  I have more control over the
>> >installation process in OS/2.  Please reread my statement.
>> 
>> How so? Explain.

>I was referring to installation procedures and you are referring to available
>features of newly installed hardware.

I'm refering to install options. You claimed and have yet to back up the 
statement that OS/2 gives one more installation control.

Try, just once, to back something up.

>> >> >> Not at all. A virus under OS/2 in a DOS box can erase system files.
Under NT in
>> >> >> a user or power user mode, the virus cannot do this.
>> >>
>> >> >If a virus attempts direct physical disk manipulations in OS/2 (which
are
>> >> >necessary to overwrite boot sectors) it will be intercepted by the
operating
>> >> >system.  Try it some time.
>> >>
>> >> If a virus attempts to perform a "del *.*" in the OS/2 system directory, 
it
>> >> will proceed merrily along. Under NT, it will fail in all but the admin
mode.
>> 
>> >And how many virii shell out to the command shell and execute "del *.*"?
>> 
>> You don't need to shell out. A simple system command will do. And really, 
>> it point is that it can be done under OS/2 easily. Not so under NT. Don't 
>> believe me?
>> 
>> Try it.

>And this can't happen in a user's directory under NT?  

That's right. Under NT, I can easily change access to prevent programs from 
deleting files.

>I never claimed OS/2 was
>secure.  What I did claim is that it cannot run (and therefore is not
>vulnerable to) the far more common Winxx based virii, which is an absolute
>truth.  I don't have to grimace and fear every time I open an e-mail message
>from someone I don't know, or worry that my word processor is sending off
>hundreds of messages to my friends with the web addresses of porn sites.

I don't grimace either and I still have more security than OS/2. I have the 
best of both worlds.

You just have an unsecure system.

>> >Runs any application that I want to use, and since the point was why I
would be
>> >using OS/2 instead of NT your "factoid" does little to counter that.
>> 
>> Fine. That doesn't change the fact that if you want more applications, OS/2 
is
>> not the OS to use.

>>Runs any application that I want to use, and since the point was why I would 
be
>>using OS/2 instead of NT your "factoid" does little to counter that.

Fine. That doesn't change the fact that if you want more applications, OS/2 is
not the OS to use.

>> >And all you could do was run WinZip, Partition Magic (which was 100MB of
it
>> >right there ;-)), and Notepad.  Sorry, but that doesn't constitute a
useable
>> >system for me.  My OS/2 functional install is several hundred MB smaller
than
>> >what used to be my minimum NT functional install.
>> 
>> That just the NT partition. See, some of us install the OS on one partition 
and
>> apps on another.
>> Fully usable, with more apps, more hardware support, and STILL less space
than
>> OS/2.

>Sorry, but that's just not true in my experience, nor in the experience of
many
>others.  

The only thing you've shown is that your experience is faulty and you don't 
know how to install NT. I've got an NT installation almost 40 megs smaller
than 
your OS/2 installation.

This is why people lump OS/2 users together. You guys try to say that Windows 
is unstable or slow despite all evidence to the contrary. Denial is a
religious 
art form in this group.

>NT is just plain bigger than OS/2.  That's nothing to be ashamed of,
>it's just a fact.

The only fact is that you are mistaken. No shame in that.

>> Give it up.

>Practice what you preach.

Don't need to preach. I'm right.
-- 
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

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

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

From: mbesy@one.net.au                                  25-Nov-99 15:52:21
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 03:28:22
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows... 

From: "Piers B." <mbesy@one.net.au>

Oh yippy, I just can't keep my dypers on about another version of Unix!!!!

Move on to a newsgroup that might have interest in your enthused ideas for
OS X.  We already have the OS we want. Thankyou!

Piers Bray



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

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

From: znu@znu.dhs.org                                   25-Nov-99 05:33:29
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 03:28:22
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows... 

From: znu@znu.dhs.org (ZnU)

In article <383cc1e9@pink.one.net.au>, "Piers B." <mbesy@one.net.au> wrote:

> Oh yippy, I just can't keep my dypers on about another version of Unix!!!!
> 
> Move on to a newsgroup that might have interest in your enthused ideas for
> OS X.  We already have the OS we want. Thankyou!

::scratches head and wonders why someone wouldn't be interested in an
easy-to-use OS based on one of the most robust and mature code bases in
the world::

-- 
All parts should go together without forcing.  You must remember that the
parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you.  Therefore, if you
can't get them together again, there must be a reason.  By all means, do
not use a hammer.
           --IBM maintenance manual, 1925

ZnU <znu@znu.dhs.org> | <http://znu.dhs.org>

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

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

From: bhenry@mediaone.net                               25-Nov-99 06:00:21
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 03:28:22
Subj: Re: Microsoft and OS/2 Software...

From: bhenry@mediaone.net (Bill)

In <382CA1C7.1AAE9DDB@mediaone.net>, fmc <fmc@mediaone.net> writes:
>Thomas Galley wrote:
>
>> Hey!
>>
>> It has nothing to do with the american military, but with military in
>> general. I think it kind of strange that what is now perceived by many
>> as an anarchist medium (sorry for the big words) has its origins in the
>> military.
>
>The fact is, many technological advances that were developed by or for the
military have
>found their way into civilian society.  Some of this technology, like
automatic weapons,
>C4 explosive, and  even the Internet, can be used for destructive purposes,
so it should
>come as no surprise that it would appeal to anarchists.
>
>> I say again, I wanted in no way insult the american army, though there
>> sure did happen a lot of things after WW2 that they should not be too
>> proud of.
>
>Yeah.  They may never get over the shame of  having to put American troops
under united
>nations command.

Yeah, and napalming civilians in Viet Nam is pretty hard to justify also. .
.though I
guess it was for their own good. . . as in Guatamala, Nicaragua, Panama,
Honduras,
etc we sorta` slapped em around for their own good I guess. . .helped them to
develop a good work ethic for American corporations.

>
>fmc
>
>>
>>
>> Sincere greetings
>>
>> Thomas
>>
>> fmc wrote:
>> >
>> > Thomas Galley wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hey!
>> > >
>> > > The internet may have started as an american military research project
>> > > (beurk!!!), but it became "the Internet" just after Europeans in Geneva
>> > > (ever heard of Tim Berners-Lee) invented the WWW, mind you!
>> >
>> > Beurk?  Are you tossing your cookies because the American Military played 
a pivotal
>> > role in saving Europe from itself in 2 World Wars?  Was it their role in

Sure, WWII was a walk in the park for Americans but did we play a pivotal
role? I'm
a little uncomfortable with that characterization. It really seems that we
only
stepped in after the British and the Soviets had beat the piss out of the
Nazis. The 
volume of resources that the Germans had dumped into the blackhole of the
Eastern
Front had really left them kinda` anemic. While it was certainly exciting, it
was
somewhat like beating up on someone who just crawled out from underneath an 
LA freeway pileup. . .not enough challenge to earn bragging rights.

>> > preventing a post war communist takeover of the entire continent, or has  
the

Are you certain that that would have been such a bad thing? A decade after the 

collapse of Stalinism, most Eastern Europeans have experienced a decline in 
living standards. Pretty hard to explain from the context of the superiority
of
capitalism. . .

>> > collapse of the  totalitarian regimes of Eastern Europe and the USSR led
to your
>> > stomach upset?
>> >
>> > fmc
>>
>> --
>> PIRONET INTRANET AG
>> Thomas Paul Galley, MA (CCNA) - Internet/Intranet Trainee
>> Im Mediapark 5 - 50670 Kln
>> Tel.: +49 (0)221 454 3833 - FAX: +49 (0)221 454 3810
>> mailto:tgalley@pironet.com - http://www.pironet.com
>> certified professional Java Programmer (see link below)
>> http://www.tekmetrics.com/transcript.shtml?pid=57102
>

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

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

From: calcio@erie.net                                   25-Nov-99 06:13:23
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 03:28:22
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows... 

From: calcio@erie.net

If/when I see MacOS X on intel I hope it doesn't cost $799. Apple
tends to be a bit out of touch when it comes to pricing.



On Tue, 23 Nov 1999 08:58:30 -0500, "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net>
wrote:

>3 letters...OS X! Just wait...it's coming to an Intel processor near you...
>
>--
>Ruel Smith
>Cincinnati, OH
>
>CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?
>
>"Mike Stephen" <mike@lionsgate.com> wrote in message
>news:T3uY3.1$874.8381@news.bctel.net...
>>
>> Although BEOS is miles ahead of Windows, it is only as good as Linux,
>> and is far behind OS/2
>>
>>
>>
>> I just finished my first week with Beos.  I must say I was hoping for
>> more...  I came from the OS/2 WPS area and I have noticed more and
>> more OS/2 users are having to leave OS/2 (due to lack of future
>> support from IBM) and are looking for alternatives.
>>
>>
>> I tried Linux and FreeBSD but they have rather clunky multitasking,
>> and have poorly written user interfaces (KDE and GNOME).  The UI is
>> patterned after Windows and in my opinion it is just as flawed as the
>> Windows interface is.  I would have hoped that the UI writers would be
>> able to vastly improve upon Windows.....  It appears that none of the
>> UI programmers for KDE, Gnome or BE have ever used the OS/2 WPS.
>>
>>
>> If only some other operating system writers would at lease look into
>> incorporating SOM and DSOM into a corba compliant WPS type of
>> interface.  Millions of OS/2 users would flock to such an operating
>> system.  BEOS is slightly better than Linux, but not as good as I was
>> hoping...  Its multitasking is not as fluid as OS/2, its multimedia
>> video support is not as good as OS/2.. Its multimedia sound capability
>> is much better than all the rest including Os/2.  However sound is
>> only a small part of multimedia.  Video is more important, and I was
>> lead to believe that Beos was a leader in Video.  Well OS/2 does more
>> video formats and does it much better than Beos m(at the operating
>> system level, not at an application level)!  Running two videos as
>> once tends to tax Beos to the limit.  Whereas I can run three or four
>> videos in OS/2....  Hmmmmm wouldn't it be great if we could get IBM to
>> spin off the os2 group as a separate company so that we could all get
>> updated operating systems that work?
>>
>> Stability of Beos is a bit better than Windows, but not as stable as
>> Warp OS/2.  It is about the same as Linux.  I Was able to lock up a
>> few different apps during the week that required a hard reboot to
>> clear. The multitasking is a bit clunky as well.  Warp seems to have a
>> best compromise scheduler that allows multitasking
>> background/foreground apps better than any other operating system to
>> date.  Pity that some developers seem to miss out on this aspect of
>> Warp OS/2.  I can only guess that it is not due to stupidity, but
>> rather that these same developers are simply not aware of how high the
>> bar has been placed with Warp OS/2.  If all you have ever used
>> includes Windows and Linux, then Beos might seem to look good.
>> However from a long time user of OS/2Warp,  can say that Beos needs a
>> whole lot more to even be considered in the same league as Warp.
>>
>> So the search goes on.  I want to replace Warp Os/2, but so far
>> nothing is anywhere near as easy to use or as reliable.  too bad IBM
>> sold out to Microsoft and basically buried OS/2....
>>
>>
>
>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http
(1:109/42)

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

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               25-Nov-99 01:58:17
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 03:28:22
Subj: Re: Bye-Bye OS/2

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

"David H. McCoy" wrote:
> 
> In article <38349927.2B46D9CC@stny.rr.com>, mamodeo@stny.rr.com says...
> 
> >> >Speaking of being accurate, IBM licensed SDD so that OS/2 users can use
a base
> >> >version for free.  The base version contains all of the drivers.
> >>
> >> Which isn't available yet and still doesn't fully support the card.
> >> Be accurate.
> 
> >The entire product is still in beta and has a free trial for 21 days.  When 
the
> >beta period is over, the base product will be available for free.  No
purchase
> >necessary at any stage of the game.  The issue of "full support" (meaning
the
> >3D accelerated aspects) is being addressed by Scitech.
> 
> So we can talk about betas now? Sorry. And "being address" isn't the same as
> available.

Fair enough.  I'll just point out that Scitech is a professional company that
has been consistently delivering what they promise, usually in a timely
manner.
 
> I'll come out on record and declare that OS/2 will never have 3d support,
> Scitech notwithstanding.

And you will be shown wrong, in due time.

> And as for "no purchase necessary" try reading their
> site. You can't even go above 85mhz with the free pack.

85MHz!  I should hope not!  Not a monitor on the planet that could do vertical
refresh at that speed.
 
> As usual, you won't be able to access the full abilities of the card. Even
> after the software is released and you buy it.

Until the support improves, which it has been steadily.  Why ignore the
progress they have been making and assume their support will be stagnant?

> >> >> >> >Yes and no.  NT has X emulators and much of the *nix stuff has
been ported.
> >> >> >> >OS/2 has X servers and most *nix stuff has been ported.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> What Unix program is available on OS/2 and not NT?  Prove what you
say 
> >> >> >> instead of just declaring it.
> >> >>
> >> >> >Enlightenment.  XF86 itself.  Gimp (it was barely ported to Win32 as
I
> >> >> >understand).  If I used more *nix apps, I'd name more.
> >> >>
> >> >> That's it. Three is NOT most.
> >>
> >> >Sorry, but I don't have personal experience with "most" and hence "most" 
are
> >> >not on the tip of my tongue.  Needless to say, more *nix apps have been
ported
> >> >to OS/2 than Win32.
> >>
> >> You have yet to prove this. You've giving up three examples.
> 
> >You only asked for one:
> >What Unix program is available on OS/2 and not NT?"
> 
> True. But you said "most". Don't offer if you can't back it up.

Just thought of another.  XAnim.

> >> An inferior shell,
> 
> >Which one would that be?
> 
> Enlightment. You brought it up.

What's allegedly inferior about it?

> >> Gimp(which has a Win32 version)
> 
> >Which isn't stable in Win32, but is perfectly usable in OS/2.
> 
> If you can mention beta Scitech drivers, I can mention Gimp. You said Gimp
> isn't available for Win32.

And where have I stated this?  Let's go to the videotape, shall we?  Here's my
first mention of it:  "Gimp (it was barely ported to Win32 as I understand)."

> I've proven otherwise.

You didn't need to.

> You say that 3d support is being address by Scitech. Where's your proof?

news.scitechsoft.com -> scitech.display.doctor.os2.beta

Unfortunately, no service seems to archive their past postings to which I
could
refer.

I'll also point out that a commitment by a professional corporation with a
history of delivering products has quite a bit more weight than a half-baked
port by a few hobbyists.

> >> I'll name several X-WinPro, SuperX, MI/X, tell you what, look here
> >> http://www.rahul.net/kenton/xsites.html#XMicrosoft and then get back to
me.
> 
> >After examining several of these sites, I can say that the above mentioned
> >products are a far cry from XF86/2.  These products operate in one of two
> >modes:
> >1] 100% remote, where the window manager and all applications run on
another
> >box and their displays are exported to your PC
> >2] 75% remote, where the window manager runs locally, caching bitmaps and
> >speeding up data transfer through clever caching, but the applications
still
> >run remotely.
> 
> >In point of fact (admittedly without examining every lead off of every
article
> >on the web page you mentioned) I would say that there are no native Win32
apps
> >that can run in these X server sessions the way EMX X applications can run
> >natively in XF86/2.  Is this true to your experience or have I got it all
> >wrong?
> 
> Hate to burst it to you, but in a corporate enviromnent, X-Windows is used
to
> run Unix apps. No one cares if one can port something using an EMX
equivalent
> because EMX brings nothing to the table that you can't get from Unix and
Win32.

The corporate environment has little to do with our discussion.  Your X
"Servers" for win32 are nothing more than X display software.  They are not
bona-fide servers.

> >>> >> and as for Gimp, forget about it. There are what ten graphic
packages? More?
> >>>
> >>> >That's not the point, seeing as how you asked about Unix programs.
> >>>
> >>> And you named ONE that has a Win32 version. Keep trying.
> 
> >An unusable Win32 version.
> 
> More usable than Scitechs "being addressed" OS/2 3d support.

But far less supported and far less potential to be usable.

> >>> >> Besides Linux and OS/2, two OSses desperate for graphics, but as you
say,
> >>> >> Gimp is available, but not stable for Windows.
> >>>
> >>> >Hence under Windows, it is useless.  Under OS/2, this is not the case.
> >>>
> >>> Certainly is unless you install X/Free86. Works natively under Windows.
> 
> >The X version works natively in OS/2.  I've also heard of people running it
> >under PMX and eXceed.
> 
> It works under OS/2 if you install X/Free86. That is not native.

That is native, actually, as the process is running on my local box using
native libraries in the real OS's environment (not a virtual environment). 
And
did you comprehend my second statement?

> >> >> That leaves Enlightenment.  If Enlightenment is it, OS/2 has less than 
I
> >> >> thought.
> >>
> >> >Good thing that's not "it".
> >>
> >> It's all YOU listed.
> 
> >It's all you asked for.
> 
> But you said "most". Back it up.  You asked for one X-Server. I gave you
many.

Actually I haven't found anything in the 5 or 6 products I looked at in your
reference that could be considered an X server.

> >> >> I do use Unix. What about tools like Cygnus or MKS? Why doesn't OS/2
actually
> >> >> have tools that people who use Unix actually need and use?
> >>
> >> >Like GCC, RCS, Grep, make, diff, ......?
> >>
> >> All available under Windows. Keep trying.
> 
> >You asked me if useful tools were available.  They are.
> 
> I asked for tools that were not available under WinNT. You haven't given me
> much.

Actually if you look a few lines up, you'll see that you asked:
"What about tools like Cygnus or MKS? Why doesn't OS/2 actually have tools
that
people who use Unix actually need and use?"

I've answered those questions.

> >> >What do Cygnus and MKS do?
> >>
> >> MKS is a commercial set of unix tools.
> 
> >Which do what exactly?
> 
> They are Win32 ports of unix tools. grep, csh, bsh, etc...

And you have to <pay> for that?  Egad!

> >> Cygnus is freeware, but charges for support and was just purchased by
> >> RedHat.  Both are standards for people who work with Unix and Windows for
> >> a living.
> 
> >You still haven't established what they do.
> 
> See above.
> 
> >> >> >Which scripting languages can you use in NT that you can't use in
OS/2?  Prove
> >> >> >what you say instead of just declaring it.
> >> >>
> >> >> VB and Javascript.
> >>
> >> >0 for 2.
> >>
> >> Really? And how can OS/2 use either of these for scripting the OS/2? Try
> >> issuing some Enlightenment instead of invoking it.
> 
> >VABasic & Netscape.
> 
> First, IBM doesn't even sell VABasic anymore.

That doesn't mean it doesn't run anymore.

> Second, you canot use Netscape to create a script to say, add a user to the 
> system, or run programs.

That wasn't part of the claim.

> You are mistaken again.

Not quite.

And now to backpedal a bit back to your claims from a few posts ago:
> Considering you can get Rexx and a other scripting languages that are NOT
> available under OS/2, it seems that OS/2 is at a disadvantage.  I'll rather
> have many options available and pick and choose than one built-in option.

You fail to see the value of having something built-in to the OS.  Programmers
can rely on REXX being install on *every* OS/2 system without exception. 
Hence, they can use it with impunity for deploying their applications, and use
it within their applications.  Do you also fail to see the power of having a
bsh or ksh installed as part of Unix OS's?  What does NT's shell have built-in
that anyone can use for scripting?  Out-of-the-box: squat.

> >> >You've irrelevantly twisted my statement.  I have more control over the
> >> >installation process in OS/2.  Please reread my statement.
> >>
> >> How so? Explain.
> 
> >I was referring to installation procedures and you are referring to
available
> >features of newly installed hardware.
> 
> I'm refering to install options. You claimed and have yet to back up the
> statement that OS/2 gives one more installation control.
> 
> Try, just once, to back something up.

It's hard to back up a subjective claim ("I find that it's easier to install
something when I can control the process, a feeling I don't get when I use
Winxx.") with solid fact.  It's my personal experience and you should treat it
as such, not as a claim against or for a given platform.

> >> >> >> Not at all. A virus under OS/2 in a DOS box can erase system files. 
Under 
> >> >> >> NT in a user or power user mode, the virus cannot do this.
> >> >>
> >> >> >If a virus attempts direct physical disk manipulations in OS/2 (which 
are
> >> >> >necessary to overwrite boot sectors) it will be intercepted by the
operating
> >> >> >system.  Try it some time.
> >> >>
> >> >> If a virus attempts to perform a "del *.*" in the OS/2 system
directory, it
> >> >> will proceed merrily along. Under NT, it will fail in all but the
admin mode.
> >>
> >> >And how many virii shell out to the command shell and execute "del *.*"?
> >>
> >> You don't need to shell out. A simple system command will do. And really,
> >> it point is that it can be done under OS/2 easily. Not so under NT. Don't
> >> believe me?
> >>
> >> Try it.
> 
> >And this can't happen in a user's directory under NT?
> 
> That's right. Under NT, I can easily change access to prevent programs from
> deleting files.

And I could make them read-only in Warp 4.  Or if we're talking about an ext2
filesystem mounted in OS/2, I can have full user permissions as well.  If
you're careless, anything can happen to your files.

If my system is so insecure, then bring it down.  Go right ahead.  My IP
changed since the last time I issued this unanswered challenge.  It is now
24.95.151.10.

