Holy Crap!! This NG is dead!!
Dave
OS/2 is dead. Turn out the lights when you leave.
The OS/2 Guy
"Dave" <da...@hidden.net> wrote:
> Only seven posts!! And five of them are Tholes!
>
> OS/2 is dead. Turn out the lights when you leave.
OS/2 has been dead for about 7 years now. It died when Will Zachmann
gave up on it.
Larry Chauvet,
the Original OS/2 Guy
Wayne
>> Only seven posts!! And five of them are Tholes!
>>
>> OS/2 is dead. Turn out the lights when you leave.
>
> OS/2 has been dead for about 7 years now. It died when Will Zachmann
> gave up on it.
IBM have rebranded it "Linux"
tho...@antispam.ham
> Only seven posts!! And five of them are Tholes!
I haven't seen any posts involving oar pins, Dave.
> OS/2 is dead.
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
> Turn out the lights when you leave.
Non sequitur.
tho...@antispam.ham
> Dave wrote:
>> Only seven posts!! And five of them are Tholes!
>>
>> OS/2 is dead. Turn out the lights when you leave.
> OS/2 has been dead for about 7 years now. It died when Will Zachmann
> gave up on it.
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
tho...@antispam.ham
> The OS/2 Guy wrote:
>> Dave wrote:
>>> Only seven posts!! And five of them are Tholes!
>>>
>>> OS/2 is dead. Turn out the lights when you leave.
>> OS/2 has been dead for about 7 years now. It died when Will Zachmann
>> gave up on it.
> IBM have rebranded it "Linux"
Doesn't run my OS/2 software.
Wayne
>>> OS/2 has been dead for about 7 years now. It died when Will Zachmann
>>> gave up on it.
>
>> IBM have rebranded it "Linux"
>
> Doesn't run my OS/2 software.
Doesn't run mine either but most of it is ancient
an unsupported anyway; pmmail, pminews, staroffice,
embellish, etc. mmedia is antique, can't play DVDs.
Too many reasons to continue flogging a dead horse.
tho...@antispam.ham
>>>> OS/2 has been dead for about 7 years now. It died when Will Zachmann
>>>> gave up on it.
>>> IBM have rebranded it "Linux"
>> Doesn't run my OS/2 software.
> Doesn't run mine either but most of it is ancient
> an unsupported anyway;
UNIX is rather ancient itself. Clearly, age isn't necessarily a factor.
> pmmail, pminews, staroffice,
> embellish, etc. mmedia is antique, can't play DVDs.
WarpVision can.
> Too many reasons to continue flogging a dead horse.
So why are you here?
Wayne
> WarpVision can.
Only in the developers dreams! Tried several versions
and none of them worked.
>> Too many reasons to continue flogging a dead horse.
>
> So why are you here?
What, are you the new OS/2 newsgroup censor? What
happened to Larry? I still have OS/2 on my laptop,
so I think I'm still entitled to be here and flame
OS/2, after all that's what this group is for!
The great thing is for every one DEAD OS/2 program
there are several current and updated Linux programs.
Not only that but Linux developers don't take your
money in exchange for buggy software and promise
fixes and updates and then move over to windows!
Richard Steiner
>Only seven posts!! And five of them are Tholes!
I'm sure there are a number of us lurking here, ready to defend the OS
we choose to use.
There so little legitimate advocacy traffic in the group, however, that
I tend to breeze on by without comment most of the time.
>OS/2 is dead. Turn out the lights when you leave.
Not really. It's just that the use of OS/2 is so intuitively obvious
for some of us that's it's very hard to put into words. :-) :-)
--
-Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Eden Prairie, MN
OS/2 + eCS + Linux + Win95 + DOS + PC/GEOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven!
Applications analyst/designer/developer (14 yrs) seeking employment.
See web site above for resume/CV and background.
tho...@antispam.ham
>> WarpVision can.
> Only in the developers dreams!
Incorrect.
> Tried several versions and none of them worked.
I've had better luck.
>>> Too many reasons to continue flogging a dead horse.
>> So why are you here?
> What, are you the new OS/2 newsgroup censor?
Classic evasion.
> What happened to Larry?
Non sequitur.
> I still have OS/2 on my laptop,
> so I think I'm still entitled to be here and flame
> OS/2, after all that's what this group is for!
Why would you have an allegedly "dead horse" on your laptop?
> The great thing is for every one DEAD OS/2 program
> there are several current and updated Linux programs.
> Not only that but Linux developers don't take your
> money in exchange for buggy software and promise
> fixes and updates and then move over to windows!
Then how do you get RedHat Enterprise Linux 3 for free?
Wayne
> Why would you have an allegedly "dead horse" on your laptop?
Because it isn't powerful enough to run Linux and I
refuse to use the windoze 98 that came with the PC.
>> The great thing is for every one DEAD OS/2 program
>> there are several current and updated Linux programs.
>> Not only that but Linux developers don't take your
>> money in exchange for buggy software and promise
>> fixes and updates and then move over to windows!
>
> Then how do you get RedHat Enterprise Linux 3 for free?
Who said anything about Redhat? I use Mandrake, that
is free.
Richard Steiner
spake unto us, saying:
>The great thing is for every one DEAD OS/2 program
>there are several current and updated Linux programs.
Not always. I love Yarn, for example, and I've only found a couple of
newsreaders under Linux that I'd even consider replacing Yarn with (one
being slrn, of course). It's not an even trade-off, though.
Most of the other examples that I can think of are old DOS or Windows
programs, I think. Until I can get Linux to run them as comfortably
as OS/2 does, they will probably be the reason I stick with OS/2.
>Not only that but Linux developers don't take your
>money in exchange for buggy software and promise
>fixes and updates and then move over to windows!
Yeah, SPG's handling of ColorWorks pissed me off, too. :-)
Wayne
> Then how do you get RedHat Enterprise Linux 3 for free?
An individual user would not pay for Redhat, they
would download Fedora Core for free. On the other
hand a business would rather pay Redhat for the
support that comes as part of the package, same
with Mandrake or any other big distro.
Wayne
> Most of the other examples that I can think of are old DOS or Windows
> programs, I think. Until I can get Linux to run them as comfortably
> as OS/2 does, they will probably be the reason I stick with OS/2.
>
>>Not only that but Linux developers don't take your
>>money in exchange for buggy software and promise
>>fixes and updates and then move over to windows!
That's one more reason I still keep OS/2 on my
laptop, I still occasionally use a windows 3.1
app and I don't want to wrestle with WINE to
be able to use the 32bit version in Lnux.
> Yeah, SPG's handling of ColorWorks pissed me off, too. :-)
Not only SPG, there were at least 2 others, if I
recall correctly.
Wayne
tho...@antispam.ham
>> Why would you have an allegedly "dead horse" on your laptop?
> Because it isn't powerful enough to run Linux and I
> refuse to use the windoze 98 that came with the PC.
Doesn't sound like a "dead horse" to me if it requires considerably
less in the way of hardware resources to run effectively.
>>> The great thing is for every one DEAD OS/2 program
>>> there are several current and updated Linux programs.
>>> Not only that but Linux developers don't take your
>>> money in exchange for buggy software and promise
>>> fixes and updates and then move over to windows!
>> Then how do you get RedHat Enterprise Linux 3 for free?
> Who said anything about Redhat?
You said "Linux developers". RedHat is a Linux developer.
> I use Mandrake, that is free.
So is RedHat 9.0, but not EL3.
tho...@antispam.ham
>> Then how do you get RedHat Enterprise Linux 3 for free?
> An individual user would not pay for Redhat, they
> would download Fedora Core for free. On the other
> hand a business would rather pay Redhat for the
> support that comes as part of the package, same
> with Mandrake or any other big distro.
Are you saying that 9.0 and EL3 are identical except for
the support?
Wayne
>> An individual user would not pay for Redhat, they
>> would download Fedora Core for free. On the other
>> hand a business would rather pay Redhat for the
>> support that comes as part of the package, same
>> with Mandrake or any other big distro.
>
> Are you saying that 9.0 and EL3 are identical except for
> the support?
Don't know, don't care. Haven't tried Redhat
since 7.3 or so. If you care so much why don't
you find out for yourself. You've always been
in my OS/2 killfile and now I remember why,
you are a complete idiot. Be the first in my
Linux killfile, won't you. Byeee.
Dave
So much woe as I have with you tholed. --Chaucer.
<tho...@antispam.ham> wrote in message
news:_eETb.3339$a65....@twister.socal.rr.com...
tho...@antispam.ham
>>> An individual user would not pay for Redhat, they
>>> would download Fedora Core for free. On the other
>>> hand a business would rather pay Redhat for the
>>> support that comes as part of the package, same
>>> with Mandrake or any other big distro.
>> Are you saying that 9.0 and EL3 are identical except for
>> the support?
> Don't know,
Then you shouldn't be talking about something that you don't know.
> don't care.
Then why are you bothering to post?
> Haven't tried Redhat since 7.3 or so. If you care so much why
> don't you find out for yourself.
I already have, but this way allowed you to paint yourself into
a corner.
> You've always been in my OS/2 killfile
Obviously not.
> and now I remember why, you are a complete idiot.
Classical unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective,
as expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
> Be the first in my Linux killfile, won't you.
What does that have to do with OS/2, Wayne?
> Byeee.
Famous Last Words.
tho...@antispam.ham
>>> Only seven posts!! And five of them are Tholes!
>> I haven't seen any posts involving oar pins, Dave.
>>> OS/2 is dead.
>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>>> Turn out the lights when you leave.
>> Non sequitur.
> So much woe as I have with you tholed. --Chaucer.
Also non sequitur.
Kelbel
don't know)
K.
MMI
> On Tuesday 03 Feb 2004 12:08 tho...@antispam.ham wrote:
>
> >>> OS/2 has been dead for about 7 years now. It died when Will Zachmann
> >>> gave up on it.
>
> >> IBM have rebranded it "Linux"
> >
> > Doesn't run my OS/2 software.
>
> Doesn't run mine either but most of it is ancient
Even ancient software can run well and can work well.
Cheers,
Martin
tho...@antispam.ham
> Richard Steiner wrote:
>> Dave wrote:
>>> Only seven posts!! And five of them are Tholes!
>> I'm sure there are a number of us lurking here, ready to defend the OS
>> we choose to use.
>>
>> There so little legitimate advocacy traffic in the group, however, that
>> I tend to breeze on by without comment most of the time.
>>> OS/2 is dead. Turn out the lights when you leave.
>> Not really. It's just that the use of OS/2 is so intuitively obvious
>> for some of us that's it's very hard to put into words. :-) :-)
> everybody in this hopeless newsgroup is as dead as OS/2 is. (but they
> don't know)
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
David T. Johnson
David T. Johnson
Wayne
>
> OS/2 runs a long list of current software including recent new or
> updated OS/2 apps (OpenOffice, IBM Web Browser, Smartsuite 1.7.2,
> Papyrus X), new Java apps, Win32 apps via Odin, and new open source apps
> ported to OS/2. OS/2 also runs a long list of legacy apps including
> DOS, Win16 apps, Java apps, and OS/2 apps. OS/2 also can serve as a
> host for Virtual PC which will run most other operating systems (and
> their apps).
OpenOffice is a buggy windows app that uses a buggy emulator to run,
it's going to be full of problems. SmartSuite is a buggy port of a
buggy windows app that has its own problems. There are few or no
NATIVE OS/2 apps. Java doesn't count as I can wait a week for it
to open and most lack many of the features found in native Linux
appsor even old, unsupported OS/2 apps, for that matter. Even the
up-to-date Java doesn't work properly! Your friends at M$ killed
the VPC for OS/2 so that doesn't count either.
> DVDs (and many other video formats) play on OS/2 with Warpvision
> here--perhaps you didn't have the necessary DVDCSS also installed. Your
> past postings reveal a long list of problems with your hardware so that
> might be another place to look. There is a dead horse being flogged
> here but it's name is 'Ongoing-computer-problems-of-Wayne' rather than
> 'OS/2'. Frankly, if you have some version of Linux working on your
> system, you should use it and be happy because that is likely to be as
> good as it will ever get for you.
As good as it will get! It's better than OS/2 will get. I regularly
have 5 or 6 apps running in 5 virtual desktops with no problems. Only
yesterday having 3 OS/2 apps open pegged the CPU, none of them
large programs. And once again Johnson resorts to his usual tactic
of lying. There is nothing wrong with my hardware. The only problem
I've had in recent months is last Autumn when I accidentally nuked
my BIOS and had to replace my mobo. One version of Warpvision almost
worked except it would not play region 2 DVDs on a region 2 DVD
player, only region 0, with all the needed encryption libraries
where they were supposed to be. Picture and sound were out of sync
and switching to another virtual desktop and back made it worse.
It also won't open the menu to let me choose an episode. In my book
that is an app that does not work. Wake me up when there some
decent native OS/2 apps..... but that isn't going to happen anytime
soon as everyone and his dog gave up on OS/2 years ago. Now, back
to my killfile for Johnson.
Andrew J. Brehm
> Wayne writes:
>
> >>>> OS/2 has been dead for about 7 years now. It died when Will Zachmann
> >>>> gave up on it.
>
> >>> IBM have rebranded it "Linux"
>
> >> Doesn't run my OS/2 software.
>
> > Doesn't run mine either but most of it is ancient
> > an unsupported anyway;
>
> UNIX is rather ancient itself. Clearly, age isn't necessarily a factor.
>
Early releases of UNIX are ancient. Current releases are not. Early
software for UNIX is ancient, current releases are not.
I think the point was that software for OS/2 is ancient, in many cases,
because there are no current releases of that software.
--
Andrew J. Brehm
Fan of Woody Allen
PowerPC User
Supporter of Pepperoni Pizza
Sten Solberg
> "David T. Johnson" <djoh...@isomedia.com> wrote in message news:<101vhgg...@corp.supernews.com>...
> >
<snip>
> > Frankly, if you have some version of Linux working on your
> > system, you should use it and be happy because that is likely to be as
> > good as it will ever get for you.
Hear, hear! :)
> As good as it will get! It's better than OS/2 will get. I regularly
> have 5 or 6 apps running in 5 virtual desktops with no problems. Only
> yesterday having 3 OS/2 apps open pegged the CPU, none of them
> large programs.
Well, I constantly have more than 3 apps running simultaneously here without
noticing much, or any, slowdown. This with a pauvre 1 gig Athlon. Of course, I
have 512 MB RAM.
> And once again Johnson resorts to his usual tactic
> of lying. There is nothing wrong with my hardware. The only problem
> I've had in recent months is last Autumn when I accidentally nuked
> my BIOS and had to replace my mobo.
With all your complaints about OS/2 over the last year or so, perhaps you should
consider hardware problems a charitable guess?
> One version of Warpvision almost
> worked except it would not play region 2 DVDs on a region 2 DVD
> player, only region 0, with all the needed encryption libraries
> where they were supposed to be. Picture and sound were out of sync
> and switching to another virtual desktop and back made it worse.
> It also won't open the menu to let me choose an episode. In my book
> that is an app that does not work.
Warpvision has been working fine here for a long time now. There is even a
utility for setting the region, if one cares to look for it. Warpvision is a
work in progress, however, and I can't say if it is yet possible to choose an
episode - I haven't cared to look for it :) On the other hand, fast forward,
for example, is working fine. One thing I have been looking at, but not yet got
to work, is the Warpvision streaming plugin. As it happens, I now have both
Win2000 and Mandrake 9.1 on my system, and I can say that Warpvision is already
better than the DVD player that ships with Win 2000. I've yet to find out
whether it is also better than the one which comes with Mandrake. Does Mandrake
even come with a DVD player? :)
> Wake me up when there some
> decent native OS/2 apps..... but that isn't going to happen anytime
> soon as everyone and his dog gave up on OS/2 years ago.
Their loss. So with Windows and Linux allegedly being so much better, how come
I don't get sound through my Pinnacle composite cable under Windows, and no
sound at all in Mandrake? The stupid Mandrake distribution doesn't even present
a user-friendly way of installing an alternative sound driver. In OS/2 it is:
point, click-click-click, reboot, finished; you've got sound.
> Now, back
> to my killfile for Johnson.
Tell us when you get a hold of him.
--
Best regards
Sten Solberg
... Also sprach Zarathustra: "Have a Good Day!"
P.S.
I suspect my Pinnacle sound problem under Windows is a PCI IRQ conflict. Could
any of the Windows lovers in here tell me how to solve such a conflict in
Windows?
Wayne
> With all your complaints about OS/2 over the last year or so, perhaps you
> should consider hardware problems a charitable guess?
So, if it works fine in three OSs but not in OS/2 it's a
fault of the hardware? Pull the other one, it's got bells
on! All my hardware was carefully chosen to work with OS/2,
the fact it works better in Linux is a bonus.
Wayne
> already
> better than the DVD player that ships with Win 2000. I've yet to find out
> whether it is also better than the one which comes with Mandrake. Does
> Mandrake even come with a DVD player? :)
>
It comes with several. One does have to install some
DVD navigation software/DVD codecs (point, click, use)
and it works perfectly, more than can be said with OS/2
Wayne
> Mandrake? The stupid Mandrake distribution doesn't even present
> a user-friendly way of installing an alternative sound driver. In OS/2 it
> is: point, click-click-click, reboot, finished; you've got sound.
Umm, KDE menu > Configuration > Hardware > HardDrake.
Not rocket science and it works.
Wayne
>> > Frankly, if you have some version of Linux working on your
>> > system, you should use it and be happy because that is likely to be as
>> > good as it will ever get for you.
>
> Hear, hear! :)
Never been better, spoilt for choice in software after all
those years of scrounging, begging and paying through the
nose for OS/2 software (whose authors took our money and
fled to windows) While OS/2 will get minor updates and a
few drivers (as IBM see fit) I'll be light years ahead.
KDE 3.2 just released, Mandrake 10 just around the corner,
my OS experience has never been this good!