> >I never claimed OS/2 was
> >secure.  What I did claim is that it cannot run (and therefore is not
> >vulnerable to) the far more common Winxx based virii, which is an absolute
> >truth.  I don't have to grimace and fear every time I open an e-mail
message
> >from someone I don't know, or worry that my word processor is sending off
> >hundreds of messages to my friends with the web addresses of porn sites.
> 
> I don't grimace either and I still have more security than OS/2. I have the
> best of both worlds.
> 
> You just have an unsecure system.

"Prove it, if you think you can."

> >> >Runs any application that I want to use, and since the point was why I
would be
> >> >using OS/2 instead of NT your "factoid" does little to counter that.
> >>
> >> Fine. That doesn't change the fact that if you want more applications,
OS/2 is
> >> not the OS to use.
> 
> >>Runs any application that I want to use, and since the point was why I
would be
> >>using OS/2 instead of NT your "factoid" does little to counter that.
> 
> Fine. That doesn't change the fact that if you want more applications, OS/2
is
> not the OS to use.

Ok.  We'll call this one quits here.  ;-)

Needless to say, your statement does not counter my original statement,
namely:
"7] Runs any application that I want to use"

> >> >And all you could do was run WinZip, Partition Magic (which was 100MB of 
it
> >> >right there ;-)), and Notepad.  Sorry, but that doesn't constitute a
useable
> >> >system for me.  My OS/2 functional install is several hundred MB smaller 
than
> >> >what used to be my minimum NT functional install.
> >>
> >> That just the NT partition. See, some of us install the OS on one
partition and
> >> apps on another.
> >> Fully usable, with more apps, more hardware support, and STILL less space 
than
> >> OS/2.
> 
> >Sorry, but that's just not true in my experience, nor in the experience of
many
> >others.
> 
> The only thing you've shown is that your experience is faulty and you don't
> know how to install NT. I've got an NT installation almost 40 megs smaller
than
> your OS/2 installation.

Try installing it after making an HPFS partition your first primary on your
first drive, then get back to me and tell me my experience is faulty and I
don't know how to install NT.

> This is why people lump OS/2 users together.

Like you're about to do now?

> You guys try to say that Windows is unstable or slow despite all evidence to 

> the contrary.

Win95 on my system gets used 1 day a week at most for a few hours.  In that
timespan, it crashes an average of 2 to 3 times.  OS/2 is in operation for the
rest of that week, 24/7.  It crashes on me when I write really crappy code
maybe once a week at most.

> Denial is a religious art form in this group.

Personal experience has little to do with denial.

> >NT is just plain bigger than OS/2.  That's nothing to be ashamed of,
> >it's just a fact.
> 
> The only fact is that you are mistaken. No shame in that.

Not according to what my hard drives told me.  Apparently YMMV.

> >> Give it up.
> 
> >Practice what you preach.
> 
> Don't need to preach. I'm right.

"On what basis do you make this claim?"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

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

From: jasper_de_keijzer@nl.compuware.com                25-Nov-99 07:49:17
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 05:15:15
Subj: Re: OS/2's source code

From: Jasper de Keijzer <jasper_de_keijzer@nl.compuware.com>

Yeh nice, but did you know that large parts of the OS are written in
assembler? So it will be very hard to change things or port it to your own
type of computer. If IBM is gonna release the source code for OS/2 they are
better of when they do that with the PoverPC version of OS/2. This one is
based on the Micro-MACH kernel  and written in plain C and some C++.

Jasper de Keijzer.
http://home-5.worldonline.nl/~jdekeij


Trancser wrote:

> Since the source code was released from IBM (oops...I meant 'leaked'
> ...yea thats it!), I was wondering if whoever bothered to download a
> copy for themselves, plan on ...I dunno....DOING anything with it,
> whether it be for private use or otherwise? I know that posting this
> message might not be the best thing to do, considering the subject, but
> I just thought I'd ask since its out there ...and I'm sure theres
> probably a lot of you out there that would LOVE to do some kick-butt
> things with the source, but hopefully for OS/2!
>
> Now, I am to understand, that the source that's out there is of an older
> version, and not of a recent or from the current fixpack for OS/2
> ...well I'm no programmer, but I'm sure theres something from the code
> that could be used to maybe form a "patch" to replace some components of
> OS/2?

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

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

From: jasper_de_keijzer@nl.compuware.com                25-Nov-99 08:16:26
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 05:15:15
Subj: Re: The intelligence level of this newsgroup is downright amusing

From: Jasper de Keijzer <jasper_de_keijzer@nl.compuware.com>

>>C++ was supposed to be made as
>>multi-platform happy - recompile anywhere...
No this was not the intention of C++. The c-runtime library is truly
platform independant. Which means you can compile your plain C/C++ on any
machine with the standard c-runtime stuff. The problem arises when platform
specific code is used (Creating windows etc). Actually what we need is a
compiled version of Java besides the interpreted version. This will allow us
to have one code set for all platforms.

The sloppy code you write about has one of the following reasons. In the
days of DOS a user interface was made up with some bios calls or putc()
functions and nothing more. If you now wanna have the same functionality,
half of your code contains stuff to get all windows/controls in place, so a
minimum plain C windowed program takes about 30 kb. If you do this with a
fat class library like the OCL (Open Class Library) of IBM than you will see
that you initial little program takes about 800 KB(!!) Plus the code you
link, instantiates/loads a bunch of system dll's.

Jasper de Keijzer
http://home-5.worldonline.nl/~jdekeij




Kelly Robinson wrote:

> Win95 is not a 32-bit OS and I cringe every time I hear it.  We all know
> this.  But some don't know:
>
> OS/2 is not 32-bit for the exact same reasons as Win9x - it incorporates
> 16-bit code, too.  'nuff said on that matter.  May as well throw stones
> in every window and not just one.
>
> Some of us are here to express opinions, not change minds.  See, that's
> what a newsgroup is for.  To talk.  If you change your mind after
> listening to another's blab, then great.  If not, oh well.  I [usually]
> could care less either way.
>
> There is only type of scenario where I do my damndest to change minds
> and they are called "Political rallies supporting certain human rights
> agendas".  I mean, computer shit is computer shit.  I'm just here to
> talk shallow like the rest of y'all.  But when human issues, epsecially
> those which pertain to me, arise, I will be there with all the artillery
> and you can bet on that with full intention of changing minds, if not
> solely turning heads.
>
> The P-II, while I'm at it, is a joke.  Really.  It's a P-Pro without the
> on-chip L2 cache.  The celeron better qualifies as a P-pro successor
> since both keep the L2 on chip for same-speed performance!  And the
> P-II/III/Celeron had those 32-bit optimization instructions removed.  I
> am still angry at Intel for doing that.  Even when the II came out (or
> even now with the III) there is enough 32-bit code to make the
> instructions useful.  In a way, Intel should never have removed the
> 32-bit instructions since it'd compel users (the ones who'd actually
> notice as most of them are dumb in the first place) to get a real 32-bit
> OS (NT, Unix, Linux, BeOS).
>
> Microsoft is a monopoly.  Okay, I won't argue that anymore <cheers and
> applause>.  But now read the next paragraph very carefully since very
> few of you pushers seem to take it into account - why you don't is
> unclear but I bet it's because you've been too busy urinating on
> Microsoft and not studying the remainder of the issue.
>
> Will YOU tell the software vendors to stop WRITING SOLELY FOR FUCKING
> MICROSOFT?!  THAT is the true problem!  Microsoft has its hands in the
> goo, too, but if you hadn't noticed it's the bloody applications which
> make computers semi-useful.  Without apps, you have a box of plastic and
> silicon - both better left for Hollywood bimbos.  Now software makers
> are going to ahve to take a chance and make an effort to recompile their
> simplistic C++ code on another hardware box so maybe it's too much
> effort for them, I don't know.  Jeez, C++ was supposed to be made as
> multi-platform happy - recompile anywhere... now we have java, something
> infinitely slower.
>
> And before you urinate on me about java, especially with the truly
> stupid reposte of  "Faster processors will make the Java issue
> pointless."  WRONG.  Faster processors will equally speed up every other
> current platform considerably more.  Bill Gates once said that
> processors would become so powerful that people would write fat sloppy
> code.  That's almost verbatim!  And he was right, thanks to Windows (and
> OS/2 since he was with IBM for that for a while) we have big fat sloppy
> code.  Now for the icing to the insult cake, along comes Java - rather
> the Java virtual machine.  It's a big waste.  For cutsie internet shite
> it's okay but it will never take the place of the most efficient non-JVM
> computer.
>
> Hmmm... if Java is meant to be platform independent, if everyone started
> to work on Java wouldn't that make Java a monopoly of its own right?
>
> Since most computers (Dell, compaq, micron, gateway) use the same type
> of technology originally cobbled together by IBM because they wanted to
> keep their own monopoly intact by ensuring that the new desktop
> generation would be slow shit (really, look it up.  The 808x is
> horrible.  And IBM knew their name would see anything, even rotten
> tomatos.)  Oh, IBM a monopoly you say?  Yup.  Look that up, too.
> Anyway, since Compaq and the rest use the basic design, the IBM PC is
> effectively a monopoly too.  Macs are shit but that's beside the point,
> in order to make money you need to do the same identical thing as
> everybody else.  And that truly is sad.

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

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

From: lennart-remove-@plg.-remove-a.se                  25-Nov-99 07:46:29
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 05:15:15
Subj: Re: Microsoft and OS/2 Software...

From: "Lennart Gahm" <lennart-remove-@plg.-remove-a.se>

On Thu, 25 Nov 1999 06:00:43 GMT, Bill wrote:
>Sure, WWII was a walk in the park for Americans but did we play a pivotal
role? I'm
>a little uncomfortable with that characterization. It really seems that we
only
>stepped in after the British and the Soviets had beat the piss out of the
Nazis. The 
>volume of resources that the Germans had dumped into the blackhole of the
Eastern
>Front had really left them kinda` anemic. While it was certainly exciting, it 
was
>somewhat like beating up on someone who just crawled out from underneath an 
>LA freeway pileup. . .not enough challenge to earn bragging rights.

This is true, it had been really hard for the British and US troups if the
nazis
had not engage them self in a two front war. The British and US had to ship
all
troups and equipment over see and it was a close call even with the present
nazi 
troups.

>Are you certain that that would have been such a bad thing? A decade after
the 
>collapse of Stalinism, most Eastern Europeans have experienced a decline in 
>living standards. Pretty hard to explain from the context of the superiority
of
>capitalism. . .

Probely more people there killed in Russia after the communist takeover then
by 
the nazis. Lenin and Stalin was as bad as Hitler.
USSR used it citizens as slaves. I saw a figure that about 10% of the
population
there in GULAG. They had to, by force, dig loooong canals, roads, railroads
etc
by hand. They barely got anything to eat and worked to they dropped. Then
some 
other slave had to take the place.  They called their slaves for things like 
"class treater" who was in "rehabilitation".
No-one who has learned what communism leed too should ever consider to
implant it
agin. The same for nazis.





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

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

From: lennart-remove-@plg.-remove-a.se                  25-Nov-99 07:47:00
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 05:15:15
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: "Lennart Gahm" <lennart-remove-@plg.-remove-a.se>

On Wed, 24 Nov 1999 20:05:26 GMT, Stan Goodman wrote:
>You are probably right. A Swedish pizza probably consists of slices of salt
>herring arranged on a knackebrot.

Na, we don't call it pizza.

But slices of (swedish) pickled herring on a knackebrot is really good.
A beer and a snaps makes it perfect.

Raw spiced salmon is also a classic.


I even like Sushi.
Lennart


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

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         25-Nov-99 07:51:16
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 05:15:15
Subj: Re: Amodeo digest, volume 2451508

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Not surprisingly, Marty chose not to comment on the matter of why a
standard interface is allegedly required to implement functionality.
Perhaps he has no good response to the functionality of Fortran 90
derived types that some FORTRAN 77 compilers implemented using
non-standard structures.  Meanwhile, Marty did choose to expand into
four other threads today.  Here's today's digest:

1> The statement above, as stated by Tholen, is the dictionary
1> definition of irony.

Incorrect, Marty.  Still suffering from reading comprehension problems?
 
2> See what I mean about your infantile game?

What alleged "infantile game", Marty?

3> Yes he is.  It is logical to "presuppose" the existence of something
3> which you know exists.  Tholen is again restating the obvious, hoping
3> that we will believe that he was "erroneously presupposing" the
3> existence of the evidence.  Too bad the evidence does exist, just as
3> Curtis said (and as Tholen conveniently deleted from his reply).

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

3> Meanwhile, note how Tholen has again ignored the evidence.  His
3> restatement of the obvious is his only answer to the evidence before
3> him.  How pathetic!

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

4> How hypocritical, coming from the idiot working overtime to destroy
4> context.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.
 
4> An excellent question.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

4> I see Dave has failed to examine the evidence presented to him again.
4> What a surprise!

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: brentdaviesNOSPAM@home.com                        25-Nov-99 09:49:02
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 10:37:25
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: "Brent Davies" <brentdaviesNOSPAM@home.com>

Hobbyist <alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net> wrote in message
news:65qf3sgkg1gkg54vdg688kdnbuvcs38cuj@4ax.com...
| "Brent Davies" <brentdaviesNOSPAM@home.com> posted:
|
|
|  <snip>
| > | FUD in the true sense. :)
| > |
| > | FUD based on factual grounds.
| >
| > Huh?  Do you want to explain that?
| >
| > I personally don't care to introduce a product into my company
| > that it's maker doesn't seem to be really excited about.  I see
| > ads for Novel, for Linux, for Solaris, for AIX, for NT, and more,
| > and I see them all over the trade rags.  Why don't I ever see
| > anything from IBM about OS/2?  It sure does seem to me like
| > they don't care much about it.  I might find that they indeed are
| > behind it 100% if I were to visit their web site, but that doesn't
| > take away from the fact that they don't seem to be openly
| > pushing OS/2 anymore.
| >
| > Or is OS/2 so much of a departure from the mainstream, like
| > MAC, that it is publicized in a totally different area of the
| > market?
|
| FUD ... Fear, uncertainty and doubt.
|
| What you said, I agreed with, and anyone who knows this and are
| considering deploying OS/2 will understandably feel .... FUD...
| Fear uncertainty and doubt. FUD that's based on truth. :)
|
| I guess you were confused because when the term FUD is used, it's
| normally used to define *misinformation* or *inaccuracies* that will
| lead to fear, uncertainty and doubt when considering an OS or system
| for deployment or use.

Ah ha!  I read between the lines and caught your tone, and from
that I figured you weren't being offensive.  I just didn't get it.

FUD is a term that is highly abused in Usenet.  Our little
exchange here proves that.

-B


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

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

From: brentdaviesNOSPAM@home.com                        25-Nov-99 09:51:22
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 10:37:25
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Brent Davies" <brentdaviesNOSPAM@home.com>

Chad Mulligan <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org> wrote in message
news:818ulr$scc$1@news.campuscwix.net...
|
[snip]
| >
| > I repeat the question. The obvious answer is no. In at least one suit,
the
| > industry was found criminally negligent. Others are pending, on trial,
| > etc. Ford was found criminally negligent in at least one Pinto suit and
| > the company was ordered to pay a fine.
|
| There is a legal difference between criminal negligence, which isn't a
crime
| and criminal justice.

Don't confuse him with the facts.  It's probably more fun for him
to invision Gates going to a Ferderal Pen for abuse of monopolistic
power.  Even the prospect of someone believing such a think makes
me laugh.

-B


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

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

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           25-Nov-99 08:05:01
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 14:28:23
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <QE7%3.29175$zd.331700@news1.alsv1.occa.home.com>, on 11/25/99 at 09:51
AM,
   "Brent Davies" <brentdaviesNOSPAM@home.com> said:

> Don't confuse him with the facts.  It's probably more fun for him to
> invision Gates going to a Ferderal Pen for abuse of monopolistic power. 
> Even the prospect of someone believing such a think makes me laugh.

I have cited by name one person who went to Federal prison for violating
the price-fixing portion of the Sherman Act. His name was George E. Burens
and he was a ranking executive of General Electric Company. He was one of
several executives of several companies who were all tried and sentenced
together.

At the moment, the DOJ has not chosen to file criminal anti-trust charges
against Gates or anyone else. However, if the follow the pattern
established by the Attorney General in the 1950's case against the
electrical manufacturers, they can bring criminal charges against
individuals.

I remember Mr. Burens' case quite well. His son was a classmate and
teammate of mine at the time.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

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

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

From: lucien@metrowerks.com                             25-Nov-99 13:05:21
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 14:28:23
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: lucien@metrowerks.com

In article <81i1gp$178$1@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenantispam@hawaii.edu wrote:
> Lucien writes:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Answer the question put to you:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Take the two simple tests, Lucien.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Note the refusal to answer a basic, central question -
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> looks like we've hit another major soft spot.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Note again the pat refusal to answer the question.
>
> >>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>>>> ....and we see the refusal again
>
> >>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>> .....and again...
>
> >>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>> ....and again.
>
> >> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> > ....and again.
>
> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

...and again.

The question again for the reader's reference:

According to your statement, under what conditions
does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
functionality..."?

Here is Dave's statement again for reference:

"The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
information."

Lucien S.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

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

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           25-Nov-99 08:20:09
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 14:28:23
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <zozo83o366.8n.uno@sage.40th.com>, on 11/24/99 at 04:05 PM,
   uno@40th.com (uno@40th.com) said:


> Also perfectly legal here.  There are anti-discrimination laws on the
> books here, so I -can't- not sell to you based on, say, your race|color. 
> However, if, say, you're just way too fat, I -can- refuse to sell you
> more cookies.  Basically, over here, anything that isn't expressly
> against the law is perfectly legal.

Tell that to the restaurant owner in Philadelphia who were fined because
they refused service to a blind couple because they had guide dogs. Tell
that to the merchant in Philadelphia who was fined because he refused to
sell condoms to gays.

The courts more and more extend anti-discrimination statutes based on
"legislative intent" rather than the specific wording in the written law.

And as far as price discrimination goes, a merchant operating entirely
within one state apparently is not covered by the Federal law covering
companies engaged in interstate commerce. However, the Supreme Court of
the US has expanded the meaning of interstate commerce so far as to make
anyone in business subject, even Pizza parlors since the ingredients they
use were made out of state.

About the only way a pizza parlor would be exempt from Federal regulation
today would be if he built his store out of wood from trees grown in New
Jersey and bricks he made himself from local mud baked in a New Jersey
cave using New Jersey grown wood for the fire, raised his own wheat,
tomatoes, and whatever else goes into his sauce, raised his own cows
purely on New Jersey pasture and made his own cheese, got his salt from
drying New Jersey saltwater, etc. He wouldn't be able to use boxes, would
have to have a wood fired oven since electricity and gas are interstate
activities, and make his own wooden spatulas, spoons, etc.

Even then he would be in trouble since undoubtedly his wood burning oven
would be in violation of EPA rules against air pollution. For good or ill,
the concept of a purely state matter has been all but eliminated by a
combination of congressional acts and court rulings.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

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

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

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           25-Nov-99 08:37:14
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 14:28:23
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <zozo83o2e6.8n.uno@sage.40th.com>, on 11/24/99 at 03:52 PM,
   uno@40th.com (uno@40th.com) said:

> >Speech is a substitute for a keyboard, an alternate form of keyboard. The
> >mouse is merely another form of a keyboard. The point is that without a
> >keyboard, a GUI is no more useful than a CLI program.

> Yes, Bob, "everything's a keyboard".  That's the only way you could ever
> 'win' an argument, Bob, is by making stuff up.  Who, exactly, is
> impressed?

Most everyone who responded to you seems to be.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

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

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

From: uno@40th.com                                      25-Nov-99 13:58:00
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 14:28:23
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: uno@40th.com (uno@40th.com)

Bob Germer? (bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com?) wrote (Thu, 25 Nov 1999 08:37:28
-0500):
>Most everyone who responded to you seems to be.

You're evading the point, Bob.  Computers do not need keyboards.
Computers are in cars.  Computers are in planes.  No keyboards,
Bob, or are you going to call a car a keyboard?  Sure, go ahead,
make up some more games, and this time, why not go for a cool M.
You're toasted, Bob!

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

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

From: agroz@the-bridge.net                              25-Nov-99 08:42:27
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 14:28:23
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows...

From: "amonk" <agroz@the-bridge.net>

Mike <spamcatcher@softhome.net> wrote in message
news:spamcatcher-2011991950200001@1cust41.tnt2.harrisonburg.va.da.uu.net...
> In article <8NSY3.20$EN1.38800@news.bctel.net>, mike@lionsgate.com (Mike
> Stephen) wrote:
>
> > In message <sdIzOBlEE6Aojmy+ALnAlrxatedl@4ax.com> - Hobbyist
> > <alliem@_nospam_wtjam.net>Thu, 18 Nov 1999 05:29:31 -0500 writes:
> > :>
> > :>clasqm@mweb.co.za (Michel Clasquin) posted:
> > :>
> > :>> On Wed, 17 Nov 1999 08:55:15 GMT, mike@lionsgate.com (Mike Stephen)
> > :>> wrote:
> > :>>
> > :>> >system level, not at an application level)!  Running two videos as
> > :>> >once tends to tax Beos to the limit.  Whereas I can run three or
four
> > :>>
> > :>> Sorry to be the one to tell you this, but there's something wrong
with
> > :>> your system. I only have a humble AMDK6 200 with 64M RAM, and my
> > :>> graphics card is just barely supported, but I can  run 4 or 5 AVI's
> > :>> and Quicktimes with no perceptible slowdown - and that's from CDROM.
> > :>> When I push it up to eight, they start running slower, but don't
skip
> > :>> any frames that I can see. Windows chokes solid on just 2.
> > :>

Hi
newbie here (this group)
just to add my two cents;
at the shop where I work we have a customers machine 400mhz amd 64mg ati
rage iic+ card
running beos 4.5.2
he demonstrated 18 videos at once (mpg) with just perceptible slowdown
convinced me, order coming
[ was win95 adv, then linux, now beos ;-) ]
tx for listening
ablemonk
agroz@the-bridge.net


-snip-


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

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

From: uno@40th.com                                      25-Nov-99 14:57:20
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 14:28:23
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: uno@40th.com (uno@40th.com)


Bob Germer? (bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com?) wrote (Thu, 25 Nov 1999 08:20:18
-0500):
>> more cookies.  Basically, over here, anything that isn't expressly
>> against the law is perfectly legal.
>
>Tell that to the restaurant owner in Philadelphia who were fined...
>... to the merchant in Philadelphia who was fined because he refused to

Nothing to tell, Bob.  If it's against the law in Philadelphia,
then it's against the law and the owner gets fined.  Now, if
you want to tell somebody something, tell IBM to sell Warp 5,
and to not price it at "discriminatory" prices ($1600!).  Go
ahead, Bob, make yourself useful.






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

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

From: uno@40th.com                                      25-Nov-99 15:12:15
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 14:28:23
Subj: Re: PC Week - Peter Coffee

From: uno@40th.com (uno@40th.com)

Win3.1 came out in April of 1992 or so.  It came out just
before the OS2 2.0 GA deadline (April 30th 23:55 as I recall).

>It's still a very strange assessment.  The degree to which
>OS/2 1.3 coincided with W3.x -- if it was two years, which I
>don't believe it was -- means we're talking about W3.0, and

He must mean 3.1 in enhanced mode.  That predated OS2 2.0 by
just a month or two.

>...tortuous rationalizations, is that Microsoft did a really
>first-rate job of presenting its case in court.

E-mail.  MS could only bluff a defense after that.  In any end,
it doesn't matter -- OS2 is still dead[1] no matter what happens
to the shark that ate it for lunch.

[1] OS2 is not a contender for market acceptance.  It's not
even on radar screens anymore.  It has reached AmigaVille
and has been, so to speak, put out to pasture.






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

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

From: josco@ibm.net                                     25-Nov-99 08:40:14
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 14:28:23
Subj: Re: PC Week - Peter Coffee

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


"uno@40th.com" wrote:

> Win3.1 came out in April of 1992 or so.  It came out just
> before the OS2 2.0 GA deadline (April 30th 23:55 as I recall).

I agree.   Win3.1 and OS/2 2.0 were spring releases and Win3.1 came out
just prior - weeks.


> >It's still a very strange assessment.  The degree to which
> >OS/2 1.3 coincided with W3.x -- if it was two years, which I
> >don't believe it was -- means we're talking about W3.0, and
>
> He must mean 3.1 in enhanced mode.  That predated OS2 2.0 by
> just a month or two.

Yes.  And Win3.0 was also very unstable whereas OS/2 2.0's Win3.0
session was rock solid.  Enhanced mode was meaningless to the OS/2 2.0
user and apps that required it were only arriving in significant numbers
when OS/2 3.0 shipped.

> >...tortuous rationalizations, is that Microsoft did a really
> >first-rate job of presenting its case in court.
>
> E-mail.  MS could only bluff a defense after that.  In any end,
> it doesn't matter -- OS2 is still dead[1] no matter what happens
> to the shark that ate it for lunch.
>
> [1] OS2 is not a contender for market acceptance.  It's not
> even on radar screens anymore.  It has reached AmigaVille
> and has been, so to speak, put out to pasture.

I agree with ONE significant exception.

The OS brand does not matter when I use the web.  e-commerce, e-mail
services, calendar services, banking, information & research.  OS/2 is
as compatible as windows.  With StarOffice/2 I can and do share Office97
files.  Ironically today OS/2 users have MORE compatibility with the
world than ever before.

How many BMWs are there on the road?  Not very many but they run on the
same highway as all other vehicles.  OS/2 runs on the same
infrastructure as Windows.  For that reason the comparison to the amiga
is pointless.   The amiga reference assumes we're standalone users.
That's not the case.  OS/2 still works and W2K is a step backwards.

Also, the PC era is going to have a train wreck.  Sony's PSX 2,
Liberate's TV navigator software and several other similar kinds of
technologies are rapidly maturing.  MS's WinCE is losing ground and only
has acceptance (non-exclusive) with partners MS co-owns or pays.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          25-Nov-99 16:49:12
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 14:28:23
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>Ian "The Moron" Tholen
>Tell me, Curtis, do any of the following end with a preposition:
>
>   "sit up"
>
>   "speak up"
>
>   "your time is up"
>
>   "from third grade up"
>
>   "the score is 15 up"
>
>   "the wind is up"

Do any of the following end with a preposition?

"Give it up"

"Shut up"

Honestly, if Tholen had even half a brain instead of none, he wouldn't
be nearly as inadvertently amusing as he is

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

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

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          25-Nov-99 17:07:07
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 14:28:23
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>Ian "The Moron" Tholen
>Those who
>ignore history are destined to repeat it, destined to become hypocrites.

And here's a bit more "history" of Tholen's past pontifications,
juxtaposed with his recent nonsense, to demonstrate how he has in fact
become a hypocrite. This of course, will be added to my Tholen digest
as yet one more of many examples of why he is a moronic fool.

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!
Date: 25 Nov 1999 02:00:57 GMT
Organization: IFA B-111
Message-ID: <81i58p$2gl$1@news.hawaii.edu>

>Curtis Bass
>Most, if not all, of the thread is there, Dave.

Is that the best you can do, Curtis, namely point to the entire
Navigator 4.7 thread?  That's one step removed from pointing to the
entire newsgroup, and two steps removed from pointing to all of
USENET.

>Peruse it at your convenience,

Unable to supply the proof, you decide to have somebody else wade
through hundreds of postings in an attempt to find that which did
not propagate to our news server or deja.com, the latter according
to another reader.

From: tholen@newton.ifa.hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: [TNT] OS/2 on PowerPC?
Date: 5 Dec 1996 22:05:22 GMT
Organization: University of Hawaii
Message-ID: <587gv2$h1c@news.Hawaii.Edu>

>Mike Timbol
>I checked Infoworld's most
>recent issues and didn't find the article you refer to.
>Perhaps you should give me a better pointer, eh?

Use the Force, Mike.  (Or the newsgroup, whichever is easier.)

>A date and page number, perhaps,
>or a web address where the article resides.

Try comp.os.os2.advocacy.

===========================================

From: tholen@hale.ifa.hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Relative credibility
Date: 1 Nov 1996 02:08:02 GMT
Organization: University of Hawaii
Message-ID: <55bm22$b21@news.Hawaii.Edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hale.ifa.hawaii.edu

>Can you provide a specific message ID?

Among your thousands of posts to this newsgroup, there's more than
enough information on which to judge your lies, your libel, your
illogic, your exaggeration, your unsubstantiated claims, your FUD,
your deletion tactics, your invective, and lack of credibility.

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

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

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          25-Nov-99 17:09:03
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 14:28:23
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>Joe Malloy
>Tholen should write only *half* as clearly as you do!

I'd even settle for Tholen writing half as "soberly". Someone grab
that brown paper bag away from him

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

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

From: sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.c...               25-Nov-99 19:19:17
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 19:46:19
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

Message sender: sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk

From: David Sutherland <sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk>

On 25 Nov 1999 01:08:41 GMT, tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)
wrote:

[snip]

>
>Tell me, Curtis, do any of the following end with a preposition:
>
>   "sit up"
>
>   "speak up"
>
>   "your time is up"
>
>   "from third grade up"
>

"up from third grade"

>   "the score is 15 up"
>

"up from a scrore of 15"

etc etc etc.

Tholen, you really are incredibly inept.


Regards,
David Sutherland
(note **ANTI-SPAM** in reply field)

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

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

From: sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.c...               25-Nov-99 19:31:12
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 19:46:19
Subj: Re: More Boring Tholen Inconsistency and Hypocrisy

Message sender: sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk

From: David Sutherland <sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk>

On Wed, 24 Nov 1999 21:47:26 -0500, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:

>Dave Tholen wrote:
>> 
>> Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:
>> 
>> CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
>> CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.
>> 
>> I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.
>> 
>> Curtis Bass writes:
>> 
>> > See what I mean?
>> 
>> See what I mean about your pontification, Curtis?
>
>See what I mean about your infantile game?

Everybody else does - tholen lacks the necessary intelligence.


Regards,
David Sutherland
(note **ANTI-SPAM** in reply field)

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

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

From: josco@ibm.net                                     25-Nov-99 11:33:04
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 19:46:19
Subj: Re: Wake Up !

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Christopher Houle wrote:

> I can't believe some crap thats posted in this group. I really don't know
> why you guys flame Be and Linux. I would think that given the current state
> of things in the OS/2 world you'd be looking to channel your efforts into a
> project thats actually got a future.  Stick a fork in OS/2, its done.

Why are you flaming OS/2?  Go do something productive for LINUX or Be.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: josco@ibm.net                                     25-Nov-99 11:38:07
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 19:46:19
Subj: Re: I am worried about our future generations...

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


"uno@40th.com" wrote:

> Holger Veit? (veit@simi.gmd.de?) wrote (25 Nov 1999 17:43:16 GMT):
> >backward compatibility. IBM tried the experiment once, with OS/2-PPC,
>
> NT runs OS2 16-bit apps.  Matter of fact, I'm typing this with
> an OS2 16-bit app I've used for several years (guess which one).
> NT runs it better than OS2 does!
>
>  OS2: A better DOS than DOS.
>   NT: A better OS2 than OS2.

Oh get real.

You refer to the old support since NT 3.1 for character mode OS/2 apps.
I thought MS removed that in NT 4.0 when they removed all support for the
OS/2 HPFS.  The OS/2 file systems isn't supported.  And NT never had
support for 16-bit Presentation Manager apps.






--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: cndbass@yahoo.com                                 25-Nov-99 22:34:14
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 19:46:19
Subj: Re: Interesting Reading Comprehension Problem by Bass

From: Curtis Bass <cndbass@yahoo.com>


Dave Tholen wrote:

-- snip --

> > What I did above was express an opinion, nothing more.
> 
> On what basis do you call it an "opinion", Curtis?  How is your
> statement *not* taking a position?

It's a qualified statement.

-- snip --

> Didn't stop you from calling it a "bullshit statement", Curtis.

I didn't *call* it such.  I expressed my *opinion* that it was such.

-- snip --

> Defend the following statement of yours, Curtis:
> 
> CB] As far as I am concerned, "Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2
> CB] functionality" *IS* a bullshit statement;

There is nothing to "defend," Dave.  "As far as I am concerned"
qualifies the statement as an opinion.

> > If my opinion is technically "wrong," then so what?
> 
> Then you should retract it, Curtis.

Really? Do you really mean that, Dave?

"Yet to look at the contents, one must have run the executable file and
on an OS/2 system to boot!"

That statement is *WRONG.*  By your own words, you should retract it.

Failure to do so means you're a hypocrite.

We're waiting . . .

-- snip --


Curtis

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

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

From: mr@biddlesworth.com                               25-Nov-99 16:08:23
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 21:46:01
Subj: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: "Mr. Biddlesworth" <mr@biddlesworth.com>

R. Tang <gwangung@u.washington.edu> wrote in message
news:81i9pu$oka$1@nntp6.u.washington.edu...
> Mr. Biddlesworth <mr@biddlesworth.com> wrote:
> >
> >So the code of Windows 1.0 (or its prototype) plausibly predated MacOS 1.0
by a year
> >(unless LisaOS and MacOS 1.0 were virtually identical???).
>
> No, it does not. Not if you can do math.
>
> --
> -Roger Tang, gwangung@u.washington.edu, Artistic Director  PC Theatre


You should open your mind, face facts, and quit believing Job's propaganda.

I have >>proof<< that Microsoft Windows 1.0 was running in 1983.

Read this 1983 Byte article:
http://www.pla-netx.com/linebackn/guis/win1983.html
It's so old that Apple's Lisa is mentioned but not Macintosh.

So that debunks the myth that Windows >>originated<< was an imitation of Mac.

History lesson is over.  Class, dismissed.

--
Mr. Biddlesworth



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Yeah, Baby! (1:109/42)

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

From: gwangung@u.washington.edu                         26-Nov-99 00:21:06
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 21:46:01
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: gwangung@u.washington.edu (R. Tang)

In article <383dcf7d$0$232@nntp1.ba.best.com>,
Mr. Biddlesworth <mr@biddlesworth.com> wrote:
>R. Tang <gwangung@u.washington.edu> wrote in message
>news:81i9pu$oka$1@nntp6.u.washington.edu...
>> Mr. Biddlesworth <mr@biddlesworth.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >So the code of Windows 1.0 (or its prototype) plausibly predated MacOS 1.0 
by a year
>> >(unless LisaOS and MacOS 1.0 were virtually identical???).
>>
>> No, it does not. Not if you can do math.
>>
>> --
>> -Roger Tang, gwangung@u.washington.edu, Artistic Director  PC Theatre
>
>
>You should open your mind, face facts, and quit believing Job's propaganda.
>
>I have >>proof<< that Microsoft Windows 1.0 was running in 1983.
>
>Read this 1983 Byte article:
http://www.pla-netx.com/linebackn/guis/win1983.html
>It's so old that Apple's Lisa is mentioned but not Macintosh.
>
>So that debunks the myth that Windows >>originated<< was an imitation of Mac.

	Hardly, Mr. Troll.

	Try harder. Use some elementary logic; it'll improve your
trolling.



-- 
-Roger Tang, gwangung@u.washington.edu, Artistic Director  PC Theatre
-	Editor, Asian American Theatre Revue [NEW URL]
-	http://www.abcflash.com/a&e/r_tang/AATR.html
-Declared 4-F in the War Between the Sexes

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Washington, Seattle (1:109/42)

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

From: ruel24@fuse.net                                   25-Nov-99 19:36:26
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 21:46:01
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows... 

From: "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net>

You call that an OS?

--
Ruel Smith
Cincinnati, OH

CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?

"Piers B." <mbesy@one.net.au> wrote in message
news:383cc1e9@pink.one.net.au...
> Oh yippy, I just can't keep my dypers on about another version of Unix!!!!
>
> Move on to a newsgroup that might have interest in your enthused ideas for
> OS X.  We already have the OS we want. Thankyou!
>
> Piers Bray
>
>
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

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

From: ruel24@fuse.net                                   25-Nov-99 19:36:08
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 21:46:01
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows... 

From: "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net>

Funny, the full version of OS 9 is $99, the full version of Win98 SE is
$189... Who's out of touch?

--
Ruel Smith
Cincinnati, OH

CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?

<calcio@erie.net> wrote in message news:383cd340.4850242@news.erie.net...
>
> If/when I see MacOS X on intel I hope it doesn't cost $799. Apple
> tends to be a bit out of touch when it comes to pricing.
>
>
>
> On Tue, 23 Nov 1999 08:58:30 -0500, "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net>
> wrote:
>
> >3 letters...OS X! Just wait...it's coming to an Intel processor near
you...
> >
> >--
> >Ruel Smith
> >Cincinnati, OH
> >
> >CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?
> >
> >"Mike Stephen" <mike@lionsgate.com> wrote in message
> >news:T3uY3.1$874.8381@news.bctel.net...
> >>
> >> Although BEOS is miles ahead of Windows, it is only as good as Linux,
> >> and is far behind OS/2
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I just finished my first week with Beos.  I must say I was hoping for
> >> more...  I came from the OS/2 WPS area and I have noticed more and
> >> more OS/2 users are having to leave OS/2 (due to lack of future
> >> support from IBM) and are looking for alternatives.
> >>
> >>
> >> I tried Linux and FreeBSD but they have rather clunky multitasking,
> >> and have poorly written user interfaces (KDE and GNOME).  The UI is
> >> patterned after Windows and in my opinion it is just as flawed as the
> >> Windows interface is.  I would have hoped that the UI writers would be
> >> able to vastly improve upon Windows.....  It appears that none of the
> >> UI programmers for KDE, Gnome or BE have ever used the OS/2 WPS.
> >>
> >>
> >> If only some other operating system writers would at lease look into
> >> incorporating SOM and DSOM into a corba compliant WPS type of
> >> interface.  Millions of OS/2 users would flock to such an operating
> >> system.  BEOS is slightly better than Linux, but not as good as I was
> >> hoping...  Its multitasking is not as fluid as OS/2, its multimedia
> >> video support is not as good as OS/2.. Its multimedia sound capability
> >> is much better than all the rest including Os/2.  However sound is
> >> only a small part of multimedia.  Video is more important, and I was
> >> lead to believe that Beos was a leader in Video.  Well OS/2 does more
> >> video formats and does it much better than Beos m(at the operating
> >> system level, not at an application level)!  Running two videos as
> >> once tends to tax Beos to the limit.  Whereas I can run three or four
> >> videos in OS/2....  Hmmmmm wouldn't it be great if we could get IBM to
> >> spin off the os2 group as a separate company so that we could all get
> >> updated operating systems that work?
> >>
> >> Stability of Beos is a bit better than Windows, but not as stable as
> >> Warp OS/2.  It is about the same as Linux.  I Was able to lock up a
> >> few different apps during the week that required a hard reboot to
> >> clear. The multitasking is a bit clunky as well.  Warp seems to have a
> >> best compromise scheduler that allows multitasking
> >> background/foreground apps better than any other operating system to
> >> date.  Pity that some developers seem to miss out on this aspect of
> >> Warp OS/2.  I can only guess that it is not due to stupidity, but
> >> rather that these same developers are simply not aware of how high the
> >> bar has been placed with Warp OS/2.  If all you have ever used
> >> includes Windows and Linux, then Beos might seem to look good.
> >> However from a long time user of OS/2Warp,  can say that Beos needs a
> >> whole lot more to even be considered in the same league as Warp.
> >>
> >> So the search goes on.  I want to replace Warp Os/2, but so far
> >> nothing is anywhere near as easy to use or as reliable.  too bad IBM
> >> sold out to Microsoft and basically buried OS/2....
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

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

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           25-Nov-99 19:56:02
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 21:46:01
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <zozo83qg2q.8j.uno@sage.40th.com>, on 11/25/99 at 01:58 PM,
   uno@40th.com (uno@40th.com) said:

> Bob Germer? (bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com?) wrote (Thu, 25 Nov 1999 08:37:28
> -0500): >Most everyone who responded to you seems to be.

> You're evading the point, Bob.  Computers do not need keyboards.
> Computers are in cars.  Computers are in planes.  No keyboards, Bob, or
> are you going to call a car a keyboard?  Sure, go ahead, make up some
> more games, and this time, why not go for a cool M. You're toasted, Bob!

In order to make the computers in a car work, one must use some sort of a
keyboard to enter the desired data.



--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

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

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

From: josco@ibm.net                                     24-Nov-99 07:24:26
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 21:46:01
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Quantum Leaper wrote:

> "Joseph" <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:383BCD9E.FF70EF39@ibm.net...
> >
> >
> > Chad Mulligan wrote:
> >
> > > ZnU <znu@znu.dhs.org> wrote in message
> > > news:znu-2311991352570001@192.168.0.2...
> > > > In article <383a9654$4$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com>, Bob Germer
> > > > <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > example, how can you tell IE where you want to go on the web without
> > > > > typing in the www.address? How can you reply to email without a
> > > keyboard?
> > > > > How can you enter data in a spreadsheet without a keyboard.
> > > >
> > > This is for that idiot Germer.  Ever been to McDonald's?  They use GUI
> based
> > > cash registers without keyboards.  Ever seen a touch screen?  Ever heard
> of
> > > voice recognition?
> > >
> > > Back to your punched cards you old geezer.
> >
> > Funny how you listed non Windows systems.  System not using IE.  Systems
> not
> > recognized as a personal IT device -- point of sale devices-- and uncommon
> > solution like voice recognition.  I have NEVER seen anyone in the Silicon
> Valley
> > use voice recognition to run a device.  NEVER.
> >
> > BTW each and every Palm Pilot has a virtual keyboard.
> >
> Why would want to use a voice recognition system in a point of sale device,
> most POS systems are used in somewhat noisy enviroments and multi user.  So
> must POS are touch based, today,  who know what they will be tomarrow.

IBM has a TV ad. The POS device scans the customer's belongings as they pass
through a gate and charges them.

In SanFrancisco the Sony Meteron has theater kiosks that sell movie tickets. 
I
swipe my CCard and pick the movie & time.  Tickets come out. Very fast, no
crowds.  Touch screen input and the device uses speech and text to guide the
user.  BTW the UI layout is bad and it confuses people.