Wayne
> Well, I constantly have more than 3 apps running simultaneously here
> without noticing much, or any, slowdown. This with a pauvre 1 gig Athlon.
> Of course, I have 512 MB RAM.
>
Celeron 1.4 and 256Mb RAM. Association Editor, of all things,
caused my CPU to peg. All I had running was PMMail and RSJ.
Here I have KMail, KNode, XMMS, Mozilla 1.6 & X-Chat always
open and I sometimes have to use OpenOffice, the Gimp, K3b
or/and edit a text file with Kedit. Not a blip.
Wayne
> Warpvision has been working fine here for a long time now. There is even
> a utility for setting the region, if one cares to look for it. Warpvision
> is a work in progress, however, and I can't say if it is yet possible to
> choose an episode - I haven't cared to look for it :) On the other hand,
> fast forward, for example, is working fine.
Fast forward works! Whatever next! Hang the flags out!
My region is set to 2, it won't play region 2 DVDs.
Xine and MPlayer play all my DVDs, fast forward, back,
subtitles, pause and all the other features work!
Richard Steiner
spake unto us, saying:
>So, if it works fine in three OSs but not in OS/2 it's a
>fault of the hardware?
You *do* seem to have performance issues with OS/2 that some of us
really don't have.
That, or you trust your CPU meter too much. :-)
On this PPro/200 box, I often juggle several programs at once (two
of them StarOffice and Mozilla, often mixed with one or more VDMs),
and I don't remember much in the way of slowdowns even back when I
had 64MB. I swapped during the initial program loads, yeah, but
that's one of the prices one pays for having a smaller system.
Mandrake did the same thing when I run too much, and unfortunely its
swapping process is a lot slower than Warp's. I upgraded the RAM in my
main Linux desktop box long before I did this one -- it needed it.
I have 192MB now on this box now, and I rarely ever see slowdowns.
Wayne
> You do seem to have performance issues with OS/2 that some of us
> really don't have.
>
> That, or you trust your CPU meter too much. :-)
>
CPU was pegged and machine was unresponsive. Had to
do a ctrl-alt-del to get it back :-( Maybe I should
put it down to Object Desktop 2 :-)
I do want to get another 256Megs for this machine
though. I'd like to take my Thinkpad up to it's
grand maximum of 256Mb but it will mean junking 2
perfectly good 64Mb chips.
Wayne
Richard Steiner
spake unto us, saying:
>On Wednesday 04 Feb 2004 11:28 Richard Steiner wrote:
>
>> You do seem to have performance issues with OS/2 that some of us
>> really don't have.
>>
>> That, or you trust your CPU meter too much. :-)
>
>CPU was pegged and machine was unresponsive. Had to
>do a ctrl-alt-del to get it back :-( Maybe I should
>put it down to Object Desktop 2 :-)
Sounds like some program decided to monopolize the WPS's input queue.
I've not seen that for a while, but it's one of OS/2's weak points.
>I do want to get another 256Megs for this machine
>though. I'd like to take my Thinkpad up to it's
>grand maximum of 256Mb but it will mean junking 2
>perfectly good 64Mb chips.
Yeah, it's hard to throw away good memory. :-(
tho...@antispam.ham
>> Wayne writes:
>>>>>> OS/2 has been dead for about 7 years now. It died when Will Zachmann
>>>>>> gave up on it.
>>>>> IBM have rebranded it "Linux"
>>>> Doesn't run my OS/2 software.
>>> Doesn't run mine either but most of it is ancient
>>> an unsupported anyway;
>> UNIX is rather ancient itself. Clearly, age isn't necessarily a factor.
> Early releases of UNIX are ancient. Current releases are not.
Current releases of OS/2 are also not ancient.
> Early software for UNIX is ancient, current releases are not.
Current releases of OS/2 software are also not ancient.
> I think the point was that software for OS/2 is ancient, in many cases,
> because there are no current releases of that software.
Irrelevant as long as the software gets the job done. I'm still using
code at work that I wrote a couple decades ago. Still works.
Bob_Meran
The Identity Thief faking himself as OS/2 Guy wrote:
> In article <6QDTb.5023$fA.17...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>,
> "Dave" <da...@hidden.net> wrote:
>
> > Only seven posts!! And five of them are Tholes!
> >
> > OS/2 is dead. Turn out the lights when you leave.
>
> OS/2 has been dead for about 7 years now. It died when Will Zachmann
> gave up on it.
False. OS/2 is very much alive. I use nothing but OS/2 and I do
everything you do - and more. I don't need, use or own Anti-Virus
software. That cost savings is a God send.
Tim Martin, The Official and Only OS/2 Guy
Warp City Web Site - http://www.warpcity.com
From his Warp 4.53 ThinkPad T40 w/2GIG of RAM,
80GIG of Hard Disk and IBM's Web Browser for OS/2
Wayne
> The Identity Thief faking himself as OS/2 Guy wrote:
Bob Meran! Another sock puppet exposed!
Wayne
>>CPU was pegged and machine was unresponsive. Had to
>>do a ctrl-alt-del to get it back :-( Maybe I should
>>put it down to Object Desktop 2 :-)
>
> Sounds like some program decided to monopolize the WPS's input queue.
>
> I've not seen that for a while, but it's one of OS/2's weak points.
The only other thing running was PMMail Bogofilter CMD
>>I do want to get another 256Megs for this machine
>>though. I'd like to take my Thinkpad up to it's
>>grand maximum of 256Mb but it will mean junking 2
>>perfectly good 64Mb chips.
>
> Yeah, it's hard to throw away good memory. :-(
I suppose I could trade them in but they won't be
worth much.
Wayne
Andrew J. Brehm
> Andrew J. Brehm writes:
>
> >> Wayne writes:
>
> >>>>>> OS/2 has been dead for about 7 years now. It died when Will Zachmann
> >>>>>> gave up on it.
>
> >>>>> IBM have rebranded it "Linux"
>
> >>>> Doesn't run my OS/2 software.
>
> >>> Doesn't run mine either but most of it is ancient
> >>> an unsupported anyway;
>
> >> UNIX is rather ancient itself. Clearly, age isn't necessarily a factor.
>
> > Early releases of UNIX are ancient. Current releases are not.
>
> Current releases of OS/2 are also not ancient.
Somewhat ancient. OS/2 has been skipping features for years.
> > Early software for UNIX is ancient, current releases are not.
>
> Current releases of OS/2 software are also not ancient.
But how many current releases are there? And how much software is there
for OS/2 anyway?
> > I think the point was that software for OS/2 is ancient, in many cases,
> > because there are no current releases of that software.
>
> Irrelevant as long as the software gets the job done. I'm still using
> code at work that I wrote a couple decades ago. Still works.
It works as long as your objectives don't change.
Richard Steiner
spake unto us, saying:
>False. OS/2 is very much alive. I use nothing but OS/2 and I do
>everything you do - and more. I don't need, use or own Anti-Virus
>software. That cost savings is a God send.
Even an OS/2 user has use for anti-virus software if they use any DOS
or WinOS2 software, since a VDM is perfectly capable of running DOS or
Windows virus code.
FWIW, some very high-quality anti-virus software is avaiable for home
users for free. I recommend the DOS version of F-Prot:
Richard Steiner
and...@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm) spake unto us, saying:
>Somewhat ancient. OS/2 has been skipping features for years.
Out of curiosity, which features are you thinking about?
>> Current releases of OS/2 software are also not ancient.
>
>But how many current releases are there? And how much software is there
>for OS/2 anyway?
A lot depends on how you define "software for OS/2", I think.
I have a wide array of programs here which run under OS/2 quite well.
Some of them are DOS programs or Windows programs, but the operation is
seamless enough that the specific API they use is largely irrelevant to
the end user (me <g>).
What types of software do you believe OS/2 is lacking?
>> > I think the point was that software for OS/2 is ancient, in many cases,
>> > because there are no current releases of that software.
>>
>> Irrelevant as long as the software gets the job done. I'm still using
>> code at work that I wrote a couple decades ago. Still works.
>
>It works as long as your objectives don't change.
True, but even some older packages are extremely flexible.
Case in point: I'm using a old DOS program right now (NeoBook Pro) to
create a graphical "referee" interface for a roleplaying game I plan on
running sometime in the near future, and it will enable me to assemble
a mix of text files, graphics, and a few smaller databases (via a nice
little freeware database called Information Palace, another DOS program)
into a single cohesive unit with a point-and-shoot interface that I can
then burn onto a CD-ROM for portability.
The copy of NeoBook Pro I have is almost ten years old, but it's still
extremely useful, and the standalone EXE's it produces still work just
as well under Windows XP as they do under OS/2 (quite well).
MMI
This is quite useless :-) I can provide the same "not a blip list" for
OS/2 on 1.3 Athlon and (well) 512M RAM:
Mozilla 1.5
Firebird 0.7
Embellish
WarpVision playing DivX
File Commander (several processes)
cdrecord/2 burning at 8x speed.
Not a blip.
Cheers,
Martin
tho...@antispam.ham
>>>> Wayne writes:
>>>>>>>> OS/2 has been dead for about 7 years now. It died when Will Zachmann
>>>>>>>> gave up on it.
>>>>>>> IBM have rebranded it "Linux"
>>>>>> Doesn't run my OS/2 software.
>>>>> Doesn't run mine either but most of it is ancient
>>>>> an unsupported anyway;
>>>> UNIX is rather ancient itself. Clearly, age isn't necessarily a factor.
>>> Early releases of UNIX are ancient. Current releases are not.
>> Current releases of OS/2 are also not ancient.
> Somewhat ancient. OS/2 has been skipping features for years.
FixPak4 for MCP is a lot more recent than "years".
>>> Early software for UNIX is ancient, current releases are not.
>> Current releases of OS/2 software are also not ancient.
> But how many current releases are there?
Define "current".
> And how much software is there for OS/2 anyway?
More than I've been able to evaluate.
>>> I think the point was that software for OS/2 is ancient, in many cases,
>>> because there are no current releases of that software.
>> Irrelevant as long as the software gets the job done. I'm still using
>> code at work that I wrote a couple decades ago. Still works.
> It works as long as your objectives don't change.
Nonsense; consider software that has capabilities you never exploited
previously. You can change your objectives and discover features that
have been there all along.
Irv Spalten
Wayne wrote:
Yup, add it to the list, check GOOGLE too. At least he's consistent <G>.
Someday he'll learn how to check stuff that he changes before sending.
It will not be as easy then <G>.
Irv
Jeramie
> Wayne writes:
>
> >> WarpVision can.
>
> > Only in the developers dreams!
>
> Incorrect.
>
> > Tried several versions and none of them worked.
>
> I've had better luck.
>
> >>> Too many reasons to continue flogging a dead horse.
>
> >> So why are you here?
>
> > What, are you the new OS/2 newsgroup censor?
>
> Classic evasion.
>
> > What happened to Larry?
>
> Non sequitur.
>
> > I still have OS/2 on my laptop,
> > so I think I'm still entitled to be here and flame
> > OS/2, after all that's what this group is for!
>
> Why would you have an allegedly "dead horse" on your laptop?
>
> > The great thing is for every one DEAD OS/2 program
> > there are several current and updated Linux programs.
> > Not only that but Linux developers don't take your
> > money in exchange for buggy software and promise
> > fixes and updates and then move over to windows!
>
> Then how do you get RedHat Enterprise Linux 3 for free?
>
I might add that RedHat pulled all their Retail distros of RedHat. It
is no longer available in the retail arena.
This news group may be dead, and "OS/2" may be dead...but
"eComstation" is just being born!
Cheers!
--
--
Jeramie
I would have to agree on this point. Good software & code don't need
to continue to be updated. Why fix something that works!
Cheers!
--
Jeramie
wrote:
> "David T. Johnson" <djoh...@isomedia.com> wrote in message news:<101vhgg...@corp.supernews.com>...
> >
> > OS/2 runs a long list of current software including recent new or
> > updated OS/2 apps (OpenOffice, IBM Web Browser, Smartsuite 1.7.2,
> > Papyrus X), new Java apps, Win32 apps via Odin, and new open source apps
> > ported to OS/2. OS/2 also runs a long list of legacy apps including
> > DOS, Win16 apps, Java apps, and OS/2 apps. OS/2 also can serve as a
> > host for Virtual PC which will run most other operating systems (and
> > their apps).
>
> OpenOffice is a buggy windows app that uses a buggy emulator to run,
> it's going to be full of problems. SmartSuite is a buggy port of a
> buggy windows app that has its own problems.
I have to take issue with this!
I use SmartSuite extensively on my eComStation Entry 1.1 system for my
business. It is rock solid and performs very well. I love it!
There are few or no
> NATIVE OS/2 apps.
There are thousands of applications for os/2...look on hobbes.
I use all native OS/2 applications, exluding Quickbooks Pro v5 (which
will be replaced soon as well).
--
Jeramie
wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 23:35:12 UTC, wayne_...@yahoo.com (Wayne) wrote:
>
> > "David T. Johnson" <djoh...@isomedia.com> wrote in message news:<101vhgg...@corp.supernews.com>...
> > >
>
> <snip>
>
> > > Frankly, if you have some version of Linux working on your
> > > system, you should use it and be happy because that is likely to be as
> > > good as it will ever get for you.
>
> Hear, hear! :)
>
> > As good as it will get! It's better than OS/2 will get. I regularly
> > have 5 or 6 apps running in 5 virtual desktops with no problems. Only
> > yesterday having 3 OS/2 apps open pegged the CPU, none of them
> > large programs.
>
> Well, I constantly have more than 3 apps running simultaneously here without
> noticing much, or any, slowdown. This with a pauvre 1 gig Athlon. Of course, I
> have 512 MB RAM.
>
Here I usually run a half-dozen apps at the same time quite smoothly.
Running eComStation Entry 1.1 on a Pentium OverDrive @120Mhz, 128MB
RAM, Adaptec 2940U w/9GB SCSI
I also host this WebSite on an "old" system running Warp 3:
http://www.os2irc.org
Both systems run very smoothly.
David T. Johnson
Andrew J. Brehm
> Andrew J. Brehm writes:
>
> >>>> Wayne writes:
>
> >>>>>>> IBM have rebranded it "Linux"
>
> >>>>>> Doesn't run my OS/2 software.
>
> >>>>> Doesn't run mine either but most of it is ancient
> >>>>> an unsupported anyway;
>
> >>>> UNIX is rather ancient itself. Clearly, age isn't necessarily a factor.
>
> >>> Early releases of UNIX are ancient. Current releases are not.
>
> >> Current releases of OS/2 are also not ancient.
>
> > Somewhat ancient. OS/2 has been skipping features for years.
>
> FixPak4 for MCP is a lot more recent than "years".
Non sequitur. I wasn't talking about releases but features.
> >>> Early software for UNIX is ancient, current releases are not.
>
> >> Current releases of OS/2 software are also not ancient.
>
> > But how many current releases are there?
>
> Define "current".
This year or last year.
> > And how much software is there for OS/2 anyway?
>
> More than I've been able to evaluate.
Than you are either extremely lucky or very very slow.
> >>> I think the point was that software for OS/2 is ancient, in many cases,
> >>> because there are no current releases of that software.
>
> >> Irrelevant as long as the software gets the job done. I'm still using
> >> code at work that I wrote a couple decades ago. Still works.
>
> > It works as long as your objectives don't change.
>
> Nonsense; consider software that has capabilities you never exploited
> previously. You can change your objectives and discover features that
> have been there all along.
Only if my objectives are among those imagined by authors several years
ago.
tho...@antispam.ham
>>>>>> Wayne writes:
>>>>>>>>> IBM have rebranded it "Linux"
>>>>>>>> Doesn't run my OS/2 software.
>>>>>>> Doesn't run mine either but most of it is ancient
>>>>>>> an unsupported anyway;
>>>>>> UNIX is rather ancient itself. Clearly, age isn't necessarily a factor.
>>>>> Early releases of UNIX are ancient. Current releases are not.
>>>> Current releases of OS/2 are also not ancient.
>>> Somewhat ancient. OS/2 has been skipping features for years.
>> FixPak4 for MCP is a lot more recent than "years".
> Non sequitur. I wasn't talking about releases but features.
So was I, Andrew.
>>>>> Early software for UNIX is ancient, current releases are not.
>>>> Current releases of OS/2 software are also not ancient.
>>> But how many current releases are there?
>> Define "current".
> This year or last year.
Plenty.
>>> And how much software is there for OS/2 anyway?
>> More than I've been able to evaluate.
> Than you are either extremely lucky or very very slow.
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>>>>> I think the point was that software for OS/2 is ancient, in many cases,
>>>>> because there are no current releases of that software.
>>>> Irrelevant as long as the software gets the job done. I'm still using
>>>> code at work that I wrote a couple decades ago. Still works.
>>> It works as long as your objectives don't change.
>> Nonsense; consider software that has capabilities you never exploited
>> previously. You can change your objectives and discover features that
>> have been there all along.
> Only if my objectives are among those imagined by authors several years
> ago.
There you go.
Marty
> "David T. Johnson" <djoh...@isomedia.com> wrote in message news:<101vhgg...@corp.supernews.com>...
>
>>OS/2 runs a long list of current software including recent new or
>>updated OS/2 apps (OpenOffice, IBM Web Browser, Smartsuite 1.7.2,
>>Papyrus X), new Java apps, Win32 apps via Odin, and new open source apps
>>ported to OS/2. OS/2 also runs a long list of legacy apps including
>>DOS, Win16 apps, Java apps, and OS/2 apps. OS/2 also can serve as a
>>host for Virtual PC which will run most other operating systems (and
>>their apps).
>
> OpenOffice is a buggy windows app that uses a buggy emulator to run,
> it's going to be full of problems.
Haven't tried it myself. Conceptually, I also don't like layers on top
of compatibility layers in terms of bloat, performance, and reliability.
But Innotek's stuff has been pretty solid and fast for me.
> SmartSuite is a buggy port of a
> buggy windows app that has its own problems.
I've been using SmartSuite for a long time without tripping over
anything. I've used it to read Word docs and edit and print my own
documents. No complaints.