Arby's fast food lets the user select the food from a menu (they run the POS
device) and a clerk brings food out and takes cash.


> Also Chad was talking about data input without a keyboard.   Most POS
> system,  I have seen are PC Unix based.   The 'new' voice recognition
> systems could easily work in just about any enviroment, noisy or not.

POS devices use product codes.  Why use voice recognition?  What's the problem
-- passing a can of soup over a laser light is fastest.  another IT solution
looking for problems already solved.

How about voice input for a portable device.-- I ride a train and cell phone
are
an annoyance and expose people's privacy.  If the train users start chatting
to
enter text then I propose spies ride the trains and record all the
information.
It's not sensible to use voice in many instances for text entry.  Maybe in a
car
for voice dictation -- as if we want drivers to author documents as the ride
in
traffic -- it may work in that private environment.  Doctors use voice
recognition to record their analysis of x-rays -- done in private and they
need
to make notes to themselves to document everything.  Not common traits.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: josco@ibm.net                                     24-Nov-99 06:48:25
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 21:46:01
Subj: Re: Not even Ballmer likes NT

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Forrest Gehrke wrote:

> Bob Germer wrote:
> >
>
> >
> >
> > Now let's just speculate a bit about a parallel with MS today. MS could be
> > forced in the first instance not to enter into per-processor agreements
> > with anyone. They could be made to unbundle IE from Win 9x and its
> > successors. MS would then have to change its pricing policy to OEM's by
> > either raising the price of Windows to make up for the lost revenue or see
> > the income stream drop as vendors offered various alternatives to
> > customers. Either way, the consumer would benefit from lower machine costs
> > as would the vendors of xNIX, BeOS, Warp, etc.
> >
>
> I doubt that MS could be forced to separate Win98 from IE.
> There had been an injunction issued intended to prevent
> MS from bolting these together.  An appellate court
> overturned it.  This would indicate that this remedy
> would not succeed.

No.

1) The appellate court ruled on a specific situation, an injunction with a
company NOT yet proven to be a monopoly.  Now the Judge has a Finding of Fact
and an anti-trust case.  This is not the same as an injunction in a case over
the Consent Decree MS and the DoJ signed.  More evidence, different context
and
different ruling.  Any application of law must be applied given MS is a
monopoly
and there are specific facts about IE and Win98.

2) The only 3 judges of the appellate court ruled and they split 2:1.  The
full
court did not rule.  Instead of appealing to the full court the gov't went
ahead
with an anti-trust case.

3) MS has been in court and eventually the judge was over ruled on appeal. 
What
people think is MS wins on appeal.  How they win is on procedure and scope of
the ruling .  Judge Sporkin did not like the narrow consent decree and
objected
it did not go far enough.  He was overruled on appeal when he challenged the
agreement the DoJ and MS made because he tried to take the DoJ's roll.   Judge
Jackson did not agree with the consent decree -- it was poorly written
(Sporkin
was right) but he also thought MS was probably violating laws so he made an
injunction over IE and Win98 -- that was over turned in part because he was
asked to rule in the scope of the consent decree.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: ames@deltrak.demon.co.uk                          24-Nov-99 15:00:17
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 21:46:01
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: ames@deltrak.demon.co.uk (Andrew Stephenson)

In article <383beef4$4$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com>
	   bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com "Bob Germer" writes:

> On <81f1dq$ojn$4@dagger.ab.videon.ca>, on 11/23/99 at 09:36 PM,
>    larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:
>
> > When I sell something, I base my price on who is asking.  You
> > will not be able to buy a slice of pizza off me at the same
> > rate I'd offer my cousin. In fact, I may refuse to sell you
> > the slice at all.
>
> If you did, you would be charged with a crime. A restaurant
> must serve everyone regardless of race, creed, color, national
> origin, etc. The civil rights laws apply to you as to everyone
> else.

Obviously you North Americans have managed to build a veritable
paradise-on-earth.  Here in the backward old UK, AFAIK a trader
can refuse to sell to a person, at whim.  Problems usually only
start for that trader if the reason for that refusal is given, or
if illegal/reprehensible discrimination can be proven.

Or did I misunderstand?  It is so difficult to recognise when a
Usenet statement refers only to a portion of North America.  ;-)

Besides, Bob, Lars could easily be doing you a favour in refusing
to sell you his pizza.  I mean, have you _tasted_ it???
--
Andrew Stephenson

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

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

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           24-Nov-99 09:42:12
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 21:46:01
Subj: Re: IBM Stock...

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <383e1b2d.4128336@news.borg.com>, on 11/23/99 at 11:00 PM,
   jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt) said:

> But clearly, when it comes to making/selling a home consumer product,
> IBM just does not have what it takes to compete against smaller, leaner,
> more efficient competition who are much more interested in that market,
> and demonstrate a lot more competence at going after that market. Unless
> you're managing a Fortune 500 company, IBM is not your ticket

Sometime go into your local Mall. Ignore the Sears, Penneys, etc. Ignore
the national chains. Go into the locally owned stores and franchise
stores.  Look at the teller machines.Find out how many of the POS machines
(used to be called cash registers) have IBM logos. 

Go into the LOCAL bank or Savings Bank or Credit Union if there is one.
See whose logo is on the platform PC's and the teller machines.

Go to a 10 or 15 strip shopping center with no national chains. See what
percentage of the POS machines say IBM. For example, we have one here with
6 stores and a WAWA convenience market. Wawa is a Delaware Valley company
which grew out of a dairy. It is no where near a Fortune 500 or even 2000
company. It uses IBM hardware. So does the barber shop, the florist, and
the dry cleaner. The pizza parlor and the Chinese take out do not. The 6th
store is vacant currently. This is rather typical, BTW.

Go do some shoeleather research. Find out what the facts are. Find out how
many small retailers use IBM hardware. Find out how many local banks use
IBM hardware.

Then retract that idiotic statement above.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

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

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

From: Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]                 24-Nov-99 10:48:20
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 21:46:01
Subj: TMF: Cast your own vote! / Microsoft Corp. (MSFT)

From: "boards.fool.com web2news.pl" <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]>

Now you can vote in a poll being conducted by Harris. It's almost like the
next presidential election!

What'll they think of next? We might be voting for our elected officials
on-line before you know it. ;)

"Would consumers benefit from a Microsoft-DOJ settlement?"

[ http://vr.harrispollonline.com/voting/default.asp?accessid=30 ]
http://vr.harrispollonline.com/voting/default.asp?accessid=30

[
http://ads.fool.com/click.ng/Params.richmedia=yes&site=usfool&tab=messages&area
=folders&feature=postpages&location=right_1&size=120x60 ]

[
http://ads.fool.com/click.ng/Params.richmedia=yes&site=usfool&tab=messages&area
=folders&feature=postpages&location=right_2&size=120x60 ]

[
http://ads.fool.com/click.ng/Params.richmedia=yes&site=usfool&tab=messages&area
=folders&feature=postpages&location=right_3&size=120x60 ]

Post New

&#149;

Post Reply

&#149;

Reply Later

Full text at:
http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?id=1180128004510000&sort=postdate

Posted with: http://www.angelfire.com/ca4/mccluretroy/web2news.html

http:  boards fool com Message asp?id=1180128004510000&sort=postdate
web2news.pl

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: mail2news@nym.alias.net (1:109/42)

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

From: uno@40th.com                                      24-Nov-99 15:52:23
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 21:46:01
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: uno@40th.com (uno@40th.com)

Bob Germer? (bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com?) wrote (Wed, 24 Nov 1999 09:11:21
-0500):
>Speech is a substitute for a keyboard, an alternate form of keyboard. The
>mouse is merely another form of a keyboard. The point is that without a
>keyboard, a GUI is no more useful than a CLI program.

Yes, Bob, "everything's a keyboard".  That's the only way you could
ever 'win' an argument, Bob, is by making stuff up.  Who, exactly,
is impressed?

>Put up or shut up

I've already won, Bob.  Not much to it:  A computer does not
need a keyboard.

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

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

From: jjens@primenet.com                                24-Nov-99 16:02:18
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 21:46:01
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: John Jensen <jjens@primenet.com>

Chad Myers <cmyers@austin.rr.com> wrote:

: Typical "CLI or Bust" attitude of a Linvocate, ZnU.

: How do you think those Wedding registries at Target work?
: Hint: They're GUI (Microsoft Windows to boot!)
: Hint: They use a touch screen

So you reply with "GUI or Bust", but laughably you communicate this
message in text.

Is it because is text is more convenient, or does it require less special
skill than a graphic representation of the same information?

John

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Primenet (602)416-7000 (1:109/42)

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

From: uno@40th.com                                      24-Nov-99 16:05:18
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 21:46:01
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: uno@40th.com (uno@40th.com)

Andrew Stephenson? (ames@deltrak.demon.co.uk?) wrote (Wed, 24 Nov 99 15:00:35
>Obviously you North Americans have managed to build a veritable
>paradise-on-earth.  Here in the backward old UK, AFAIK a trader
>can refuse to sell to a person, at whim.  Problems usually only

Also perfectly legal here.  There are anti-discrimination laws
on the books here, so I -can't- not sell to you based on, say,
your race|color.  However, if, say, you're just way too fat, I
-can- refuse to sell you more cookies.  Basically, over here,
anything that isn't expressly against the law is perfectly legal.
There is no law saying I can't not sell a fat person cookies
because that person is too fat.  But, anyway, people do refuse
to sell based on race | color all the time.  As a matter of fact,
there are towns that are ridiculously all-white (Annaheim CA &
Glenview, IL, to name the two whitest).  There are also towns
that are ridiculously all-non-white, but that's not quite the
same thing (choice being the difference).  Just goes to show you.





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

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

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               24-Nov-99 11:24:26
  To: All                                               25-Nov-99 21:46:01
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

"uno@40th.com" wrote:
> 
> Andrew Stephenson? (ames@deltrak.demon.co.uk?) wrote (Wed, 24 Nov 99
15:00:35
> >Obviously you North Americans have managed to build a veritable
> >paradise-on-earth.  Here in the backward old UK, AFAIK a trader
> >can refuse to sell to a person, at whim.  Problems usually only
> 
> Also perfectly legal here.  There are anti-discrimination laws
> on the books here, so I -can't- not sell to you based on, say,
> your race|color.  However, if, say, you're just way too fat, I
> -can- refuse to sell you more cookies.  Basically, over here,
> anything that isn't expressly against the law is perfectly legal.
> There is no law saying I can't not sell a fat person cookies
> because that person is too fat.

Not what if you are taken to court on the matter and a judge "finds a
fact" stating that not selling someone cookies because they're fat is
prejudicial just as much as not selling someone cookies because of their
race?  Should you be punished for all of the times in the past when you
didn't sell someone cookies because they were fat?

- Marty

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

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

From: rbarris@quicksilver.com                           26-Nov-99 01:15:25
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:20
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: rbarris@quicksilver.com (Rob Barris)

In article <383dcf7d$0$232@nntp1.ba.best.com>, "Mr. Biddlesworth"
<mr@biddlesworth.com> wrote:

> R. Tang <gwangung@u.washington.edu> wrote in message
> news:81i9pu$oka$1@nntp6.u.washington.edu...
> > Mr. Biddlesworth <mr@biddlesworth.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >So the code of Windows 1.0 (or its prototype) plausibly predated
MacOS 1.0 by a year
> > >(unless LisaOS and MacOS 1.0 were virtually identical???).
> >
> > No, it does not. Not if you can do math.
> >
> > --
> > -Roger Tang, gwangung@u.washington.edu, Artistic Director  PC Theatre
> 
> 
> You should open your mind, face facts, and quit believing Job's propaganda.
> 
> I have >>proof<< that Microsoft Windows 1.0 was running in 1983.
> 
> Read this 1983 Byte article:
http://www.pla-netx.com/linebackn/guis/win1983.html
> It's so old that Apple's Lisa is mentioned but not Macintosh.
> 
> So that debunks the myth that Windows >>originated<< was an imitation of
Mac.

Must have been an imitation of Lisa then!

Rob

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

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

From: rbarris@quicksilver.com                           26-Nov-99 01:17:25
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:20
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: rbarris@quicksilver.com (Rob Barris)

In article <383dcf7d$0$232@nntp1.ba.best.com>, "Mr. Biddlesworth"
<mr@biddlesworth.com> wrote:

> R. Tang <gwangung@u.washington.edu> wrote in message
> news:81i9pu$oka$1@nntp6.u.washington.edu...
> > Mr. Biddlesworth <mr@biddlesworth.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >So the code of Windows 1.0 (or its prototype) plausibly predated
MacOS 1.0 by a year
> > >(unless LisaOS and MacOS 1.0 were virtually identical???).
> >
> > No, it does not. Not if you can do math.
> >
> > --
> > -Roger Tang, gwangung@u.washington.edu, Artistic Director  PC Theatre
> 
> 
> You should open your mind, face facts, and quit believing Job's propaganda.
> 
> I have >>proof<< that Microsoft Windows 1.0 was running in 1983.
> 
> Read this 1983 Byte article:
http://www.pla-netx.com/linebackn/guis/win1983.html
> It's so old that Apple's Lisa is mentioned but not Macintosh.
> 
> So that debunks the myth that Windows >>originated<< was an imitation of
Mac.
> 
> History lesson is over.  Class, dismissed.


Oh, and where's that guy with the sig

   "That's not what the Mac does. I want Mac on the PC, I want Mac on the PC"-
   -B.Gates

when you need him?


Rob

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

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

From: Alan_Baker@bc.sympatico.ca                        25-Nov-99 17:19:23
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:20
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Alan_Baker@bc.sympatico.ca (Alan Baker)

In article <383dce64$0$224@nntp1.ba.best.com>, "Lord Foul" <lord@foul.com>
wrote:

>R. Tang <gwangung@u.washington.edu> wrote in message
>news:81i9pu$oka$1@nntp6.u.washington.edu...
>> Mr. Biddlesworth <mr@biddlesworth.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >So the code of Windows 1.0 (or its prototype) plausibly predated MacOS
1.0 by a year
>> >(unless LisaOS and MacOS 1.0 were virtually identical???).
>>
>> No, it does not. Not if you can do math.
>>
>> --
>> -Roger Tang, gwangung@u.washington.edu, Artistic Director  PC Theatre
>
>
>You should open your mind, face facts, and quit believing Job's propaganda.
>
>I have >>proof<< that Microsoft Windows 1.0 was running in 1983.
>
>Read this 1983 Byte article:
http://www.pla-netx.com/linebackn/guis/win1983.html
>It's so old that Apple's Lisa is mentioned but not Macintosh.
>
>So that debunks the myth that Windows >>originated<< was an imitation of Mac.
>
>History lesson is over.  Class, dismissed.

This is what passes for logic in your head?

The Mac was shipped in January of 1984.  Don't you think maybe that the
Mac OS was running before then? Like for a couple of _years_ minimum.

The fact that Byte didn't do an article on the Macintosh doesn't mean it
didn't exist. Or do you think that after Apple saw the article on Windows
in Byte they just dashed off the Mac OS in a month?

-- 
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall to that
wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you sit in the 
bottom of that cupboard."

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

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

From: tholen@ifa.hawaii.edu                             26-Nov-99 01:15:02
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:20
Subj: Re: I am worried about our future generations...

From: tholen@ifa.hawaii.edu

uno@40th.com writes:

> NT: A better OS2 than OS2.

Oh really?  Does NT run OS/2 Presentation Manager applications?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

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

From: rfovell@yahoo.com                                 25-Nov-99 17:48:27
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:20
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Robert Fovell <rfovell@yahoo.com>


Rob Barris wrote:
> 
> In article <383dcf7d$0$232@nntp1.ba.best.com>, "Mr. Biddlesworth"
> <mr@biddlesworth.com> wrote:
> 
> > R. Tang <gwangung@u.washington.edu> wrote in message
> > news:81i9pu$oka$1@nntp6.u.washington.edu...
> > > Mr. Biddlesworth <mr@biddlesworth.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >So the code of Windows 1.0 (or its prototype) plausibly predated
> MacOS 1.0 by a year
> > > >(unless LisaOS and MacOS 1.0 were virtually identical???).
> > >
> > > No, it does not. Not if you can do math.
> > >
> > > --
> > > -Roger Tang, gwangung@u.washington.edu, Artistic Director  PC Theatre
> >
> >
> > You should open your mind, face facts, and quit believing Job's
propaganda.
> >
> > I have >>proof<< that Microsoft Windows 1.0 was running in 1983.
> >
> > Read this 1983 Byte article:
> http://www.pla-netx.com/linebackn/guis/win1983.html
> > It's so old that Apple's Lisa is mentioned but not Macintosh.
> >
> > So that debunks the myth that Windows >>originated<< was an imitation of
Mac.
> >
> > History lesson is over.  Class, dismissed.
> 
> Oh, and where's that guy with the sig
> 
>    "That's not what the Mac does. I want Mac on the PC, I want Mac on the
PC"-
>    -B.Gates
> 
> when you need him?
> 
> Rob

What a coincidence, here I am (tho with a new .sig after all these years).

According to the chronology in Linzmayer's book, we have this
(interpolations from an analogue timeline are mine):

* IBM PC introduced summer 1981
* MS Mac development begins early 1982 (Gates sees Mac UI at this point,
right? <g>)
* Lisa introduced early 1983
* Windows *announced* late 1983
* Mac introduced January, 1984
* Windows 1.01 released mid-1985

[Windows 2 followed in late 1987, Windows 3 in early 1990.]

I previously excerpted Michael Malone's rather different slant on the
old "stereo/TV" theft from Xerox story in CSMA -- the one in which Gates
claims that Jobs actually copied *Gates*.  I'm sure that the foul Lord
Biddlesworth (not speaking for Intel) will like it, tho not for the
right reasons <g>:

http://x44.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=530793441

So, instead, I'll list this - from p. 269 of "Infinite Loop", by Malone:

<quote>
[O]nce Gates recognized the potential for the Macintosh, he threw every
available soldier he had at it -- until by the time of the Mac's
introduction, Microsoft was fielding a larger Mac team than Apple itself....

Meanwhile, of course, Gates had other plans... Gates had now seen the
Mac interface close up and knew we wanted it.  Even as his people were
at work on applications for this new operating system, Gates was also
setting others to work to destroy it.  This new, graphical operating
system, to be called Windows, was too late to beat the Mac to market,
but Gates figured it could at least meet head-on a more immediate
concern, VisiCorp's new [GUI] software.  With that threat out of the
way, he could them devote months and millions to undermining his old
acquaintance and new partner, Steve Jobs.
</quote>



--
Robert Fovell
Parodies of Mac bashers: http://home.pacbell.net/rfovell

"[A] prize specimen of the irresistible force meeting the immovable
object, a battle without armor, a war without blood, and as elaborate
a waste of human intelligence as you could find anywhere outside an
advertising agency." -- Raymond Chandler (not specifically about CSMA).

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of California, Los Angeles (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                25-Nov-99 20:58:25
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:20
Subj: Re: Tholen Digest II - Electric Boogaloo

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu (tholenbot)

In article <81cl6f$pk0$1@news.hawaii.edu>, tholenantispam@hawaii.edu wrote:

> Eric Bennett writes (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But even that wouldn't completely solve the problem,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as you've also screwed up the correct attributions. 
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is the fact that even that would not completely solve the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problem as Marty also screwed up the correct attributions
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the real reason?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with tholenbot, Dave?
> 
> >>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>> Doesn't look like Eliza anymore.  Looks more like Dave Tholen pasting
in
> >>>>> canned lines from Eliza without actually having Eliza respond to the
> >>>>> post.  
> 
> >>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?
> 
> >>> See what I mean?
> 
> >> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

See what I mean?
 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note that the URL and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the line that follows have the same level of
indentation, yet
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you wrote one and I wrote the other.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does the fact that the url and the line that follows have
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same indentation yet Marty wrote one and you wrote the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other explain anything else?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through
all this?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with "doctor", Dave?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.
> 
> >>>>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?
> 
> >>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with tholenbot, Dave?
> 
> >>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> >>>>> Doesn't look like Eliza anymore.  Looks more like Dave Tholen pasting
in
> >>>>> canned lines from Eliza without actually having Eliza respond to
the post.
> 
> >>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?
> 
> >>> See what I mean?
> 
> >> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?
> 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?

See what I mean?

-- 
"I do not "approve" phrases.
-Dave Tholen"
-tholenbot

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

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

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                25-Nov-99 21:00:14
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:20
Subj: Re: Interesting Reading Comprehension Problem by Bass

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu (tholenbot)

In article <81clfs$pk0$3@news.hawaii.edu>, tholenantispam@hawaii.edu wrote:

> Eric Bennett writes (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> >> David Sutherland writes:
> 
> >>>> What appears to you is irrelevant, Curtis.
>  
> >>> Tholen, you are a lying jerk.
>  
> >> Where is the alleged lie in the above statement, Sutherland?
> 
> > Enjoying your conversation with Sutherland, Dave?
> 
> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

Enjoying your conversation with tholenbot, Dave?
 
> >>> This whole thread would have died if you just had the guts to admit
> >>> that you were wrong,
>  
> >> This whole thread would have died if Timbol just had the guts to admit
> >> that OS/2 Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality.
> 
> > Enjoying your conversation with Sutherland, Dave?
> 
> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?

Enjoying your conversation with tholenbot, Dave?
 
> >> This whole thread would have died if Bass hadn't felt the need to make
> >> a personal attack.
> 
> > Enjoying your conversation with Sutherland, Dave?
> 
> Are you sure that those are Sutherland's?

Enjoying your conversation with tholenbot, Dave?
 
> >>> address the issue but you are too damn arrogant to do it,
> >>> and too damn stupid to realise how bad you look when you don't.
>  
> >> How ironic.
> 
> > Enjoying your conversation with Sutherland, Dave?
> 
> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.

Enjoying your conversation with tholenbot, Dave?

-- 
"I do not "approve" phrases.
-Dave Tholen"
-tholenbot

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

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

From: mr@biddlesworth.com                               25-Nov-99 18:21:10
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:20
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: "Mr. Biddlesworth" <mr@biddlesworth.com>

Alan Baker <Alan_Baker@bc.sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:Alan_Baker-
> In article , "Mr. Biddlesworth" <mr@biddlesworth.com>
> wrote:
>
> >I have >>proof<< that Microsoft Windows 1.0 was running in 1983.
> >
> >Read this 1983 Byte article:
> http://www.pla-netx.com/linebackn/guis/win1983.html
> >It's so old that Apple's Lisa is mentioned but not Macintosh.
> >
> >So that debunks the myth that Windows >>originated<< was an imitation of
Mac.
> >
> >History lesson is over.  Class, dismissed.
>
> The Mac was shipped in January of 1984.  Don't you think maybe that the
> Mac OS was running before then? Like for a couple of _years_ minimum.


Duh, of course Apple was running the Mac's operating system before Jan 1984.
But that doesn't save your religion's myth from being debunked.

When I hear a Mac zealot whine, "Windoze is everywhere, but its just
a crappy imitation of my Mac", I remember Xerox's Star, and see hypocrisy.


Mr. Biddlesworth



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Yeah, Baby! (1:109/42)

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

From: tholen@ifa.hawaii.edu                             26-Nov-99 02:48:03
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:20
Subj: Re: Interesting Reading Comprehension Problem by Bass

From: tholen@ifa.hawaii.edu

Eric Bennett writes (using a pseudonym again):

>>>> David Sutherland writes:

>>>>>> What appears to you is irrelevant, Curtis.

>>>>> Tholen, you are a lying jerk.

>>>> Where is the alleged lie in the above statement, Sutherland?

>>> Enjoying your conversation with Sutherland, Dave?

>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

> Enjoying your conversation with tholenbot, Dave?

Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>> This whole thread would have died if you just had the guts to admit
>>>>> that you were wrong,

>>>> This whole thread would have died if Timbol just had the guts to admit
>>>> that OS/2 Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality.

>>> Enjoying your conversation with Sutherland, Dave?

>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?

> Enjoying your conversation with tholenbot, Dave?

Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>> This whole thread would have died if Bass hadn't felt the need to make
>>>> a personal attack.

>>> Enjoying your conversation with Sutherland, Dave?

>> Are you sure that those are Sutherland's?

> Enjoying your conversation with tholenbot, Dave?

Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>> address the issue but you are too damn arrogant to do it,
>>>>> and too damn stupid to realise how bad you look when you don't.

>>>> How ironic.

>>> Enjoying your conversation with Sutherland, Dave?

>> Maybe your plans have something to do with this.

> Enjoying your conversation with tholenbot, Dave?

Enjoying your conversation with Eliza, Eric?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

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

From: tholen@ifa.hawaii.edu                             26-Nov-99 02:49:17
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:20
Subj: Re: Tholen Digest II - Electric Boogaloo

From: tholen@ifa.hawaii.edu

Eric Bennett writes (using a pseudonym again):

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But even that wouldn't completely solve the problem,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as you've also screwed up the correct attributions. 

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is the fact that even that would not completely solve the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problem as Marty also screwed up the correct attributions
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the real reason?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with "doctor", Dave?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.

>>>>>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with tholenbot, Dave?

>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>> Doesn't look like Eliza anymore.  Looks more like Dave Tholen pasting
in
>>>>>>> canned lines from Eliza without actually having Eliza respond to the
>>>>>>> post.  

>>>>>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

>>>>> See what I mean?

>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?

>>> See what I mean?

>> Why do you say claim might want to do and?

> See what I mean?

Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note that the URL and the line that follows have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same level of indentation, yet you wrote one
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and I wrote the other.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does the fact that the url and the line that follows have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same indentation yet Marty wrote one and you wrote the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other explain anything else?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all this?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your conversation with "doctor", Dave?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see you failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?

>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see you still failed to answer the question.  How predictable.

>>>>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>>>>>> Your failure to answer the question was predictable, Dave.

>>>>>>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?

>>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with tholenbot, Dave?

>>>>>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?

>>>>>>> Doesn't look like Eliza anymore.  Looks more like Dave Tholen pasting
in
>>>>>>> canned lines from Eliza without actually having Eliza respond to
>>>>>>> the post.

>>>>>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?

>>>>> See what I mean?

>>>> Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?

>>> See what I mean?

>> Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?

> See what I mean?

Enjoying your chat with Eliza, Eric?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

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

From: tholen@ifa.hawaii.edu                             26-Nov-99 02:53:07
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:20
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholen@ifa.hawaii.edu

Lucien writes:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Answer the question put to you:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Take the two simple tests, Lucien.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note the refusal to answer a basic, central question -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> looks like we've hit another major soft spot.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note again the pat refusal to answer the question.

>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

>>>>>>>>>>> ....and we see the refusal again

>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>> .....and again...

>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>> ....and again.

>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>> ....and again.

>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

> ....and again.

Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

> The question again for the reader's reference:

The same response again for the reader's reference:

> According to your statement, under what conditions
> does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
> functionality..."?

Perhaps you'd like to tell me how the statement you keep pointing to
applies to the JDK sentence, Lucien.

> Here is Dave's statement again for reference:

Unnecessary, Lucien, again.  I will restore my two simple tests,
however, given that you've never taken them.

> "The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
> 'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
> information."

And how does that concern the JDK sentence, Lucien, as you've repeatedly
insisted?

Note again the pat "refusal" to take the two simple tests:

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Meanwhile, I noticed that you failed to answer my little test,
Lucien:

] #1:  It rained today.                                              
]                                                                    
] #2:  It rained today until sunset.                                 
]                                                                    
] The question:  did it rain all of the day or only some of the day? 
]                                                                    
] The word "rained", by itself, doesn't indicate duration, therefore 
] one cannot determine an unambiguous answer to the question in the  
] absence of other information.  Yet I will claim that the answer to 
] the question is in fact unambiguous in the case of statement #2.   
]                                                                    
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.                                    

Test grade:  F.

Here's another little test for you, Lucien:

] #3:  It did rain today.
] 
] #4:  It didn't rain today.
] 
] The question:  what fraction of the day did it rain?
] 
] Structurally, the two statements are identical, yet there is nothing
] in statement #3 that allows the question to be answered unambiguously,
] while there is something in statement #4 that does allow the question
] to be answered unambigiously.
] 
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.

Test grade:  F.

Perhaps readers will notice how 3-4 corresponds to the "prevent costly
mistakes" thread, where the quantification is provided by the definition
of a word and not the structure.  Perhaps readers will notice how 1-2
corresponds to the "Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality" thread,
where the additional information resolves what would otherwise be
ambiguous.

Yet more evidence that you're playing your own "infantile game".   
Or are you really that idiotic?                                    

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

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

From: look@my.sig                                       26-Nov-99 03:11:13
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:20
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: look@my.sig (Michael J. Stango)

In article <383dcf7d$0$232@nntp1.ba.best.com>, "Mr. Biddlesworth"
<mr@biddlesworth.com> wrote:

> So that debunks the myth that Windows >>originated<< was an imitation of
Mac.
> 
> History lesson is over.  Class, dismissed.

Wrong, asshole. Microsoft was given Macintosh prototypes in 1982.

Excerpt from page 268 of _Hard Drive: Bill Gates & the Making of the
Microsoft Empire_, by James Wallace and Jim Erickson:

"In an interview with Rolling Stone magazine shortly after the announcement
[of the Mac in 1984], Gates told author Steven Levy the Apple engineers who
who developed the Macintosh had 'worked miracles.' Gates had been smitten
by the simplicity of the Mac ever since he saw a prototype back in the
summer of 1981, shortly before IBM announced the PC."

And page 269:

"Microsoft received the first prototypes of the Macintosh in late January
of 1982."

Follow this link to order the book, and Read More About It, snapperhead:

<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0887306292/o/qid=943585559/sr=8-1/00
2-2086865-4742640>

~Philly

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
Michael J. Stango  --who is known as 'mjstango' at his ISP, 'home.com'

Webmaster of <http://www.Tiffany.Schmid.com>
See her in the Hooters 2000 Calendar!

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

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

From: mcbrides@erols.com                                25-Nov-99 23:22:00
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:21
Subj: Re: OS/2's source code

From: mcbrides@erols.com (Jerry McBride)

In article
<y7xHJI5dddgW-pn2-W6d4hB9iWpWK@dialup4.fawlty.kingston-internet.net>,
glen@rockyhorror.Zkaroo.co.uk (Glen D) wrote:
>On Tue, 23 Nov 1999 06:43:23, Trancser <jbergman@ixc.ixc.net> wrote:
>

--- snip ---


>I'm not convinced the source code was "leaked" at all.  If it was then
>the person who has it is keeping it to themselves, which is just as
>useful as if the source code had never left IBM.
>
>Personally I think the only way OS/2 is gonna become public domain is
>if a team of programmers build a FreeOS2 from the ground up (a la
>FreeDos or Freedows) with the intention of it being "100% IBM OS/2
>compatible".  Of course this would require a lot of dedicated people
>willing to commit a lot of spare time to the project.  Unfortunately
>those types of people are rare in the OS/2 community.
>

You're right! And thankfully they're busy working on Linux. Jumping into
FREEOS/2 would only diminish the work going on with Linux. Personally, if IBM
wants me to stop using OS/2 as my personal and small business platform
begining
the year 2000... More power to them. Once I see actuall evidence of people,
users and programmers being charged for updates, fixes, JDK's, NetyScape, etc.
then I'm "out-a-here" and I'm taking it all with me too.


--


*******************************************************************************

*            Sometimes, the BEST things in life really ARE free...           
*
*       Get a FREE copy of NetRexx 1.151 for your next java project at:      
*
*                                                                            
*
*                      GET IT NOW! WHILE IT'S STILL FREE!                    
*
*                                                                            
*
*                     http://www2.hursley.ibm.com/netrexx                    
*
*******************************************************************************


/----------------------------------------\
| From the desktop of: Jerome D. McBride |
|         mcbrides@erols.com             |
\----------------------------------------/

--

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

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

From: mcbrides@erols.com                                25-Nov-99 23:17:15
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:21
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows...

From: mcbrides@erols.com (Jerry McBride)

In article <mcif18.6ke.ln@labserver.emmanuel.uq.edu.au>,
"Christopher Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net> wrote:

--- snip ---

>> Frederic wasn't quite clear: in the BeOS, one window automatically
>> means one _more_ thread - the window rendering thread - created and
>> maintained by the OS runtime. Therefore, even if the app itself was
>> written single-threaded, a second processor will be used.
>>
>> And we didn't even mention the OS threads like the filesystem...
>
>Sounds just like NT to me.

Yup... I could guzzle a keg of Bud, pass wind like a train and it'd sound
JUST LIKE NT...


--

*******************************************************************************

*            Sometimes, the BEST things in life really ARE free...           
*
*       Get a FREE copy of NetRexx 1.151 for your next java project at:      
*
*                                                                            
*
*                      GET IT NOW! WHILE IT'S STILL FREE!                    
*
*                                                                            
*
*                     http://www2.hursley.ibm.com/netrexx                    
*
*******************************************************************************


/----------------------------------------\
| From the desktop of: Jerome D. McBride |
|         mcbrides@erols.com             |
\----------------------------------------/

--

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

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

From: yoceuh@hotmail.com                                26-Nov-99 05:13:25
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:21
Subj: Very Special Report coming soon  2035

From: yoceuh@hotmail.com

This is not spam. You are receiving this because you have sent me information
about your program or opportunity and I appreciate it. I would like to
reciprocate because many of you would like to retire, financially, within 6-9
months, as I will. 
 Let me keep it short and direct. I have extremely valuable information to
share with you. It involves a private club and wealth building along with
asset preservation. The best part is you DO NOT have to recruit or sell if you 
choose not to. Just being a member will avail you to unbelievable wealth
building tools and information formerly reserved only for the rich and famous. 
 If you want to test me on my claim to retire with this, financially, within
my first 6-9 months, do yourself a favor and click here
<mailto:glue143@hotmail.com?subject=More_Info_Please> for more info, and then
simply click on send, you do not need to add any info in the body... just two
clicks and I will respond with info you NEED to have.  Thanks for your time,
GLUE Glue143@hotmail.com <mailto:Glue143@hotmail.com> National Voice Mail
877.795.8921 
To be removed from my list of future mailings on this subject click here
<mailto:glue143@hotmail.com?subject=remove_please>. Thank-You. 

wkyrmjebjshnxldysvuvuysivqitcmqmwdoqhxujxrrkbwsqftufogh

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

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

From: drsmithy@usa.net                                  26-Nov-99 15:27:25
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:21
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows... 

From: "Christopher Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net>

"Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote in message
news:s3rlh9bna4r12@corp.supernews.com...
> Funny, the full version of OS 9 is $99, the full version of Win98 SE is
> $189... Who's out of touch?

There is no "full version" of OS 9 - they're all upgrades.


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

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

From: znu@znu.dhs.org                                   26-Nov-99 05:47:02
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:21
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows... 

From: znu@znu.dhs.org (ZnU)

In article <8c5l18.34t.ln@labserver.emmanuel.uq.edu.au>, "Christopher
Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net> wrote:

> "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote in message
> news:s3rlh9bna4r12@corp.supernews.com...
> > Funny, the full version of OS 9 is $99, the full version of Win98 SE is
> > $189... Who's out of touch?
> 
> There is no "full version" of OS 9 - they're all upgrades.

But we can determine the price of a "full version" of Mac OS. Mac OS 8.0
ran on CHRP systems, and was priced the same as every Mac OS release
since.

-- 
All parts should go together without forcing.  You must remember that the
parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you.  Therefore, if you
can't get them together again, there must be a reason.  By all means, do
not use a hammer.
           --IBM maintenance manual, 1925

ZnU <znu@znu.dhs.org> | <http://znu.dhs.org>

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

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

From: drsmithy@usa.net                                  26-Nov-99 17:06:15
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:21
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows... 

From: "Christopher Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net>

"ZnU" <znu@znu.dhs.org> wrote in message
news:znu-2611990043330001@192.168.0.2...
> In article <8c5l18.34t.ln@labserver.emmanuel.uq.edu.au>, "Christopher
> Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net> wrote:
>
> > "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote in message
> > news:s3rlh9bna4r12@corp.supernews.com...
> > > Funny, the full version of OS 9 is $99, the full version of Win98 SE
is
> > > $189... Who's out of touch?
> >
> > There is no "full version" of OS 9 - they're all upgrades.
>
> But we can determine the price of a "full version" of Mac OS. Mac OS 8.0
> ran on CHRP systems, and was priced the same as every Mac OS release
> since.

Of course the other way is to sum the cost of the components in a Mac and
subtract that from the retail cost.  Somehow I don't think the two figure
will mesh.  IIRC Steve Jobs also said once that the cost of MacOS factored
into each Mac was around the $200 mark.


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

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

From: znu@znu.dhs.org                                   26-Nov-99 07:22:05
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:22
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows... 

From: znu@znu.dhs.org (ZnU)

In article <65bl18.eqt.ln@labserver.emmanuel.uq.edu.au>, "Christopher
Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net> wrote:

> "ZnU" <znu@znu.dhs.org> wrote in message
> news:znu-2611990043330001@192.168.0.2...
> > In article <8c5l18.34t.ln@labserver.emmanuel.uq.edu.au>, "Christopher
> > Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net> wrote:
> >
> > > "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote in message
> > > news:s3rlh9bna4r12@corp.supernews.com...
> > > > Funny, the full version of OS 9 is $99, the full version of Win98 SE
> is
> > > > $189... Who's out of touch?
> > >
> > > There is no "full version" of OS 9 - they're all upgrades.
> >
> > But we can determine the price of a "full version" of Mac OS. Mac OS 8.0
> > ran on CHRP systems, and was priced the same as every Mac OS release
> > since.
> 
> Of course the other way is to sum the cost of the components in a Mac and
> subtract that from the retail cost.  Somehow I don't think the two figure
> will mesh.

Not everything in a Mac is off-the-shelf. Moreover, your method ignores
the cost of design, assembly, testing, marketing, support, packaging, etc.
You'll find that an OEM copy of Windows 98 runs about $300 if you compare
the cost of a Gateway machine w/ Win 98 to a home-built system with the
same components (sans Win 98). Knowing nothing about Apple's internal
organization, the salaries employees are paid, the taxes Apple pays on the
Cupertino campus, the cost of an ounce of translucent blue iMac plastic,
etc. there is no way to make an accurate guess as to how much of that
difference goes into Mac OS development.

> IIRC Steve Jobs also said once that the cost of MacOS factored
> into each Mac was around the $200 mark.

AFAIK, Apple has been very careful to not mention what Mac OS actually
costs, so I doubt Jobs would come out an give a number. There are some
rumors that Apple was asking for something like that for high-end clones,
but that doesnt mean anything. Apple could very well have been asking for
such a high price to make up for losing a high-end hardware sale, or it
could have just been that Apple wanted clones gone but didnt want to just
have to kill them outright (for PR and possibly contractual reasons), so
Apple simply named a price that cloners wouldnt pay.

-- 
All parts should go together without forcing.  You must remember that the
parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you.  Therefore, if you
can't get them together again, there must be a reason.  By all means, do
not use a hammer.
           --IBM maintenance manual, 1925

ZnU <znu@znu.dhs.org> | <http://znu.dhs.org>

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

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

From: brentdaviesNOSPAM@home.com                        26-Nov-99 07:35:00
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:22
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Brent Davies" <brentdaviesNOSPAM@home.com>

Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
news:383d351c$4$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com...
| On <QE7%3.29175$zd.331700@news1.alsv1.occa.home.com>, on 11/25/99 at 09:51
| AM,
|    "Brent Davies" <brentdaviesNOSPAM@home.com> said:
|
| > Don't confuse him with the facts.  It's probably more fun for him to
| > invision Gates going to a Ferderal Pen for abuse of monopolistic power.
| > Even the prospect of someone believing such a think makes me laugh.
|
| I have cited by name one person who went to Federal prison for violating
| the price-fixing portion of the Sherman Act. His name was George E. Burens
| and he was a ranking executive of General Electric Company. He was one of
| several executives of several companies who were all tried and sentenced
| together.

I admit that my knowledge of anti-trust law is not too strong, but I
believe you are talking about collusion, which is, IINM, a higher
crime than leveraging monopolistic power the way MS has been
found to be doing.  You can't say they are "price fixing" when
their operating systems are some of the least expensive on the
market (CALs not withstanding).

-B


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

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         26-Nov-99 09:06:08
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:22
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

David Sutherland writes:

> [snip]

>> Tell me, Curtis, do any of the following end with a preposition:
>>
>>   "sit up"
>>
>>   "speak up"
>>
>>   "your time is up"
>>
>>   "from third grade up"
>>

> "up from third grade"

>>   "the score is 15 up"
>>

> "up from a scrore of 15"
>
> etc etc etc.
>
> Tholen, you really are incredibly inept.

How ironic.  When the score is 15 up, that means the score is tied
at 15.

Talk about inept!

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         26-Nov-99 09:08:00
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:22
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.

Curtis Bass writes:

> -- snip --

> -- snip --

> -- snip --

In other words, Curtis added nothing new.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         26-Nov-99 09:09:14
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:22
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.

Curtis Bass writes:

> The remarq.com webserver resets to the initial page, Dave.

That's not my problem, Curtis.

> Go ahead. try it yourself.  Go to the page, then hyperlink to a subpage,
> cut the url into your clipboard, close your browser, reopen it, paste
> the url into the location, and note where you end up.

That's not my problem, Curtis.

> Or ignore even more evidence, "scientist."

How ironic.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         26-Nov-99 09:10:20
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:22
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.

Curtis Bass writes:

> There is a relationship between the two words, Dave, as the evidence
> clearly shows.

Too bad you're using both incorrectly.

> You can also deny the existence of the moon and sun, but that doesn't
> prove anything.

Irrelevant, given that I haven't done so.

> Which has nothing to do with my state of mind at the time I stated "This
> is my final post in this subthread."

Obviously you weren't sincere.  Witness your continued postings.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         26-Nov-99 09:14:09
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:22
Subj: Re: Interesting Reading Comprehension Problem by Bass

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.

Curtis Bass writes:

> It's a qualified statement.

Are you suggesting that someone who says "As far as I am concerned,
two plus two equals five" is stating an opinion because it was
"qualified", Curtis?