> There are few or no NATIVE OS/2 apps.
Comes with the territory. But the apps that are there can be quite good
and comfortable to use.
> Java doesn't count as I can wait a week for it
> to open and most lack many of the features found in native Linux
> appsor even old, unsupported OS/2 apps, for that matter. Even the
> up-to-date Java doesn't work properly!
I also think that using Java as a crutch is a bad idea. But GoldenCode
and Innotek Javas are working well for me.
> As good as it will get! It's better than OS/2 will get. I regularly
> have 5 or 6 apps running in 5 virtual desktops with no problems.
I recently changed my configuration over to be a dual-head system with 6
virtual desktops on eCS. I typically had my web server, DTOC, FTP
server, e-mail client (filtering all those SPAMs), web browser,
Distributed.net client, dynamic DNS client, MP3 player, and SNES
emulator running together without any hiccups on my 866MHz P3.
If you were having trouble running 3 apps, it sounds like your hardware
had some crappy OS/2 drivers or your hardware is at fault. Since you
say you run fine with other OS's I'd conclude the drivers are at fault.
In any case, please don't dump on existing OS/2 developers. Their
collective works might not have been enough to keep your interest, but
they are few people who are working their tails off. Good luck with
Linux. I might join you in the distant future, but eCS still works for
my needs.
The OS/2 Guy
wrote:
> False. OS/2 is very much alive. I use nothing but OS/2 and I do
> everything you do - and more. I don't need, use or own Anti-Virus
> software. That cost savings is a God send.
I have no anti-virus software either. I doubt very much that you do
"more than me".
Besides, your lame website doesn't run on OS/2, so how can you claim
that you "use nothing but OS/2"?
Larry Chauvet
the Original OS/2 Guy
Dan
wrote:
The usual drivel.
Hi Timmie. Nice to see you have developed another dominant personality.
Dan
Dan
tho...@antispam.ham wrote:
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous TholenBot answer.
Dan
David H. McCoy
> Subject: Re: Holy Crap!! This NG is dead!!
> From: rste...@visi.com (Richard Steiner)
> Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 02:31:31 -0600
> Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
>
> Here in comp.os.os2.advocacy,
> and...@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm) spake unto us, saying:
>
> >Somewhat ancient. OS/2 has been skipping features for years.
>
> Out of curiosity, which features are you thinking about?
>
machines, certain people quickly dismiss them.
Why so curious now?
--
--------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
--------------------------------------
Andrew J. Brehm
> Here in comp.os.os2.advocacy,
> and...@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm) spake unto us, saying:
>
> >Somewhat ancient. OS/2 has been skipping features for years.
>
> Out of curiosity, which features are you thinking about?
The ones usually mentioned when this comes up, plus a few that might not
have been specifically mentioned.
Support for laptops, all their hardware, sleeping, power saving etc.
Support for wireless lan.
Support for DVD playing.
Support for new 64 bit CPUs.
Support for digital cameras, video and photo.
Support for USB2/Firewire and external hard disks or other devices.
Support for CD and DVD burning and ripping.
Support for audio and text chat.
There are others, but this is what came to mind instantly.
Note that I expect these features not only on my own computer(s), but
also on other computers I might come into contact with.
> >> Current releases of OS/2 software are also not ancient.
> >
> >But how many current releases are there? And how much software is there
> >for OS/2 anyway?
>
> A lot depends on how you define "software for OS/2", I think.
I mean "OS/2 software" as in "written for OS/2 or with OS/2 in mind".
> I have a wide array of programs here which run under OS/2 quite well.
> Some of them are DOS programs or Windows programs, but the operation is
> seamless enough that the specific API they use is largely irrelevant to
> the end user (me <g>).
>
> What types of software do you believe OS/2 is lacking?
Video and DVD authoring.
3D authorting.
Graphics athoring.
Music authoring.
Current games.
Web authoring and blogging.
> >> > I think the point was that software for OS/2 is ancient, in many cases,
> >> > because there are no current releases of that software.
> >>
> >> Irrelevant as long as the software gets the job done. I'm still using
> >> code at work that I wrote a couple decades ago. Still works.
> >
> >It works as long as your objectives don't change.
>
> True, but even some older packages are extremely flexible.
True, but modern operating systems can usually run older software too.
> Case in point: I'm using a old DOS program right now (NeoBook Pro) to
> create a graphical "referee" interface for a roleplaying game I plan on
> running sometime in the near future, and it will enable me to assemble
> a mix of text files, graphics, and a few smaller databases (via a nice
> little freeware database called Information Palace, another DOS program)
> into a single cohesive unit with a point-and-shoot interface that I can
> then burn onto a CD-ROM for portability.
>
> The copy of NeoBook Pro I have is almost ten years old, but it's still
> extremely useful, and the standalone EXE's it produces still work just
> as well under Windows XP as they do under OS/2 (quite well).
Good for you.
Sten Solberg
> On Wednesday 04 Feb 2004 10:38 Sten Solberg wrote:
>
> > With all your complaints about OS/2 over the last year or so, perhaps you
> > should consider hardware problems a charitable guess?
>
> So, if it works fine in three OSs but not in OS/2 it's a
> fault of the hardware? Pull the other one, it's got bells
> on! All my hardware was carefully chosen to work with OS/2,
> the fact it works better in Linux is a bonus.
I have never made any claims about your hardware, but if you can't run 3 apps
simultaneously, something is obviously not right in your setup. Considering how
long you have used OS/2, it's rather amazing if this has not crossed your mind!
Or have you been running a crippled system all that time? My first thought
would be to get rid of Object Desktop, which is one of the few apps that have
caused serious problems on my system. Then, as others have suggested, consider
drivers and virtual desktops. And please stop complaining about OS/2 until you
have fixed it.
--
Best regards
Sten Solberg
... Also sprach Zarathustra: "Have a Good Day!"
Sten Solberg
> On Wednesday 04 Feb 2004 10:38 Sten Solberg wrote:
>
> > already
> > better than the DVD player that ships with Win 2000. I've yet to find out
> > whether it is also better than the one which comes with Mandrake. Does
> > Mandrake even come with a DVD player? :)
> >
>
> It comes with several. One does have to install some
> DVD navigation software/DVD codecs (point, click, use)
> and it works perfectly, more than can be said with OS/2
I'll look into it when I feel like booting Linux to watch a DVD movie.
Sten Solberg
> On Wednesday 04 Feb 2004 10:38 Sten Solberg wrote:
>
> > Mandrake? The stupid Mandrake distribution doesn't even present
> > a user-friendly way of installing an alternative sound driver. In OS/2 it
> > is: point, click-click-click, reboot, finished; you've got sound.
>
> Umm, KDE menu > Configuration > Hardware > HardDrake.
> Not rocket science and it works.
No, it doesn't. My sound driver installer complains that it can't find a
"source file" where it is supposed to be. Considering all the sound drivers
Mandrake comes with, it's rather strange that it would be missing resources for
the quite common VIA AC'97 codecs, and rather stupid that it suggests using an
ALSA driver, when we all know that a dedicated driver is needed for VIA's
VT82C686A southbridge. This was no problem in OS/2 and Win2000, but a
showstopper in Mandrake.
Wayne
>> Then how do you get RedHat Enterprise Linux 3 for free?
>>
>
> I might add that RedHat pulled all their Retail distros of RedHat. It
> is no longer available in the retail arena.
>
> This news group may be dead, and "OS/2" may be dead...but
> "eComstation" is just being born!
>
Would you like to purchase my version? I rarely use
it and the only apps I use; PMView and the Japanese
wordprocessor, JWP, work fine in Warp 4 FP15.
Wayne
> I have never made any claims about your hardware, but if you can't run 3
> apps simultaneously, something is obviously not right in your setup.
> Considering how long you have used OS/2, it's rather amazing if this has
> not crossed your mind! Or have you been running a crippled system all that
> time? My first thought would be to get rid of Object Desktop, which is
> one of the few apps that have caused serious problems on my system. Then,
> as others have suggested, consider drivers and virtual desktops. And
> please stop complaining about OS/2 until you have fixed it.
No point in fixing something I don't use. I would agree
with you though, that it is OD2 that caused most of my
problems.
Sten Solberg
> On Wednesday 04 Feb 2004 10:38 Sten Solberg wrote:
>
> >> > Frankly, if you have some version of Linux working on your
> >> > system, you should use it and be happy because that is likely to be as
> >> > good as it will ever get for you.
> >
> > Hear, hear! :)
>
> Never been better, spoilt for choice in software after all
> those years of scrounging, begging and paying through the
> nose for OS/2 software (whose authors took our money and
> fled to windows) While OS/2 will get minor updates and a
> few drivers (as IBM see fit) I'll be light years ahead.
> KDE 3.2 just released, Mandrake 10 just around the corner,
> my OS experience has never been this good!
Well, that's nice to hear, as I am trying to learn a little bit about Mandrake
myself. But your derision of OS/2 is uncalled for. Apart from some multimedia
apps and a (more) flexible accounting programme, I can do all I need under OS/2.