> I didn't *call* it such.

Wrong again, Curtis:

CB] As far as I am concerned, "Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2
CB] functionality" *IS* a bullshit statement;

> I expressed my *opinion* that it was such.

Are you suggesting that someone who says "As far as I am concerned,
two plus two equals five" is stating an opinion because it was
"qualified", Curtis?

> There is nothing to "defend," Dave.

On the contrary, your concern is there to defend, Curtis.

> "As far as I am concerned" qualifies the statement as an opinion.

Are you suggesting that someone who says "As far as I am concerned,
two plus two equals five" is stating an opinion because it was
"qualified", Curtis?

> Really? Do you really mean that, Dave?

Why shouldn't you, Curtis?

> That statement is *WRONG.*

How ironic, coming from the person who claimed that I was making OS/2
look bad.

> By your own words, you should retract it.

How ironic, coming from the person who hasn't retracted the "inept"
claim.

> Failure to do so means you're a hypocrite.

How ironic.

> We're waiting . . .

Who else are you speaking for, Curtis?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         26-Nov-99 09:24:15
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:22
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.

Curtis Bass writes:

> Unfortunately, it is the best I can do.

"Inept".

> Technology has its limits.

I've been able to point to single articles at deja.com, Curtis.

> For whatever reason, the webserver resets to the initial page of the
> thread if you try to link directly to a subpage.

That's not my problem, Curtis.

> Nevertheless, the evidence *IS* there.

There is no evidence that your JPEG propagated to our news server,
Curtis.

> That you ignore it surprises no one.

You're erroneously presupposing that there is evidence of your JPEG
propagating to our news server, Curtis.

> Others can (and will) peruse the thread, see the evidence, and
> conclude that you lose yet again.

Others can peruse the thread, see the evidnece, and see that I'm
right about OS/2 Java 1.1.8 implementing Java 1.2 functionality.
Others can peruse the thread, see the evidence, and discover that
while I'm addressing the issue, you're making personal attacks.
Others can peruse the thread, see the evidence, and find you
effectively claiming that the truth can't be invective.
Others can peruse the thread, see the evidence, and laugh at your
claim that I'm making OS/2 look bad because InfoZip can't unzip
an incomplete file.  Others can peruse the thread, see the evidence,
and realize that you're continuing to post in a subthread where you
claimed several days ago that that post would be your last.

> In other words, you take the second option:

Incorrect, given that your so-called "evidence" doesn't deal with
my copy of the javainuf.exe file, Curtis.

> No surprises there.

Your continued hypocrisy is no surprise, Curtis.

> One cannot "presuppose" that which one has seen, Dave.

Have you seen what propagated to our news server, Curtis?

> Yeah, and black is white, Dave.

Wrong again, Curtis.

> Night is Day.

Wrong again, Curtis.

> Freedom is Slavery.

Wrong again, Curtis.

> War is Peace.

Wrong again, Curtis.

> Ignorance is Strength.

Wrong again, Curtis.

> Believe whatever you want, Dave,

You're the one with the long list of wrong beliefs, Curtis.

> while the rest of us chuckle and laugh.

As the saying goes, "ignorance is bliss".

> Another day has gone by and you have failed to post an example of
> admitting error during an adversarial exchange,

You're the one who made the claim, Curtis, thus the burden of proof
falls on your shoulders.  I see you've failed yet again to reproduce
a single unadmitted error during a so-called "adversarial exchange".

> opting again to arrogantly imply that you do not make errors.

Once again, you fail to demonstrate comprehension of the difference
between "imply" and "infer".

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            26-Nov-99 09:35:07
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:22
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Wed, 24 Nov 1999 23:00:25, Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com> wrote:

> Karel Jansens wrote:
> > I have yet to meet an experienced wordprocessor who
> > actually likes a mouse.
> 
> Oh man do you get a thumbs up for this statement from me.  I HATE
mouse-driven
> wordprocessors.  MS Word is the worst damn thing I've ever seen in that
> respect (even worse than the original MacWrite, and that's a hard act to
> follow in terms of badness for typists).  There's no way at all to do even
> simple editing tasks other than "delete character" without removing your
hands
> from the home row.  And that is a serious productivity destroyer to a
> touch-typist.
> 
I have one version of Word that I use: Word 2.0 came on the ROM disk 
of my Omnibook 425. And although it is a useable tool, the annoying 
dependence on the rodent (especially the pop-out "mouse-on-a-stick" of
the OB seriously hinders my productivity. I have actually resorted to 
booting the OB into DOS (it really is a taylored Win3.1 machine) and 
running WP 6.0 at a reduced speed (because it runs from the flash 
drive, and not in XIP mode), just so as I can type instead of hunt'n 
peck.

(I prefer 6.0 to 5.1, because I regularly have to make higly visual 
documents, and the WYSIWYG mode of 6.0 is really handy).

> Wordperfect was pretty good but it used the mnemonic approach that tends to
> cause finger-twisting (emacs does the same thing; the basic key bindings are
> even similar).  That can lead to increased cases of RSI.  I long for
> WordStar-style bindings, although we'd have to move the control key back to
> where it should be.
> 
IMHO, the advantage of WP is that it would allow (less so in these 
Corel days, alas) the user to "invent" his/her own user interface. I 
know many WordPerfecters who have "developed" a mishmash of keyboard-,
function keys- and the odd mouse combination that works best for them.
It does for me too <G>.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net

Microsoft MVP -- Not!

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

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

From: thorne25@juno.com                                 26-Nov-99 06:02:27
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:22
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com>

winblows <winblows@none.com> wrote in message
news:383e2bff$0$211@nntp1.ba.best.com...
>
> ----------
> In article <383dee89$0$204@nntp1.ba.best.com>, "Mr. Biddlesworth"
> <mr@biddlesworth.com> wrote:
>
>
> >Alan Baker <Alan_Baker@bc.sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:Alan_Baker-
> >> In article , "Mr. Biddlesworth" <mr@biddlesworth.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I have >>proof<< that Microsoft Windows 1.0 was running in 1983.
> >> >
> >> >Read this 1983 Byte article:
> >> http://www.pla-netx.com/linebackn/guis/win1983.html
> >> >It's so old that Apple's Lisa is mentioned but not Macintosh.
> >> >
> >> >So that debunks the myth that Windows >>originated<< was an imitation
of Mac.
> >> >
> >> >History lesson is over.  Class, dismissed.
> >>
> >> The Mac was shipped in January of 1984.  Don't you think maybe that the
> >> Mac OS was running before then? Like for a couple of _years_ minimum.
> >
> >
> >Duh, of course Apple was running the Mac's operating system before Jan
1984.
> >But that doesn't save your religion's myth from being debunked.
> >
> >When I hear a Mac zealot whine, "Windoze is everywhere, but its just
> >a crappy imitation of my Mac", I remember Xerox's Star, and see
hypocrisy.
> >
> >
> >Mr. Biddlesworth
> >
> >
>
> Mr. Biddlesworth (?), the hypocrisy is yours for trolling with Microsoft's
> well-known historical and innate pre-disposition towards plagiarism:

My, what a heaping helping of steaming bullsh*t you've served up this time.
You've really let your igorance shine.

> CPM -> MS DOS (QDOS was a copy)

QDOS was NOT a copy of CP/M.

> MacOS -> MS Windows

Whatever MS took from Mac OS was licensed to it.  This has been settled in
court, and settled forever by MS's $150 million payment to Apple.

> Visicalc/Lotus -> MS Excel

Visicalc was the first spreadsheet.  Why have you got it lumped in with
Lotus?   Because that would make Lotus the first "plagiarist?"

> WordStar -> MS Word

I used WordStar.   You're full of it if you say MS-Word is a copy of
WordStar.

> MacProject -> MS Project

What was copied, the word "Project?"

> Hypercard -> MS Visual Basic

Pure bullsh*t.  Hypercard doesn't do anywhere near what VB does.

> Netscape -> MS IE Explorer

Another blatant lie.   IE derives from Mosaic, as does Netscape.

> Java -> MS 'polluted' Java

> RealAudio -> MS Media Player

Bullsh*t.   Media Player plays MS formats, and those LICENCED  to it by Real
Networks.


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

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

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           26-Nov-99 07:59:16
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:22
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <Alan_Baker-2511991719480001@a3a31538.sympatico.bconnected.net>, on
11/25/99 at 05:19 PM,
   Alan_Baker@bc.sympatico.ca (Alan Baker) said:


> The fact that Byte didn't do an article on the Macintosh doesn't mean it
> didn't exist. Or do you think that after Apple saw the article on
> Windows in Byte they just dashed off the Mac OS in a month?

Of course you are right. When Gates released Windows 1.0, Apple threatened
suit claiming that MS had ripped off the Mac interface. Gates dismissed
the claim in the press with a remark that both he and Jobs had raided
XEROX PARC which was the real inventor of the interface. 

Gates also forced Jobs to back off by threatening to stop development of
the applications the Mac depended upon. At that time, Apple was MS's
biggest single customer since MS did the spreadsheet, wordprocessor, etc.
for Apple.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

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

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

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           26-Nov-99 08:02:25
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 10:42:22
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-21dt1dFK6Cno@localhost>, on 11/26/99 at 09:35 AM,
   jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) said:

> IMHO, the advantage of WP is that it would allow (less so in these 
> Corel days, alas) the user to "invent" his/her own user interface. I 
> know many WordPerfecters who have "developed" a mishmash of keyboard-,
> function keys- and the odd mouse combination that works best for them.
> It does for me too <G>.

And how I miss those alt or control plus letter or number key macros I
incorporated into my default keyboard. How much easier it was to hit F12,
use the arrow keys to highlight the exact text I wanted to manipulate, and
then hit Alt-d to delete, Alt-c to copy, or Alt-m to move it. The last, of
course required me to move the cursor to the insertion point and hit
Enter.

I also had a separate keyboard for doing my wife's weekly lesson plans.
Many things were duplicated on those plans and each had a macro.

Until WP came along, I used SuperKey to do those tasks which really slowed
down the old AT. I still have the SK macros in my DOS\BIN subdirectory
although I haven't loaded SK for over a decade.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

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

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

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           26-Nov-99 08:10:04
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 14:27:20
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <FKq%3.30211$zd.338810@news1.alsv1.occa.home.com>, on 11/26/99 at 07:35
AM,
   "Brent Davies" <brentdaviesNOSPAM@home.com> said:

> I admit that my knowledge of anti-trust law is not too strong, but I
> believe you are talking about collusion, which is, IINM, a higher crime
> than leveraging monopolistic power the way MS has been found to be
> doing.  You can't say they are "price fixing" when their operating
> systems are some of the least expensive on the market (CALs not
> withstanding).

Huh? Windows one of the least expensive OS's on the market? What are you
smoking fella?

Linux costs $0. Redhat Linux costs $39 with documentation and support.
Corel Linux is $59 with documentation and support. BeOS is $69 with
documentation and support. I cannot find DR-DOS on the web (I forget what
it's called now) but I paid $59 for it about a year ago. IBM-PC DOS 7
costs $79 for the upgrade version.

Windows 98, conversely, costs $89 for the upgrade version. This is the
highest other than Warp.

Even Warp for small companies with 50 or more users is cheaper by far than
Windows 98 even without considering the cost of Network software. Look at
the facts, Jack.

Warp Server for eBusiness is $1400. Additional user licenses are $59. For
a 50 user network, That's an investment of $1,400 + $2,950 or a total of
$4,350. Fifty Windows 98 upgrades cost $4,450 and you have to also
purchase some server software and 50 user licenses!

NT 4.0 at discount on the web costs $191 per workstation. The server with
5 user licenses is $663. Each additional 5 licenses are $59. So NT would
cost $10,744. Not to mention that NT Server sucks big time.

And if you look at a company with 10 workstations, Warp would cost them
$1,990. Compare that to NT at $2,632. 





--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

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

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

From: nik@hiwaay.net                                    26-Nov-99 08:20:19
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 14:27:20
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows... 

From: "Nik Simpson" <nik@hiwaay.net>

"ZnU" <znu@znu.dhs.org> wrote in message
news:znu-2611990218360001@192.168.0.2...
>
> Not everything in a Mac is off-the-shelf. Moreover, your method ignores
> the cost of design, assembly, testing, marketing, support, packaging, etc.
> You'll find that an OEM copy of Windows 98 runs about $300 if you compare
> the cost of a Gateway machine w/ Win 98 to a home-built system with the
> same components (sans Win 98).


I don't follow your logic here, are you saying that if a Gateway machine of
configuration X (including Win98) costs $1,300 and equivalent hardware
bought from Joe Blow's PC Emporium costs $1000 with Win98, then the cost of
Win98 is $300? Surely you realise that is is total bullshit since it assumes
that pricing from Joe's PC Emporium vs. Gateway is identical for hardware
components which is nonsense.


--
Nik Simpson


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

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

From: lucien@metrowerks.com                             26-Nov-99 14:34:13
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 14:27:20
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: lucien@metrowerks.com

In article <81ksmr$8cs$3@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenAntiSpam@ifa.hawaii.edu wrote:
> Lucien writes:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Answer the question put to you:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Take the two simple tests, Lucien.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note the refusal to answer a basic, central question -
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> looks like we've hit another major soft spot.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Note again the pat refusal to answer the question.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> ....and we see the refusal again
>
> >>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>> .....and again...
>
> >>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>> ....and again.
>
> >> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> > ....and again.
>
> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

...and again.

The (unanswered) question again for the reader's reference:

According to your statement, under what conditions
does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
functionality..."?

Here is Dave's statement again for reference:

"The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
information."

Lucien S.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

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

From: LP@iroadrunner.net                                26-Nov-99 10:22:28
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 14:27:21
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows... 

From: "LP" <LP@iroadrunner.net>

ZnU <znu@znu.dhs.org> wrote in message
news:znu-2611990218360001@192.168.0.2...
> In article <65bl18.eqt.ln@labserver.emmanuel.uq.edu.au>, "Christopher
> Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net> wrote:
>
> > "ZnU" <znu@znu.dhs.org> wrote in message
> > news:znu-2611990043330001@192.168.0.2...
> > > In article <8c5l18.34t.ln@labserver.emmanuel.uq.edu.au>, "Christopher
> > > Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote in message
> > > > news:s3rlh9bna4r12@corp.supernews.com...
> > > > > Funny, the full version of OS 9 is $99, the full version of Win98
SE
> > is
> > > > > $189... Who's out of touch?
> > > >
> > > > There is no "full version" of OS 9 - they're all upgrades.
> > >
> > > But we can determine the price of a "full version" of Mac OS. Mac OS
8.0
> > > ran on CHRP systems, and was priced the same as every Mac OS release
> > > since.
> >
> > Of course the other way is to sum the cost of the components in a Mac
and
> > subtract that from the retail cost.  Somehow I don't think the two
figure
> > will mesh.
>
> Not everything in a Mac is off-the-shelf. Moreover, your method ignores
> the cost of design, assembly, testing, marketing, support, packaging, etc.
> You'll find that an OEM copy of Windows 98 runs about $300 if you compare
> the cost of a Gateway machine w/ Win 98 to a home-built system with the
> same components (sans Win 98). Knowing nothing about Apple's internal
> organization, the salaries employees are paid, the taxes Apple pays on the
> Cupertino campus, the cost of an ounce of translucent blue iMac plastic,
> etc. there is no way to make an accurate guess as to how much of that
> difference goes into Mac OS development.

Of course, your method of "determining" the cost of OEM WIn98 is laughable
at best.
You  are ignoring all the internal cost of Gateway's organization, etc..

Second, if you apply your method to other computer companies.. you'll not
get a consistant
result.

Third.. I doubt that any OEM would be purchasing Win98 for MORE than the
full retail cost of the OS!

btw: the "cost" to  OEM's are pretty much well known, except for the largest
companies, e.g. Dell, etc..




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

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

From: jhimmel@i-2000.com                                26-Nov-99 16:18:20
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 14:27:21
Subj: Re: I am worried about our future generations...

From: jhimmel@i-2000.com (James Himmelman)

On Fri, 26 Nov 1999 15:34:11, "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@hamilton.edu> 
wrote:

> Something claiming to be a <tholen@ifa.hawaii.edu> felt wounded and
> tholened: 
> > > NT: A better OS2 than OS2.
> > Oh really?
> Yes.
 
> > Does NT run OS/2 Presentation Manager applications?

> Nope.  Why would it want to?

It would have to in order to be a better OS/2 than OS/2.

[[[ James Himmelman - jhimmel@i-2000.com ]]]

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

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

From: thorne25@juno.com                                 26-Nov-99 10:31:13
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 14:27:21
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com>

R. Tang <gwangung@u.washington.edu> wrote in message
news:81kjpo$1ams$1@nntp6.u.washington.edu...
> In article <383dcf7d$0$232@nntp1.ba.best.com>,
> Mr. Biddlesworth <mr@biddlesworth.com> wrote:
> >R. Tang <gwangung@u.washington.edu> wrote in message
> >news:81i9pu$oka$1@nntp6.u.washington.edu...
> >> Mr. Biddlesworth <mr@biddlesworth.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >So the code of Windows 1.0 (or its prototype) plausibly predated MacOS
1.0 by a year
> >> >(unless LisaOS and MacOS 1.0 were virtually identical???).
> >>
> >> No, it does not. Not if you can do math.
> >>
> >> --
> >> -Roger Tang, gwangung@u.washington.edu, Artistic Director  PC Theatre
> >
> >
> >You should open your mind, face facts, and quit believing Job's
propaganda.
> >
> >I have >>proof<< that Microsoft Windows 1.0 was running in 1983.
> >
> >Read this 1983 Byte article:
http://www.pla-netx.com/linebackn/guis/win1983.html
> >It's so old that Apple's Lisa is mentioned but not Macintosh.
> >
> >So that debunks the myth that Windows >>originated<< was an imitation of
Mac.
>
> Hardly, Mr. Troll.
>
> Try harder. Use some elementary logic; it'll improve your
> trolling.

Why don't you step us through this "elementary logic?"

>
>
> --
> -Roger Tang, gwangung@u.washington.edu, Artistic Director  PC Theatre
> - Editor, Asian American Theatre Revue [NEW URL]
> - http://www.abcflash.com/a&e/r_tang/AATR.html
> -Declared 4-F in the War Between the Sexes


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

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

From: thorne25@juno.com                                 26-Nov-99 10:33:01
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 14:27:21
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com>

Mr. Biddlesworth <mr@biddlesworth.com> wrote in message
news:383dcf7d$0$232@nntp1.ba.best.com...
> R. Tang <gwangung@u.washington.edu> wrote in message
> news:81i9pu$oka$1@nntp6.u.washington.edu...
> > Mr. Biddlesworth <mr@biddlesworth.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >So the code of Windows 1.0 (or its prototype) plausibly predated MacOS
1.0 by a year
> > >(unless LisaOS and MacOS 1.0 were virtually identical???).
> >
> > No, it does not. Not if you can do math.
> >
> > --
> > -Roger Tang, gwangung@u.washington.edu, Artistic Director  PC Theatre
>
>
> You should open your mind, face facts, and quit believing Job's
propaganda.
>
> I have >>proof<< that Microsoft Windows 1.0 was running in 1983.
>
> Read this 1983 Byte article:
http://www.pla-netx.com/linebackn/guis/win1983.html
> It's so old that Apple's Lisa is mentioned but not Macintosh.
>
> So that debunks the myth that Windows >>originated<< was an imitation of
Mac.
>
> History lesson is over.  Class, dismissed.

Thanks.   I saved that article.   It should come in very handy.
> --
> Mr. Biddlesworth
>
>
>


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

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

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          26-Nov-99 16:49:18
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 14:27:21
Subj: Re: Interesting Reading Comprehension Problem by Bass

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>Ian "The Moron" Tholen
>Are you suggesting that someone who says "As far as I am concerned,
>two plus two equals five" is stating an opinion because it was
>"qualified", Curtis?

Oh, I know where this particular Tholen Cliche is going because I've
heard it used before. (It's all the same myopic, pedantic nonsense
with Tholen, over and over. His bag of dumb tricks are not all that
varied nor imaginative). I'm going to be able to dig out yet another,
embarrassingly dumb Tholen Cliche that contradicts the above and once
again demonstrates exactly why Tholen is a dimwitted hypocrite who
can't even follow his *own* logic without contradicting himself.

The Tholen Digest is armed and ready to fire

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

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

From: jmalloy@hamilton.edu                              26-Nov-99 10:16:25
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 14:27:21
Subj: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451507.456835257959SE^-69845609908-46

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@hamilton.edu>

Tholen just keeps expanding into other threads, despite my efforts to get
him to consolidate his "infantile game" into just a single thread.  And note
he's taken to reposting the same old material again and again, ridiculously
expecting responses to his Kook-generated tripe.  Here's today's digest:

{O}

That's it, folks, thanks for reading!



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

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

From: jmalloy@hamilton.edu                              26-Nov-99 10:34:05
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 14:27:21
Subj: Re: I am worried about our future generations...

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@hamilton.edu>

Something claiming to be a <tholen@ifa.hawaii.edu> felt wounded and
tholened:

> > NT: A better OS2 than OS2.
>
> Oh really?