Sten Solberg
> On Wednesday 04 Feb 2004 10:38 Sten Solberg wrote:
>
> > Warpvision has been working fine here for a long time now. There is even
> > a utility for setting the region, if one cares to look for it. Warpvision
> > is a work in progress, however, and I can't say if it is yet possible to
> > choose an episode - I haven't cared to look for it :) On the other hand,
> > fast forward, for example, is working fine.
>
> Fast forward works! Whatever next! Hang the flags out!
> My region is set to 2, it won't play region 2 DVDs.
> Xine and MPlayer play all my DVDs, fast forward, back,
> subtitles, pause and all the other features work!
I don't have any Region 2 films to test...
Wayne
> I don't have any Region 2 films to test...
I have 2 region 2 films that were bought here
and several from the UK and 3 region 0 DVDs.
Perhaps a change of subject and groups is in
order?
tho...@antispam.ham
>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous TholenBot answer.
You're still erroneously presupposing the existence of some "TholenBot",
Dan.
Sten Solberg
Probably, if we are going to pursue the matter...
I usually prefer watching DVD films on the telly, fed from a dedicated DVD
player. That DVD player is modified to play all regions, BTW; a service offered
by some retailers here. Whoever invented this 'region' nonsense did not ask the
consumers first.
Jeramie
How about a trade?
I have a full retail version of Mandrake 8.2 with Powerpak, includes
original packaging, books, pamplets, and 7 cds.
I also have a full retail version of Mandrake 7.2 with Powerpak, which
includes commercial applications...IBM ViaVoice and more...also
contains original packaging, books, and CDs.
I would love to see these packages find a good home with someone that
has a lot of time on their hands and enjoys fiddling.
--
Richard
"Sten Solberg" <st...@powertech.no> wrote in message
news:4RR8ymkuyquO-pn2-3SpcD5djqGS1@localhost...
> --
> Best regards
> Sten Solberg
>
> ... Also sprach Zarathustra: "Have a Good Day!"
>
>
> P.S.
> I suspect my Pinnacle sound problem under Windows is a PCI IRQ conflict.
Could
> any of the Windows lovers in here tell me how to solve such a conflict in
> Windows?
>
>
At a guess I would suggest:
a. rearranging your PCI boards physically;
b. look in you Bios to see if you can reserve the IRQ,
Richard
"Wayne" <rond...@ybb.ne.jp> wrote in message
news:bvpiot$vd5s6$3...@ID-134497.news.uni-berlin.de...
> On Wednesday 04 Feb 2004 10:38 Sten Solberg wrote:
>
> > a user-friendly way of installing an alternative sound driver. In OS/2
it
> > is: point, click-click-click, reboot, finished; you've got sound.
>
> Umm, KDE menu > Configuration > Hardware > HardDrake.
> Not rocket science and it works.
work (netwroking was a bugger until I came across a post that suggested
installing "linux noacpi" it then worked fine) sound and getting it to
recognise my keyboard properly are the current challenges.
Linux seems good but on this 2.4GHz P4 with 1Gb Ram it (and WinXP) seem
generally slower than OS/2 on the old Athlon 450Mhz was- alas hardware
issues mean I will never be able to "back to back" them on this beast.
Richard
> Wayne wrote:
> > "David T. Johnson" <djoh...@isomedia.com> wrote in message
news:<101vhgg...@corp.supernews.com>...
> >
> >>OS/2 runs a long list of current software including recent new or
> >>updated OS/2 apps (OpenOffice, IBM Web Browser, Smartsuite 1.7.2,
> >>Papyrus X), new Java apps, Win32 apps via Odin, and new open source apps
> >>ported to OS/2. OS/2 also runs a long list of legacy apps including
> >>DOS, Win16 apps, Java apps, and OS/2 apps. OS/2 also can serve as a
> >>host for Virtual PC which will run most other operating systems (and
> >>their apps).
> >
> >
> > OpenOffice is a buggy windows app that uses a buggy emulator to run,
> > it's going to be full of problems.
>
> It uses the ODIN libraries, as Virtual PC also did. Virtual PC is
> reliable and not 'full of problems.' I don't see why why OpenOffice
> should be any different since they are both being developed by the same
> people at Innotek.
>
> > SmartSuite is a buggy port of a
> > buggy windows app that has its own problems.
>
> I have Smartsuite v1.7.2 and it is definitely not 'buggy' and all of its
> apps are native OS/2 apps, something which should be obvious to you if
> you have ever used it.
>
it was still very much a port over from Windows - any look at the help files
or attempts to interact with the Desktop really showed it was NOT OS/2 in
lineage. My experience with SS was that it was a little buggy though no
worse than the same vintage SS on Windows was.
Wayne
> Probably, if we are going to pursue the matter...
> I usually prefer watching DVD films on the telly, fed from a dedicated DVD
> player. That DVD player is modified to play all regions, BTW; a service
> offered by some retailers here. Whoever invented this 'region' nonsense
> did not ask the consumers first.
It's further complicated by the fact that all but 2 of
the DVDs here are PAL format. This means that I would
have to buy a DVD player that is capable of playing
PAL format DVDs on an NTSC TV and maybe that can also
be set to 'region free'. Right now with current plans
in progress I don't want to spend the extra cost on
such a beast when my $50 PC DVD player works fine :-)
I was thinking of getting a video card with video out
but I don't know what this mobo supports. I know it
won't work with Matrox cards, my G400 is sitting unused
on top of the box, and I'm forced to use the crappy
Intel onboard video :-(
Wayne
Richard
"Bob_Meran" <BM1...@PRC.com> wrote in message
news:40206444...@PRC.com...
> I use nothing but OS/2 and I do
> everything you do - and more. I don't need, use or own Anti-Virus
> software. That cost savings is a God send.
>
given what he's said about software no one would be surprised that he
doesn't own any!.
Richard Steiner
spake unto us, saying:
>No point in fixing something I don't use. I would agree
>with you though, that it is OD2 that caused most of my
>problems.
The WPS has the potential to be a house of cards, and OD/OD2 tends to
stack the deck a bit. :-)
--
-Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Eden Prairie, MN
OS/2 + eCS + Linux + Win95 + DOS + PC/GEOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven!
Applications analyst/designer/developer (14 yrs) seeking employment.
See web site above for resume/CV and background.
Richard Steiner
David H. McCoy <fa...@mail.com> spake unto us, saying:
>In article <j3KIApHp...@visi.com>, rste...@visi.com says...
>
>> Subject: Re: Holy Crap!! This NG is dead!!
>> From: rste...@visi.com (Richard Steiner)
>> Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 02:31:31 -0600
>> Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
>>
>> Here in comp.os.os2.advocacy,
>> and...@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm) spake unto us, saying:
>>
>> >Somewhat ancient. OS/2 has been skipping features for years.
>>
>> Out of curiosity, which features are you thinking about?
>
>Shall I list mine?
Sure, though I think I've already seen them. Lots of things related to
multimedia applications, if I recall.
Those really aren't OS features, are they?
>Why so curious now?
When have I ever *not* been curious? :-)
Richard Steiner
and...@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm) spake unto us, saying:
>Richard Steiner <rste...@visi.com> wrote:
>
>> Here in comp.os.os2.advocacy,
>> and...@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm) spake unto us, saying:
>>
>> >Somewhat ancient. OS/2 has been skipping features for years.
>>
>> Out of curiosity, which features are you thinking about?
>
>The ones usually mentioned when this comes up, plus a few that might not
>have been specifically mentioned.
Fair enough. Most of what you cite are either third-party applications
or device drivers, however, and not directly related to the OS itself
(which is what I thought you were talking about).
>Support for laptops, all their hardware, sleeping, power saving etc.
This is either largely or completely lacking in all x86 OSes that I'm
aware of except Windows.
>Support for wireless lan.
Have no idea about this, since I use standard CAT5 cabling everywhere.
Do people really use wireless networking on non-laptop machines? Isn't
that rather insecure?
>Support for DVD playing.
I don't have the CPU power to do this on my current machines, but I'd
love to be able to do this in the future.
Then again, I've seen dedicated DVD players for $30 locally, so I may
never care all that much about playing them on my PC. I don't watch
movies down here -- I do computer stuff!
>Support for new 64 bit CPUs.
They'll still run OS/2, won't they?
>Support for digital cameras, video and photo.
OS/2 has some support in this area. I know apps exist to transfer pics
from a fairly large number of common camera models.
My Casio camera isn't one of them, though. :-(
>Support for USB2/Firewire and external hard disks or other devices.
I don't actually know anyone who uses Firewire at home except a couple
of Mac users. USB device support would be a good thing, though, and
some USB support exists for OS/2. Since I have no USB ports, my level
of interst is again somewhat lacking...
>Support for CD and DVD burning and ripping.
OS/2 already has *very* good CD ripping and burning software. I don't
know anything about the DVD side, but suspect it's very weak.
>Support for audio and text chat.
This is important to a lot of people, though not to me, and I'm actually
a little bit surprised that someone hasn't ported something like gaim to
OS/2. Text chat, anyway.
The only audio chat I've found any use for are things like Roger Wilco,
and those are largely confined to a gaming context anyway (something
OS/2 is never going to be a good platform for).
>There are others, but this is what came to mind instantly.
It does a good job of demonstrating how different computer users are, I
think. Of the above items, only DVD viewing/ripping/burning and digital
camera support interests me at all.
>Note that I expect these features not only on my own computer(s), but
>also on other computers I might come into contact with.
I would think your requirements would limit your platform choices quite
severely on x86 hardware. Windows, yes, and perhaps a half-dozen Linux
flavors (though the Linux flavors would also be seriously or completely
lacking in many areas).
I guess that's why you use a mainstream OS like MacOSX, huh?
>> >But how many current releases are there? And how much software is
>> >there for OS/2 anyway?
>>
>> A lot depends on how you define "software for OS/2", I think.
>
>I mean "OS/2 software" as in "written for OS/2 or with OS/2 in mind".
But that's an arbitrary definition. Since OS/2 comes bundled with an
excellent DOS and Win16 environment, programs written for those two
environments are just as viable as native programs.
Given today's hardware, there's not even a performance impact.
Besides, a number of Windows and DOS programs were actually written
with OS/2 in mind. OS/2 support is often explicitly mentioned.
>> I have a wide array of programs here which run under OS/2 quite well.
>> Some of them are DOS programs or Windows programs, but the operation is
>> seamless enough that the specific API they use is largely irrelevant to
>> the end user (me <g>).
>>
>> What types of software do you believe OS/2 is lacking?
>
>Video and DVD authoring.
Yes. My recommendation: use an OS that has multimedia support, which
on x86 hardware would be Windows and very little else.
>3D authorting.
Context? Are you talking CAD, 3-D image creation, or what?
>Graphics athoring.
The selection of basic bitmap manipulation tools under OS/2 is better
than that under Linux. It's one of the things keeping me on OS/2.
Again, in the x86 world you would probably be limited to Windows.
>Music authoring.
I use Cakewalk Home Studio and Quartz AudioMaster under Win95 OSR2 for
that type of think (mainly mixing MIDI tracks generated by my Yamaha
keyboard).
There's nothing under any other x86 platform that comes close, OS/2
included. Linux software sucks in this area also.
>Current games.
Again Windows only, with a few exceptions on Linux in the First Person
Shooter department.
>Web authoring and blogging.
Depends on what you need. For basic stuff, a text editor or a simple
WYSIWYG tool is sufficient, and OS/2 supports a number of those.
>> True, but even some older packages are extremely flexible.
>
>True, but modern operating systems can usually run older software too.
Which ones, pray tell?
On the x86 side, OS/2 does, and Windows flavors do (XP somewhat worse
than OS/2). That makes two (if you count the Windows flavors as one).
Linux doesn't have *any* legacy support unless you take the time to
hunt down the appropriate support for DOS and Windows (which is a royal
pain in the ass I might add -- I'm in the process of doing that right
now for one of my Mandrake boxes).
The other x86 alternatives (BeOS/Solaris/FreeBSD) have nothing at all
that I'm aware of.
>> Case in point: I'm using a old DOS program right now (NeoBook Pro) to
>> create a graphical "referee" interface for a roleplaying game I plan on
>> running sometime in the near future, and it will enable me to assemble
>> a mix of text files, graphics, and a few smaller databases (via a nice
>> little freeware database called Information Palace, another DOS program)
>> into a single cohesive unit with a point-and-shoot interface that I can
>> then burn onto a CD-ROM for portability.
>>
>> The copy of NeoBook Pro I have is almost ten years old, but it's still
>> extremely useful, and the standalone EXE's it produces still work just
>> as well under Windows XP as they do under OS/2 (quite well).
>
>Good for you.
You know, that's kind of the same reaction I have to the extreme set of
requirements you cite above.
If you were on x86 hardware, you'd be a die-hard Windows user. No other
OS on x86 hardware has even half of the stuff you claim you need...
Wayne
> Err not always! I'm going through the slow learning ex of getting it all
> to
> work (netwroking was a bugger until I came across a post that suggested
> installing "linux noacpi" it then worked fine) sound and getting it to
> recognise my keyboard properly are the current challenges.
> Linux seems good but on this 2.4GHz P4 with 1Gb Ram it (and WinXP) seem
> generally slower than OS/2 on the old Athlon 450Mhz was- alas hardware
> issues mean I will never be able to "back to back" them on this beast.
I suppose I was lucky in that everything was recognised straight
off. Judging from posts I read in some forums there must be
something wrong with my system because I can watch and rip DVDs,
burn CDs with K3b, connect to the Net with all the apps in my
KDE menu and urpmi updates my system just fine :-)
Cheers
Wayne
David T. Johnson
Marty
And there must be something wrong with all of our OS/2 systems that meet
our needs and work perfectly. ;-)
Two can play at that, Wayne.
Andrew J. Brehm
> Here in comp.os.os2.advocacy,
> and...@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm) spake unto us, saying:
>
> >Richard Steiner <rste...@visi.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Here in comp.os.os2.advocacy,
> >> and...@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm) spake unto us, saying:
> >>
> >> >Somewhat ancient. OS/2 has been skipping features for years.
> >>
> >> Out of curiosity, which features are you thinking about?
> >
> >The ones usually mentioned when this comes up, plus a few that might not
> >have been specifically mentioned.
>
> Fair enough. Most of what you cite are either third-party applications or
> device drivers, however, and not directly related to the OS itself (which
> is what I thought you were talking about).
My point is that what I cited _should not_ be third-party applications
or (seperate) device drivers. All these are typical features of a modern
operating system.
> >Support for laptops, all their hardware, sleeping, power saving etc.
>
> This is either largely or completely lacking in all x86 OSes that I'm
> aware of except Windows.
OS/2 might be in good company, but there is also GNU/Linux which has at
least some of these features.
> >Support for wireless lan.
>
> Have no idea about this, since I use standard CAT5 cabling everywhere.
>
> Do people really use wireless networking on non-laptop machines? Isn't
> that rather insecure?
It's handy to connect to your desktop machine from a laptop without a
cable. You can buy a seperate base station, but there is no need for
that if your OS supports wireless lan out of the box.
> >Support for DVD playing.
>
> I don't have the CPU power to do this on my current machines, but I'd love
> to be able to do this in the future.
My Macs can both do it. It's something I have come to expect from a
computer.
> Then again, I've seen dedicated DVD players for $30 locally, so I may
> never care all that much about playing them on my PC. I don't watch
> movies down here -- I do computer stuff!
The thing about features is not that you have to use them but that you
can. My laptop can show me a movie when I'm on the train, a dedicated
DVD player can't. A portable dedicated DVD player is more expensive than
a DVD drive and in some cases more expensive than a cheap iBook.
> >Support for new 64 bit CPUs.
>
> They'll still run OS/2, won't they?
The Opteron does, but OS/2 won't have access to more than 4 GB of RAM.
> >Support for digital cameras, video and photo.
>
> OS/2 has some support in this area. I know apps exist to transfer pics
> from a fairly large number of common camera models.
Some support isn't enough. Customers expect more these days.
> My Casio camera isn't one of them, though. :-(
Bad luck.
> >Support for USB2/Firewire and external hard disks or other devices.
>
> I don't actually know anyone who uses Firewire at home except a couple of
> Mac users.
Both Firewire and USB2 are fairly common interfaces. Many hard disks
come with Firewire and USB2 connectors.
> USB device support would be a good thing, though, and some USB support
> exists for OS/2. Since I have no USB ports, my level of interest is again
> somewhat lacking...
I expect Firewire disks and CD drives to simply work with my computers.
> >Support for CD and DVD burning and ripping.
>
> OS/2 already has *very* good CD ripping and burning software. I don't
> know anything about the DVD side, but suspect it's very weak.
I suspect so too.
> >Support for audio and text chat.
>
> This is important to a lot of people, though not to me, and I'm actually a
> little bit surprised that someone hasn't ported something like gaim to
> OS/2. Text chat, anyway.
I'm not so surprised. OS/2 is simply not enough of a market even for
Free software. People rather port to OS X or Windows.
> The only audio chat I've found any use for are things like Roger Wilco,
> and those are largely confined to a gaming context anyway (something OS/2
> is never going to be a good platform for).
Can OS/2 finally switch resolutions without a reboot?
> >There are others, but this is what came to mind instantly.
>
> It does a good job of demonstrating how different computer users are,
No. Computer users aren't so different. The great majority want these
features, only a small minority are "different".
> I think. Of the above items, only DVD viewing/ripping/burning and digital
> camera support interests me at all.
When you use a laptop more things come to mind.
> >Note that I expect these features not only on my own computer(s), but
> >also on other computers I might come into contact with.
>
> I would think your requirements would limit your platform choices quite
> severely on x86 hardware. Windows, yes, and perhaps a half-dozen Linux
> flavors (though the Linux flavors would also be seriously or completely
> lacking in many areas).
Platform choices are limited anyway.
> I guess that's why you use a mainstream OS like MacOSX, huh?