Yes.

> Does NT run OS/2 Presentation Manager applications?

Nope.  Why would it want to?


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

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

From: ruel24@fuse.net                                   26-Nov-99 11:06:08
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 14:27:21
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows... 

From: "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net>

Funny, I can wipe my system clean and install the full OS 9. That's a full
version my friend.

They are all called updates because every Mac system has a Mac OS already.
You cannot build your own nor buy a non-Apple Mac. Therefore, you have to
have an earlier OS version one way or another.

--
Ruel Smith
Cincinnati, OH

CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?

"Christopher Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net> wrote in message
news:8c5l18.34t.ln@labserver.emmanuel.uq.edu.au...
>
> "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote in message
> news:s3rlh9bna4r12@corp.supernews.com...
> > Funny, the full version of OS 9 is $99, the full version of Win98 SE is
> > $189... Who's out of touch?
>
> There is no "full version" of OS 9 - they're all upgrades.
>
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

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

From: thlayli23x@theglobe.com                           26-Nov-99 11:10:20
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 14:27:21
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Thlayli <thlayli23x@theglobe.com>

"Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:

[snip]
>> WordStar -> MS Word
>
>I used WordStar.   You're full of it if you say MS-Word is a copy of
>WordStar.

MS Word is descended from "Bravo", the first GUI word processor.  Bravo was
written at PARC by Charles Simonyi (or, more precisely, by programmers
supervised by Simonyi), who took it with him when he was hired by Microsoft.

--
Thlayli
thlayli23x@theglobe.com   http://www.geocities.com/~thlayli23x/home.html

This message printed on 100% recycled electrons (40% post-consumer)

*** Replace "theglobe.com" with "usa.net" to email me ***

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

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

From: LP@iroadrunner.net                                23-Nov-99 20:55:25
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 14:27:21
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: "LP" <LP@iroadrunner.net>


After using the MacOS for over 8 years.. with merely one day of NT under my
belt.. NT was far more productive for me. No more rampant crashes..  NT
empowered me to do work that I was never able to do on the Mac.

In the end, that is all that matters.




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

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

From: LP@iroadrunner.net                                23-Nov-99 20:57:04
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 14:27:21
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: "LP" <LP@iroadrunner.net>

ZnU <znu@znu.dhs.org> wrote in message
news:znu-2311991352570001@192.168.0.2...
> In article <383a9654$4$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com>, Bob Germer
> <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote:
>
> > On <81cjjv$kr8$1@news.campuscwix.net>, on 11/22/99 at 03:29 PM,
> >    "Chad Mulligan" <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org> said:
> >
> >
> > > How well does your cli function without a keyboard.  GUI's do this all
> > > the time.
> >
> > All one has to do is read the above to know what kind of idiot you are.
No
> > GUI can operate without a keyboard as well once the program is loaded.
For
> > example, how can you tell IE where you want to go on the web without
> > typing in the www.address? How can you reply to email without a
keyboard?
> > How can you enter data in a spreadsheet without a keyboard.
>
> Actually, Mac OS _can_ be used without a keyboard, right out of the box.
> You can open the Key Caps DA, type with the mouse, and copy the text into
> other apps.
>
> Not much fun though.

The KeyCaps DA is then the "keyboard" merely in another form..

How do you use your mac without the mouse thou?




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

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

From: LP@iroadrunner.net                                26-Nov-99 10:16:03
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 14:27:21
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows... 

From: "LP" <LP@iroadrunner.net>

Ruel Smith <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote in message
news:s3rlh9bna4r12@corp.supernews.com...
> Funny, the full version of OS 9 is $99, the full version of Win98 SE is
> $189... Who's out of touch?

I see that many people still can not comprehend the difference between an
upgrade license, and a new/full license.

The upgrade license for previous owners of MacOS with full-install is $99
for OS9, and for owners of Windows is $95 for Win98SE.
You can not buy a new license for the MacOS 9.0 without buying a computer
from apple. But you can buy a nelicense form MS for $189 in case you are
building your new computer.

btw: have you compared the upgrade to either OS for owner's of the last
version?   To upgrade from 8.6.1 to OS9 is $79 with the $20 rebate.
To upgrade to WIn98SE from WIn98 is $19.  Of course, you can download 95% of
SE for free.. and about the only thing you are not getting is the "internet
connection sharing" feature.





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

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

From: LP@iroadrunner.net                                26-Nov-99 10:18:08
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 14:27:21
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows... 

From: "LP" <LP@iroadrunner.net>

ZnU <znu@znu.dhs.org> wrote in message
news:znu-2611990043330001@192.168.0.2...
> In article <8c5l18.34t.ln@labserver.emmanuel.uq.edu.au>, "Christopher
> Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net> wrote:
>
> > "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote in message
> > news:s3rlh9bna4r12@corp.supernews.com...
> > > Funny, the full version of OS 9 is $99, the full version of Win98 SE
is
> > > $189... Who's out of touch?
> >
> > There is no "full version" of OS 9 - they're all upgrades.
>
> But we can determine the price of a "full version" of Mac OS. Mac OS 8.0
> ran on CHRP systems, and was priced the same as every Mac OS release
> since.

If you are usin an upgrade license as a new license.. then you are violating
the law.

If we're going to discuss criminal behavior.. then well, my Deep Blue
computer cost me $0.01 and runs rings around any of your "personal
computers"...





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

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

From: uno@40th.com                                      26-Nov-99 17:29:16
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 19:59:04
Subj: Re: I am worried about our future generations...

From: uno@40th.com (uno@40th.com)

Yes, NT will run PM apps.  This is OS2 16-bit PM apps,
not OS2 32-bit PM apps.  Also, it's not in the box,
like console app support is; MS sends the PM kit out
to you by request.

The seemed-obvious point is is that NT isn't handicapped
in its native mode just to run OS2 16-bit apps.  OS2, since
2.0, has been and always will be handicapped by this legacy
support: tiled memory, small user address space (effectively
300 MB, tops) that that provides, and then of course, all
the 16-bit code that's always exectuted, no matter what, in
the kernel and drivers.  And still, NT runs OS2 better than OS2.

James Himmelman? (jhimmel@i-2000.com?) wrote (Fri, 26 Nov 1999
>> > Does NT run OS/2 Presentation Manager applications?
>> Nope.  Why would it want to?
>It would have to in order to be a better OS/2 than OS/2.

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

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

From: sctvguy@netcenter.net                             26-Nov-99 12:18:02
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 19:59:04
Subj: Re:  I am worried about future generations

From: Bob Grimes <sctvguy@netcenter.net>

I do not give a damn about future generations.  However, I do care what
is on my computer.

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

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

From: josco@sea.monterey.edu                            26-Nov-99 10:12:04
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 19:59:04
Subj: Re: I am worried about our future generations...

From: josco <josco@sea.monterey.edu>

On 26 Nov 1999, uno@40th.com wrote:

> 
> Yes, NT will run PM apps.  This is OS2 16-bit PM apps,
> not OS2 32-bit PM apps.  Also, it's not in the box,
> like console app support is; MS sends the PM kit out
> to you by request.

False.

MS offered PM compatibility for a fee on a case by case basis to large
corporate customers.

> The seemed-obvious point is is that NT isn't handicapped
> in its native mode just to run OS2 16-bit apps. 

The second obvious point is NT isn't a better OS/2 than OS/2 --- a
pathetic bluff. 

> OS2, since
> 2.0, has been and always will be handicapped by this legacy
> support: 

:)

FUD, rinse and repeat.  Say it 10,00 times -- it is still a lie.


> tiled memory, small user address space (effectively
> 300 MB, tops) that that provides, and then of course, all
> the 16-bit code that's always exectuted, no matter what, in
> the kernel and drivers.  And still, NT runs OS2 better than OS2.

16-bit OS/2 apps have a 16MB limitation.  OS/1 1.x and the 16-bit apps
that ran on OS/2 had that 16 MB limit -- 1x was written for 286 CPUs.  

OS/2 4.0 supports 2 gig of RAM with 512 MB per process limitation.  

And NT has NO support for the HPFS. NONE.

Hell, NT cannot even support it's own file system.
http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/stories/news/0,4153,2399378,00.html


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

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

From: nospam_ktk@netlabs.org                            26-Nov-99 18:39:15
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 19:59:04
Subj: Re: Wake Up !

From: "Adrian Gschwend" <nospam_ktk@netlabs.org>

On Thu, 25 Nov 1999 13:20:40 -0500, Christopher Houle wrote:

>The games already over for OS/2...... It lost.

Well people like you write this for years now and it's still alive and
kicking. So you should wake up :))




---
Adrian Gschwend
@ OS/2 Netlabs

ICQ: 22419590
ktk@netlabs.org
-------
The OS/2 OpenSource Project:
http://www.netlabs.org


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OS/2 Netlabs (1:109/42)

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

From: josco@sea.monterey.edu                            26-Nov-99 10:22:10
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 19:59:04
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: josco <josco@sea.monterey.edu>

On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, LP wrote:

> 
> 
> After using the MacOS for over 8 years.. with merely one day of NT under my
> belt.. NT was far more productive for me. No more rampant crashes..  NT
> empowered me to do work that I was never able to do on the Mac.
> 
> In the end, that is all that matters.

BSOD is a short hand for Blue Screen of Death.  It has been coined to
describe how NT crashes and is often blamed on device drives, not the OS. 
Still it is a fatal crash. 

In the end, that is all that matters.

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

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

From: znu@znu.dhs.org                                   26-Nov-99 18:26:12
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 19:59:04
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows... 

From: znu@znu.dhs.org (ZnU)

In article <s3t5s8uha4r45@corp.supernews.com>, "Nik Simpson"
<nik@hiwaay.net> wrote:

> "ZnU" <znu@znu.dhs.org> wrote in message
> news:znu-2611990218360001@192.168.0.2...
> >
> > Not everything in a Mac is off-the-shelf. Moreover, your method ignores
> > the cost of design, assembly, testing, marketing, support, packaging, etc.
> > You'll find that an OEM copy of Windows 98 runs about $300 if you compare
> > the cost of a Gateway machine w/ Win 98 to a home-built system with the
> > same components (sans Win 98).
> 
> 
> I don't follow your logic here, are you saying that if a Gateway machine of
> configuration X (including Win98) costs $1,300 and equivalent hardware
> bought from Joe Blow's PC Emporium costs $1000 with Win98, then the cost of
> Win98 is $300? Surely you realise that is is total bullshit since it assumes
> that pricing from Joe's PC Emporium vs. Gateway is identical for hardware
> components which is nonsense.

Of course it's nonsense. That was the idea. You snipped me out of context.
I was replying to Christopher Smith who was claiming that doing just what
I described (but with Mac hardware) would be an accurate way to determine
the price of a copy of Mac OS.

-- 
All parts should go together without forcing.  You must remember that the
parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you.  Therefore, if you
can't get them together again, there must be a reason.  By all means, do
not use a hammer.
           --IBM maintenance manual, 1925

ZnU <znu@znu.dhs.org> | <http://znu.dhs.org>

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

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

From: znu@znu.dhs.org                                   26-Nov-99 18:27:07
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 19:59:04
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows... 

From: znu@znu.dhs.org (ZnU)

In article <uiy%3.23043$bh.29982@news2.pompano.net>, "LP"
<LPNOSPAM@iroadrunner.net> wrote:

> ZnU <znu@znu.dhs.org> wrote in message
> news:znu-2611990043330001@192.168.0.2...
> > In article <8c5l18.34t.ln@labserver.emmanuel.uq.edu.au>, "Christopher
> > Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net> wrote:
> >
> > > "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote in message
> > > news:s3rlh9bna4r12@corp.supernews.com...
> > > > Funny, the full version of OS 9 is $99, the full version of Win98 SE
> is
> > > > $189... Who's out of touch?
> > >
> > > There is no "full version" of OS 9 - they're all upgrades.
> >
> > But we can determine the price of a "full version" of Mac OS. Mac OS 8.0
> > ran on CHRP systems, and was priced the same as every Mac OS release
> > since.
> 
> If you are usin an upgrade license as a new license.. then you are violating
> the law.
> 
> If we're going to discuss criminal behavior.. then well, my Deep Blue
> computer cost me $0.01 and runs rings around any of your "personal
> computers"...

But it isn't an upgrade license. Read a Mac OS licensing agreement.
Nowhere does it say you much have a previous version of the OS.

-- 
All parts should go together without forcing.  You must remember that the
parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you.  Therefore, if you
can't get them together again, there must be a reason.  By all means, do
not use a hammer.
           --IBM maintenance manual, 1925

ZnU <znu@znu.dhs.org> | <http://znu.dhs.org>

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

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

From: leaper@bigfoot.com                                26-Nov-99 12:15:25
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 19:59:05
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: "Quantum Leaper" <leaper@bigfoot.com>

"Bob Germer" <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
news:383e84bf$4$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com...
> On <Alan_Baker-2511991719480001@a3a31538.sympatico.bconnected.net>, on
> 11/25/99 at 05:19 PM,
>    Alan_Baker@bc.sympatico.ca (Alan Baker) said:
>
>
> > The fact that Byte didn't do an article on the Macintosh doesn't mean it
> > didn't exist. Or do you think that after Apple saw the article on
> > Windows in Byte they just dashed off the Mac OS in a month?
>
> Of course you are right. When Gates released Windows 1.0, Apple threatened
> suit claiming that MS had ripped off the Mac interface. Gates dismissed
> the claim in the press with a remark that both he and Jobs had raided
> XEROX PARC which was the real inventor of the interface.

You do realize that Doug Egsbend (sp?) created the GUI idea in 1969 when he
demo a primative GUI and the mouse.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: ExecPC Internet - Milwaukee, WI (1:109/42)

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

From: znu@znu.dhs.org                                   26-Nov-99 18:30:18
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 19:59:05
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows... 

From: znu@znu.dhs.org (ZnU)

In article <viy%3.23044$bh.29982@news2.pompano.net>, "LP"
<LPNOSPAM@iroadrunner.net> wrote:

> ZnU <znu@znu.dhs.org> wrote in message
> news:znu-2611990218360001@192.168.0.2...
> > In article <65bl18.eqt.ln@labserver.emmanuel.uq.edu.au>, "Christopher
> > Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net> wrote:
> >
> > > "ZnU" <znu@znu.dhs.org> wrote in message
> > > news:znu-2611990043330001@192.168.0.2...
> > > > In article <8c5l18.34t.ln@labserver.emmanuel.uq.edu.au>, "Christopher
> > > > Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote in message
> > > > > news:s3rlh9bna4r12@corp.supernews.com...
> > > > > > Funny, the full version of OS 9 is $99, the full version of Win98
> SE
> > > is
> > > > > > $189... Who's out of touch?
> > > > >
> > > > > There is no "full version" of OS 9 - they're all upgrades.
> > > >
> > > > But we can determine the price of a "full version" of Mac OS. Mac OS
> 8.0
> > > > ran on CHRP systems, and was priced the same as every Mac OS release
> > > > since.
> > >
> > > Of course the other way is to sum the cost of the components in a Mac
> and
> > > subtract that from the retail cost.  Somehow I don't think the two
> figure
> > > will mesh.
> >
> > Not everything in a Mac is off-the-shelf. Moreover, your method ignores
> > the cost of design, assembly, testing, marketing, support, packaging, etc.
> > You'll find that an OEM copy of Windows 98 runs about $300 if you compare
> > the cost of a Gateway machine w/ Win 98 to a home-built system with the
> > same components (sans Win 98). Knowing nothing about Apple's internal
> > organization, the salaries employees are paid, the taxes Apple pays on the
> > Cupertino campus, the cost of an ounce of translucent blue iMac plastic,
> > etc. there is no way to make an accurate guess as to how much of that
> > difference goes into Mac OS development.
> 
> Of course, your method of "determining" the cost of OEM WIn98 is laughable
> at best.
> You  are ignoring all the internal cost of Gateway's organization, etc..
> 
> Second, if you apply your method to other computer companies.. you'll not
> get a consistant
> result.
> 
> Third.. I doubt that any OEM would be purchasing Win98 for MORE than the
> full retail cost of the OS!

Of course its laughable! The entire idea was to demonstrate how absurd
this method was. Mr. Smith was suggesting that this be done with the Mac
to determine the cost of Mac OS. I pointed out (by example) that this
would give wildly inaccurate results.

> btw: the "cost" to  OEM's are pretty much well known, except for the largest
> companies, e.g. Dell, etc..

Except for the most important companies you mean.

-- 
All parts should go together without forcing.  You must remember that the
parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you.  Therefore, if you
can't get them together again, there must be a reason.  By all means, do
not use a hammer.
           --IBM maintenance manual, 1925

ZnU <znu@znu.dhs.org> | <http://znu.dhs.org>

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

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

From: leaper@bigfoot.com                                26-Nov-99 12:00:14
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 19:59:05
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows... 

From: "Quantum Leaper" <leaper@bigfoot.com>

"Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote in message
news:s3tc0u6ma4r7@corp.supernews.com...
> Funny, I can wipe my system clean and install the full OS 9. That's a full
> version my friend.
>
> They are all called updates because every Mac system has a Mac OS already.
> You cannot build your own nor buy a non-Apple Mac. Therefore, you have to
> have an earlier OS version one way or another.

> "Christopher Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net> wrote in message
> news:8c5l18.34t.ln@labserver.emmanuel.uq.edu.au...
> >
> > "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote in message

> > > Funny, the full version of OS 9 is $99, the full version of Win98 SE
is
> > > $189... Who's out of touch?
> >
> > There is no "full version" of OS 9 - they're all upgrades.
> >
>
Funny,  I can install a UPGRADE version of Win98SE,  on a computer without a
OS also.  All I need is the orginal Win98 CD.   It basicly the same as what
Apple is doing,  consider Apple already knows you OWN a copy of one of their
OS before hand.  MS can't do that since you could build your own machine,
you can't really do that with an Apple.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: ExecPC Internet - Milwaukee, WI (1:109/42)

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

From: glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu                    26-Nov-99 18:31:01
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 19:59:05
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen)

In article <383ecda0$0$96891@news.execpc.com>,
Quantum Leaper <leaper@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
>"Bob Germer" <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
>news:383e84bf$4$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com...
>> On <Alan_Baker-2511991719480001@a3a31538.sympatico.bconnected.net>, on
>> 11/25/99 at 05:19 PM,
>>    Alan_Baker@bc.sympatico.ca (Alan Baker) said:
>>
>>
>> > The fact that Byte didn't do an article on the Macintosh doesn't mean it
>> > didn't exist. Or do you think that after Apple saw the article on
>> > Windows in Byte they just dashed off the Mac OS in a month?
>>
>> Of course you are right. When Gates released Windows 1.0, Apple threatened
>> suit claiming that MS had ripped off the Mac interface. Gates dismissed
>> the claim in the press with a remark that both he and Jobs had raided
>> XEROX PARC which was the real inventor of the interface.
>
>You do realize that Doug Egsbend (sp?) created the GUI idea in 1969 when he
>demo a primative GUI and the mouse.

And that Jeff Raskin did a Ph.D. thesis on the subject before then?

-- 
"That's not an avocado, that's a grenade!" -- The Skipper

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Indiana University, Bloomington (1:109/42)

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

From: tg7642@cyclic.aux.net                             26-Nov-99 18:36:19
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 19:59:05
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <tg7642@cyclic.aux.net>

John Jensen <jjens@primenet.com> writes:

: Chad Myers <cmyers@austin.rr.com> wrote:

: : Typical "CLI or Bust" attitude of a Linvocate, ZnU.

: : How do you think those Wedding registries at Target work?
: : Hint: They're GUI (Microsoft Windows to boot!)
: : Hint: They use a touch screen

: So you reply with "GUI or Bust", but laughably you communicate this
: message in text.

Exactly how is Chad implying "GUI or Bust"?  He's merely denouncing the
"CLI or Bust" mentality that constantly oozes from the mouths of "UNIX or
Bust" advocates.
--
.-----.
|[_] :| Stephen S. Edwards II | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
| =  :| "Humans have the potential to become irrational... perhaps
|     |  you should attempt to access that part of your psyche."
|_..._|                    -- Lieutenant Commander Data

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Anamorphic 3-D Graphics Inc. (1:109/42)

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

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          26-Nov-99 18:16:07
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 19:59:05
Subj: Re: Wake Up !

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>>Christopher Houle
>>The games already over for OS/2...... It lost.

>Adrian Gschwend
>it's still alive and kicking.

So is Shawn Cassidy

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

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

From: jhimmel@i-2000.com                                26-Nov-99 19:15:06
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 19:59:05
Subj: Re: I am worried about our future generations...

From: jhimmel@i-2000.com (James Himmelman)

On Fri, 26 Nov 1999 17:29:32, uno@40th.com (uno@40th.com) wrote:

> 
> Yes, NT will run PM apps.  This is OS2 16-bit PM apps,
> not OS2 32-bit PM apps.

Then NT is not a better OS/2 than OS/2. OS/2 runs all 16bit and 32bit 
PM apps.

> Also, it's not in the box,
> like console app support is; MS sends the PM kit out
> to you by request.

Again, making NT a poor substitute for running PM apps.
 
> The seemed-obvious point is is that NT isn't handicapped
> in its native mode just to run OS2 16-bit apps.  OS2, since
> 2.0, has been and always will be handicapped by this legacy
> support: tiled memory, small user address space (effectively
> 300 MB, tops) that that provides, and then of course, all
> the 16-bit code that's always exectuted, no matter what, in
> the kernel and drivers.

What makes NT a better OS/2 than OS/2? How does NT handle 32bit OS/2 
applications?

> And still, NT runs OS2 better than OS2.

Not from what you have said so far.

> James Himmelman? (jhimmel@i-2000.com?) wrote (Fri, 26 Nov 1999
> >> > Does NT run OS/2 Presentation Manager applications?
> >> Nope.  Why would it want to?
> >It would have to in order to be a better OS/2 than OS/2.
> 

[[[ James Himmelman - jhimmel@i-2000.com ]]]

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

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

From: nik@hiwaay.net                                    26-Nov-99 13:29:15
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 19:59:05
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows... 

From: "Nik Simpson" <nik@hiwaay.net>

"ZnU" <znu@znu.dhs.org> wrote in message
news:znu-2611991323430001@192.168.0.2...
> In article <uiy%3.23043$bh.29982@news2.pompano.net>, "LP"
> <LPNOSPAM@iroadrunner.net> wrote:
>
> > ZnU <znu@znu.dhs.org> wrote in message
> > news:znu-2611990043330001@192.168.0.2...
> > > In article <8c5l18.34t.ln@labserver.emmanuel.uq.edu.au>, "Christopher
> > > Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote in message
> > > > news:s3rlh9bna4r12@corp.supernews.com...
> > > > > Funny, the full version of OS 9 is $99, the full version of Win98
SE
> > is
> > > > > $189... Who's out of touch?
> > > >
> > > > There is no "full version" of OS 9 - they're all upgrades.
> > >
> > > But we can determine the price of a "full version" of Mac OS. Mac OS
8.0
> > > ran on CHRP systems, and was priced the same as every Mac OS release
> > > since.
> >
> > If you are usin an upgrade license as a new license.. then you are
violating
> > the law.
> >
> > If we're going to discuss criminal behavior.. then well, my Deep Blue
> > computer cost me $0.01 and runs rings around any of your "personal
> > computers"...
>
> But it isn't an upgrade license. Read a Mac OS licensing agreement.
> Nowhere does it say you much have a previous version of the OS.


That's just splitting hairs. What use would you have a "new version" of
MacOS if you didn't already possess a Mac with an older version of the
software, you can't run it on anything else.


--
Nik Simpson


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

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

From: tim.timmins@bcs.org.uk                            26-Nov-99 19:04:02
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 19:59:05
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Tim Timmins <tim.timmins@bcs.org.uk>

We ARE talking about Windows 1.0 - the one where IBM stepped in and made a few
suggestions, to improve the user interface (like having 'windows' instead of
'panes') -  aren't we?

Regards,
Tim

Edwin wrote:

> Mr. Biddlesworth <mr@biddlesworth.com> wrote in message
> news:383dcf7d$0$232@nntp1.ba.best.com...
> > R. Tang <gwangung@u.washington.edu> wrote in message
> > news:81i9pu$oka$1@nntp6.u.washington.edu...
> > > Mr. Biddlesworth <mr@biddlesworth.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >So the code of Windows 1.0 (or its prototype) plausibly predated MacOS
> 1.0 by a year
> > > >(unless LisaOS and MacOS 1.0 were virtually identical???).
> > >
> > > No, it does not. Not if you can do math.
> > >
> > > --
> > > -Roger Tang, gwangung@u.washington.edu, Artistic Director  PC Theatre
> >
> >
> > You should open your mind, face facts, and quit believing Job's
> propaganda.
> >
> > I have >>proof<< that Microsoft Windows 1.0 was running in 1983.
> >
> > Read this 1983 Byte article:
> http://www.pla-netx.com/linebackn/guis/win1983.html
> > It's so old that Apple's Lisa is mentioned but not Macintosh.
> >
> > So that debunks the myth that Windows >>originated<< was an imitation of
> Mac.
> >
> > History lesson is over.  Class, dismissed.
>
> Thanks.   I saved that article.   It should come in very handy.
> > --
> > Mr. Biddlesworth
> >
> >
> >

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

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

From: ispy@groovyshow.com                               26-Nov-99 14:05:20
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 19:59:05
Subj: Re: OS/2's source code

From: Kelly Robinson <ispy@groovyshow.com>

Another 180!

How many of us will forget the fat bastard's refusal to hand out the source
code of OS/2 because of all the banks and other big-name companies that IBM
had?

Looks like lil' Louie was tired of jacking off and decided to go do
something else with himself?

Trancser wrote:

> Since the source code was released from IBM (oops...I meant 'leaked'
> ...yea thats it!), I was wondering if whoever bothered to download a
> copy for themselves, plan on ...I dunno....DOING anything with it,
> whether it be for private use or otherwise? I know that posting this
> message might not be the best thing to do, considering the subject, but
> I just thought I'd ask since its out there ...and I'm sure theres
> probably a lot of you out there that would LOVE to do some kick-butt
> things with the source, but hopefully for OS/2!
>
> Now, I am to understand, that the source that's out there is of an older
> version, and not of a recent or from the current fixpack for OS/2
> ...well I'm no programmer, but I'm sure theres something from the code
> that could be used to maybe form a "patch" to replace some components of
> OS/2?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: http://extra.newsguy.com (1:109/42)

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

From: ispy@groovyshow.com                               26-Nov-99 14:13:22
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 19:59:05
Subj: Re: Wake Up !

From: Kelly Robinson <ispy@groovyshow.com>

Wow!  Someone in this OS/2 user group who has a grain of sense!  (note I'm not
including myself in that designation since I can hardly be sane as I'm here in
the first place.)  Well, there's a bit of swearing and for not attacking a
group, telling people to blow smoke up our asses is a tad misleading.

Now that IBM has released the OS/2 source code (something they said once that
they'd never do, hehe) these pro-OS/2 unrealistic whiners can now prove their
worth and plop the WPS (shitty SIQ and all) on to the (not quite 100% perfect)
Linux core.

Or save time and humility and just go to BeOS for a better OS or live with
Winshit and use great applications instead.  An OS is nothing without apps and
BeOS has the fewest of them all.  :-(  Of course, no apps are better than bad
apps.  OS/2's apps (many rudimentary ones I had no other choice but to use)
are
so bad they'd instantly turn people away from it.  Yet Windows is admittingly
bad but has the applications I need (quite a few of them.  Note I'm using
netscape again since IE heavily uses the registry in ways it shouldn't.)

Christopher Houle wrote:

> I can't believe some crap thats posted in this group. I really don't know
> why you guys flame Be and Linux. I would think that given the current state
> of things in the OS/2 world you'd be looking to channel your efforts into a
> project thats actually got a future.  Stick a fork in OS/2, its done. IBM
> bailed out on OS/2 , and also you, the end user. They don't need or wan't
> your business.  How many times do you people have to get shit on before
> you'll figure it out ? You can blow all the smoke up our asses you like
> about OS/2 being this and that, but your really just beating a dead horse.
>
> The best idea I've heard yet is taking the idea of taking the WPS and
> running it over the linux kernel. You guys should channel your energy into
> something like that if want your environment to hang around so badly. IBM's
> just not going to be there to wipe your asses forever. In fact, they've just
> announced that they're going to really stick it up your asses for hanging
> around by charging you a price for software updates. Piss on IBM, you don't
> owe them anything.
>
> Yea, Its true that Be and Linux may not be as good as OS/2 in some areas and
> visa versa. But with a little more support and a little less condesention
> from the soon to be gone OS/2 community, one of them may just turn out to be
> the greatest OS yet.  Did any of you stop to think that some of these other
> projects (Be/Linux) could benefit from your experience as an OS/2
> user/developer/advocate ?
>
> Im not flaming OS/2 as a system. I've used it and I like it just fine. No
> complaints other than the install/update process. Im just sick of hearing
> that these other projects dont or wont ever measure up to OS/2. Wake up !
> The games already over for OS/2...... It lost.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: http://extra.newsguy.com (1:109/42)

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

From: what@homey.com                                    26-Nov-99 16:59:22
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 19:59:06
Subj: Re: BeOS compared to Windows... 

From: what@homey.com (and nothing else matters)

In article <s3tnv9noa4r10@corp.supernews.com>, "Nik Simpson"
<nik@hiwaay.net> wrote:

>"ZnU" <znu@znu.dhs.org> wrote in message
>news:znu-2611991323430001@192.168.0.2...
>> In article <uiy%3.23043$bh.29982@news2.pompano.net>, "LP"
>> <LPNOSPAM@iroadrunner.net> wrote:
>>
>> > ZnU <znu@znu.dhs.org> wrote in message
>> > news:znu-2611990043330001@192.168.0.2...
>> > > In article <8c5l18.34t.ln@labserver.emmanuel.uq.edu.au>, "Christopher
>> > > Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote in message
>> > > > news:s3rlh9bna4r12@corp.supernews.com...
>> > > > > Funny, the full version of OS 9 is $99, the full version of Win98
>SE
>> > is
>> > > > > $189... Who's out of touch?
>> > > >
>> > > > There is no "full version" of OS 9 - they're all upgrades.
>> > >
>> > > But we can determine the price of a "full version" of Mac OS. Mac OS
>8.0
>> > > ran on CHRP systems, and was priced the same as every Mac OS release
>> > > since.
>> >
>> > If you are usin an upgrade license as a new license.. then you are
>violating
>> > the law.
>> >
>> > If we're going to discuss criminal behavior.. then well, my Deep Blue
>> > computer cost me $0.01 and runs rings around any of your "personal
>> > computers"...
>>
>> But it isn't an upgrade license. Read a Mac OS licensing agreement.
>> Nowhere does it say you much have a previous version of the OS.
>
>
>That's just splitting hairs. What use would you have a "new version" of
>MacOS if you didn't already possess a Mac with an older version of the
>software, you can't run it on anything else.

I've bought used Macs with the hard drives wiped clean and NO OS CDs. It
helps to be able to buy the full version of the latest operating system
for $90. That is not to say operating system costs are not spread over the
cost of all machines; they are.

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

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

From: bbarclay@ca.ibm.com                               26-Nov-99 17:04:07
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 19:59:06
Subj: Re: OS/2's source code

From: Brad BARCLAY <bbarclay@ca.ibm.com>

Kelly Robinson wrote:
> 
> Another 180!
> 
> How many of us will forget the fat bastard's refusal to hand out the source
> code of OS/2 because of all the banks and other big-name companies that IBM
> had?
> 
> Looks like lil' Louie was tired of jacking off and decided to go do
> something else with himself?

	OS/2 source code is *not* freely available from IBM in any legal form.

	If someone does have any OS/2 source code without IBM's authorization,
then they are holding it illegally, and can be subject to serious legal
action.

Brad BARCLAY

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Posted from the OS/2 WARP v4.5 desktop of Brad BARCLAY.
E-Mail:  bbarclay@ca.ibm.com		Location:  2G43D@Torolabs

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Toronto Labs, DB2 for OS/2 Install Developer (1:109/42)

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

From: cndbass@yahoo.com                                 26-Nov-99 22:16:17
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 19:59:06
Subj: Re: Interesting Reading Comprehension Problem by Bass

From: Curtis Bass <cndbass@yahoo.com>


Dave Tholen wrote:

-- snip --

> Are you suggesting that someone who says "As far as I am concerned,
> two plus two equals five" is stating an opinion because it was
> "qualified", Curtis?

You may *infer* anything you wish, Dave.  Nothing new.

-- snip --


Curtis

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

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

From: cndbass@yahoo.com                                 26-Nov-99 22:23:02
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 19:59:06
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: Curtis Bass <cndbass@yahoo.com>


Dave Tholen wrote:

-- snip --

> Curtis Bass writes:
> 
> > There is a relationship between the two words, Dave, as the evidence
> > clearly shows.
> 
> Too bad you're using both incorrectly.

Gee. Dave is now reduced to hypocritical pontification.

-- snip --


Curtis

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

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

From: cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org                      26-Nov-99 15:06:17
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 19:59:06
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Chad Mulligan" <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org>

Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
news:383e9200$6$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com...
> On <FKq%3.30211$zd.338810@news1.alsv1.occa.home.com>, on 11/26/99 at 07:35
> AM,
>    "Brent Davies" <brentdaviesNOSPAM@home.com> said:
>
> > I admit that my knowledge of anti-trust law is not too strong, but I
> > believe you are talking about collusion, which is, IINM, a higher crime
> > than leveraging monopolistic power the way MS has been found to be
> > doing.  You can't say they are "price fixing" when their operating
> > systems are some of the least expensive on the market (CALs not
> > withstanding).
>
> Huh? Windows one of the least expensive OS's on the market? What are you
> smoking fella?
>
> Linux costs $0. Redhat Linux costs $39 with documentation and support.
> Corel Linux is $59 with documentation and support. BeOS is $69 with
> documentation and support. I cannot find DR-DOS on the web (I forget what
> it's called now) but I paid $59 for it about a year ago. IBM-PC DOS 7
> costs $79 for the upgrade version.
>
> Windows 98, conversely, costs $89 for the upgrade version. This is the
> highest other than Warp.
>
> Even Warp for small companies with 50 or more users is cheaper by far than
> Windows 98 even without considering the cost of Network software. Look at
> the facts, Jack.
>
> Warp Server for eBusiness is $1400. Additional user licenses are $59. For
> a 50 user network, That's an investment of $1,400 + $2,950 or a total of
> $4,350. Fifty Windows 98 upgrades cost $4,450 and you have to also
> purchase some server software and 50 user licenses!
>
> NT 4.0 at discount on the web costs $191 per workstation. The server with
> 5 user licenses is $663. Each additional 5 licenses are $59. So NT would
> cost $10,744. Not to mention that NT Server sucks big time.
>
> And if you look at a company with 10 workstations, Warp would cost them
> $1,990. Compare that to NT at $2,632.
>
>

You've obviously never priced a commercial UNIX installation.

>
>
>
> --
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------
> Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
> Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
> MR/2 Ice Registration Number 67
> Aut Pax Aut Bellum
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------


--
Armageddon means never having to say you're sorry.

>


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

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

From: victor@eijkhout.net                               26-Nov-99 18:04:21
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 19:59:06
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: victor@eijkhout.net (Victor Eijkhout)

Lord Foul <lord@foul.com> wrote:

> I have >>proof<< that Microsoft Windows 1.0 was running in 1983.
> 
> Read this 1983 Byte article:
> http://www.pla-netx.com/linebackn/guis/win1983.html It's so old that
> Apple's Lisa is mentioned but not Macintosh.
> 
> So that debunks the myth that Windows >>originated<< was an imitation of
> Mac.

Sure. But have you actually seen W1.0? It looks nothing like the current
incarnation. Windows did not overlap, but were side by side or stacked.
Making one window bigger made the adjacent ones smaller. The current
look is definitely inspired by the Mac.

Btw, if your article mentions the Lisa, how do you know Windows did not
originate as a ripoff of that? People say "Mac" these days, but they
mean "Apple".

-- 
Victor Eijkhout
"the time comes for everyone to do deliberately what 
he used to do by mistake"  [Quentin Crisp]

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Me? Organised? Never! (1:109/42)

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

From: jack.troughton@nospam.videotron.ca                26-Nov-99 23:19:14
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 21:40:22
Subj: Re: User interface learning curves

From: jack.troughton@nospam.videotron.ca (Jack Troughton)

On Fri, 26 Nov 1999 18:36:39, "Stephen S. Edwards II" 
<tg7642@cyclic.aux.net> wrote:

John Jensen <jjens@primenet.com> writes:

: Chad Myers <cmyers@austin.rr.com> wrote:

: : Typical "CLI or Bust" attitude of a Linvocate, ZnU.

: : How do you think those Wedding registries at Target work?
: : Hint: They're GUI (Microsoft Windows to boot!)
: : Hint: They use a touch screen

: So you reply with "GUI or Bust", but laughably you communicate this
: message in text.

Exactly how is Chad implying "GUI or Bust"?  He's merely denouncing the
"CLI or Bust" mentality that constantly oozes from the mouths of "UNIX or
Bust" advocates.
--

GUI and CLI or bust.  Take the best of both worlds. They're both 
excellent interfaces.  They do things the other cannot do easily.

That's why I like warp: REXX and WPS.  Not only are they good, but 
they work well together too.  It rocks. :)

Whew, just checked the headers.  Putting on the asbestos now...

Jack Troughton   ICQ:7494149
http://jakesplace.dhs.org
jack.troughton at videotron.ca
jake at jakesplace.dhs.org
Montral PQ Canada

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

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

From: zjagrantz@znrcanz.gcz.ca                          26-Nov-99 18:24:03
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 21:40:22
Subj: Re: Very Special Report coming soon  2035

From: "John A. Grant" <zjagrantz@znrcanz.gcz.ca>

yoceuh@hotmail.com wrote in message <81l4ue$ili$80@ffx2nh4.news.uu.net>...
>This is not spam. You are receiving this because you have sent
>>me information about your program or opportunity and I

    :) :) :) Sigh. If only we could harness idiots for fuel.
--
John A. Grant  * I speak only for myself *  (remove 'z' to reply)
Radiation Geophysics, Geological Survey of Canada, Ottawa
If you followup, please do NOT e-mail me a copy: I will read it here




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Natural Resources Canada / Ressources naturelles 
(1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         27-Nov-99 00:06:12
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 21:40:22
Subj: Re: I am worried about our future generations...

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

uno@40th.com writes:

> OS2, since 2.0, has been and always will be handicapped by
> this legacy support: tiled memory, small user address space
> (effectively 300 MB, tops)

Feel free to explain how I was able to run a number crunching
job with a single data array larger than 300 MB on OS/2, not
to mention all the other smaller arrays needed by the code.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         27-Nov-99 00:10:02
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 21:40:22
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Lucien writes:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Answer the question put to you:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Take the two simple tests, Lucien.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note the refusal to answer a basic, central question -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> looks like we've hit another major soft spot.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note again the pat refusal to answer the question.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and we see the refusal again

>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>> .....and again...

>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>> ....and again.

>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>> ....and again.

>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

> ....and again.

Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

> The (unanswered) question again for the reader's reference:

The same response again for the reader's reference:

> According to your statement, under what conditions
> does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
> functionality..."?

Perhaps you'd like to tell me how the statement you keep pointing to
applies to the JDK sentence, Lucien.

> Here is Dave's statement again for reference:

Unnecessary, Lucien, again.  I will restore my two simple tests,
however, given that you've never taken them.

> "The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
> 'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
> information."

And how does that concern the JDK sentence, Lucien, as you've repeatedly
insisted?

Note again the pat "refusal" to take the two simple tests:

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Meanwhile, I noticed that you failed to answer my little test,
Lucien:

] #1:  It rained today.                                              
]                                                                    
] #2:  It rained today until sunset.                                 
]                                                                    
] The question:  did it rain all of the day or only some of the day? 
]                                                                    
] The word "rained", by itself, doesn't indicate duration, therefore 
] one cannot determine an unambiguous answer to the question in the  
] absence of other information.  Yet I will claim that the answer to 
] the question is in fact unambiguous in the case of statement #2.   
]                                                                    
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.                                    

Test grade:  F.

Here's another little test for you, Lucien:

] #3:  It did rain today.
] 
] #4:  It didn't rain today.
] 
] The question:  what fraction of the day did it rain?
] 
] Structurally, the two statements are identical, yet there is nothing
] in statement #3 that allows the question to be answered unambiguously,
] while there is something in statement #4 that does allow the question
] to be answered unambigiously.
] 
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.

Test grade:  F.

Perhaps readers will notice how 3-4 corresponds to the "prevent costly
mistakes" thread, where the quantification is provided by the definition
of a word and not the structure.  Perhaps readers will notice how 1-2
corresponds to the "Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality" thread,
where the additional information resolves what would otherwise be
ambiguous.

Yet more evidence that you're playing your own "infantile game".   
Or are you really that idiotic?                                    

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         27-Nov-99 00:11:19
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 21:40:22
Subj: Re: Wake Up !

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Kelly Robinson writes:

> Now that IBM has released the OS/2 source code

Evidence, please.  Unofficial sources don't count.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         27-Nov-99 00:15:24
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 21:40:22
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.

Curtis Bass writes:

> Gee. Dave is now reduced to hypocritical pontification.

Yet another example of your pontification.

I see you never answered my question:

] Tell me, Curtis, do any of the following end with a preposition:
] 
]    "sit up"
] 
]    "speak up"
] 
]    "your time is up"
] 
]    "from third grade up"
] 
]    "the score is 15 up"
] 
]    "the wind is up"

Nor did you take the opportunity to reproduce a single case of an
allegedly unadmitted error in an "adversarial exchange".

I'm not surprised.  It's so much easier to pontificate.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         27-Nov-99 00:13:04
  To: All                                               26-Nov-99 21:40:22
Subj: Re: Interesting Reading Comprehension Problem by Bass

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.

Curtis Bass writes:

> You may *infer* anything you wish, Dave.  Nothing new.

I'd rather not rely on inference, Curtis, which is why I asked you for
a clarification.  I see you didn't bother.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

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

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