I use it because it gave me what GNU/Linux did and more. And I used
GNU/Linux because it ran on my hardware when I saw no future for BeOS;
and I switched to BeOS when I saw no future for OS/2.
I am "different", as you are. I don't use most of the features that have
to with cameras and what not. I just expect them to be there should the
need arise. I am quite happy that my box runs UNIX and OpenStep
programs, and Macintosh games.
> >> >But how many current releases are there? And how much software is
> >> >there for OS/2 anyway?
> >>
> >> A lot depends on how you define "software for OS/2", I think.
> >
> >I mean "OS/2 software" as in "written for OS/2 or with OS/2 in mind".
>
> But that's an arbitrary definition. Since OS/2 comes bundled with an
> excellent DOS and Win16 environment, programs written for those two
> environments are just as viable as native programs.
If they were written with OS/2 in mind (as some were) and if any of them
are still current (as in released this year or last)...
> Given today's hardware, there's not even a performance impact.
>
> Besides, a number of Windows and DOS programs were actually written
> with OS/2 in mind. OS/2 support is often explicitly mentioned.
_was_
These times are over.
Incidentally, I am in the process of converting lots of old .INF files
into postscript and putting them on my homepage. I have many INFs that
are not even on Hobbes, I think.
> >> I have a wide array of programs here which run under OS/2 quite well.
> >> Some of them are DOS programs or Windows programs, but the operation is
> >> seamless enough that the specific API they use is largely irrelevant to
> >> the end user (me <g>).
> >>
> >> What types of software do you believe OS/2 is lacking?
> >
> >Video and DVD authoring.
>
> Yes. My recommendation: use an OS that has multimedia support, which on
> x86 hardware would be Windows and very little else.
UNIX can do it, not on x86 though.
> >3D authoring.
>
> Context? Are you talking CAD, 3-D image creation, or what?
Yes.
> >Graphics authoring.
>
> The selection of basic bitmap manipulation tools under OS/2 is better than
> that under Linux. It's one of the things keeping me on OS/2.
GNU has the Gimp, Windows and Mac OS have Photoshop and others, and
Gimp.
> Again, in the x86 world you would probably be limited to Windows.
Or using GNU software.
> >Music authoring.
>
> I use Cakewalk Home Studio and Quartz AudioMaster under Win95 OSR2 for
> that type of think (mainly mixing MIDI tracks generated by my Yamaha
> keyboard).
>
I hve no doubt that even Windows 95, older than even Warp 4 has better
support for such applications.
> There's nothing under any other x86 platform that comes close, OS/2
> included. Linux software sucks in this area also.
I guess even Atari TOS has better audio software than OS/2.
> >Current games.
>
> Again Windows only, with a few exceptions on Linux in the First Person
> Shooter department.
Windows has most, Mac OS X has many, GNU/Linux has some, OS/2 has none.
And that's it.
> >Web authoring and blogging.
>
> Depends on what you need. For basic stuff, a text editor or a simple
> WYSIWYG tool is sufficient, and OS/2 supports a number of those.
I use iBlog.
> >> True, but even some older packages are extremely flexible.
> >
> >True, but modern operating systems can usually run older software too.
>
> Which ones, pray tell?
Windows XP runs DOS software.
Mac OS X runs classic Mac software.
> On the x86 side, OS/2 does, and Windows flavors do (XP somewhat worse than
> OS/2). That makes two (if you count the Windows flavors as one).
And GNU and UNIX.
> Linux doesn't have *any* legacy support unless you take the time to hunt
> down the appropriate support for DOS and Windows (which is a royal pain in
> the ass I might add -- I'm in the process of doing that right now for one
> of my Mandrake boxes).
GNU/Linux has legacy support for UNIX and GNU applications. And you can
use Wine to run DOS and Windows applications. Heck, at school we used
some other x86 UNIX to run DOS software.
> The other x86 alternatives (BeOS/Solaris/FreeBSD) have nothing at all that
> I'm aware of.
Both Solaris and FreeBSD run DOSemu and, every now and then depending on
version numbers, Wine.
> >> Case in point: I'm using a old DOS program right now (NeoBook Pro) to
> >> create a graphical "referee" interface for a roleplaying game I plan on
> >> running sometime in the near future, and it will enable me to assemble
> >> a mix of text files, graphics, and a few smaller databases (via a nice
> >> little freeware database called Information Palace, another DOS program)
> >> into a single cohesive unit with a point-and-shoot interface that I can
> >> then burn onto a CD-ROM for portability.
> >>
> >> The copy of NeoBook Pro I have is almost ten years old, but it's still
> >> extremely useful, and the standalone EXE's it produces still work just
> >> as well under Windows XP as they do under OS/2 (quite well).
> >
> >Good for you.
>
> You know, that's kind of the same reaction I have to the extreme set of
> requirements you cite above.
Except that they are bonus features, meaning they don't lack, they add.
> If you were on x86 hardware, you'd be a die-hard Windows user.
When I was on x86 hardware I was a die-hard OS/2 user.
> No other OS on x86 hardware has even half of the stuff you claim you
> need...
I didn't say I needed it. GNU/Linux can do many of the things and is
open source. But Mac OS X has more. So Mac OS X it is.
Marty
>>>Support for audio and text chat.
>>
>>This is important to a lot of people, though not to me, and I'm actually a
>>little bit surprised that someone hasn't ported something like gaim to
>>OS/2. Text chat, anyway.
>
> I'm not so surprised. OS/2 is simply not enough of a market even for
> Free software. People rather port to OS X or Windows.
Actually, I was working on a native OS/2 AIM client myself (with full
WPS integration, etc.). I was doing great with it, but I kept slamming
into a brick wall when it came to dealing with the underlying protocol
itself, for which I can't find any reasonable or accurate documentation.
I got as far as logging in, getting your user information, and
retrieving the buddy list. But once I tried to go "live", the server
showed me to the door.
I might try to respin my source, using the source in gAIM for all the
protocol-specific stuff, and try to bolt on a native GUI. gAIM
allegedly uses libfaim for it's AIM stuff, but I can't find the source,
documentation, or a web site for this library anywhere. The only source
is what is included in gAIM itself. I would have much rather
re-implemented the protocol from accurate documentation myself. <sigh>
>>The only audio chat I've found any use for are things like Roger Wilco,
>>and those are largely confined to a gaming context anyway (something OS/2
>>is never going to be a good platform for).
>
> Can OS/2 finally switch resolutions without a reboot?
Yes, with a few limitations. Your desktop size itself can never change.
You can zoom in on your desktop to any arbitrary resolution you want
(with the Scitech SNAP drivers). You cannot change your desktop color
depth. A full screen (SNAP/MGL) application can choose any resolution
or color depth that it wants.
In practical use, these limitations don't feel very restrictive at all.
Color depth changing is useless to me, since I always run in a 32bpp
mode. And the only time I want to change the size of my desktop is so
that I can zoom in on something to see it more easily.
Sten Solberg
> On Thursday 05 Feb 2004 17:31 Sten Solberg wrote:
>
> > Probably, if we are going to pursue the matter...
> > I usually prefer watching DVD films on the telly, fed from a dedicated DVD
> > player. That DVD player is modified to play all regions, BTW; a service
> > offered by some retailers here. Whoever invented this 'region' nonsense
> > did not ask the consumers first.
>
> It's further complicated by the fact that all but 2 of
> the DVDs here are PAL format. This means that I would
> have to buy a DVD player that is capable of playing
> PAL format DVDs on an NTSC TV and maybe that can also
> be set to 'region free'.
Hmm... Well, I don't know if there's an easy solution for that, but I can watch
American DVDs (presumably NTSC??) with my Pioneer DVD player/PAL TV combo just
fine. This may also have something to do with my TV being German; Germans like
to cover all bases... :) Japan used to teem with Radio/TV repair shops and if
they are still around you could likely get some good advice or help in one of
those?
> Right now with current plans
> in progress I don't want to spend the extra cost on
> such a beast when my $50 PC DVD player works fine :-)
Fair enough.
> I was thinking of getting a video card with video out
> but I don't know what this mobo supports. I know it
> won't work with Matrox cards, my G400 is sitting unused
> on top of the box, and I'm forced to use the crappy
> Intel onboard video :-(
My 'old' "nVidia Riva TNT 64" card has a TV Out option which I have yet to test.
Otherwise this card works fine with SciTech's drivers; I am using their latest
SNAP beta right now. I would think most boards support nVidia and, given this
specific board's age, you might be able to pick one up cheaply.
Sten Solberg
>
> "Sten Solberg" <st...@powertech.no> wrote in message
> news:4RR8ymkuyquO-pn2-3SpcD5djqGS1@localhost...
> > On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 23:35:12 UTC, wayne_...@yahoo.com (Wayne) wrote:
<snip>
> >
> > P.S.
> > I suspect my Pinnacle sound problem under Windows is a PCI IRQ conflict.
> Could
> > any of the Windows lovers in here tell me how to solve such a conflict in
> > Windows?
> >
> >
> At a guess I would suggest:
> a. rearranging your PCI boards physically;
> b. look in you Bios to see if you can reserve the IRQ,
Thanks. Yes, this is what I have been looking into, but it seems to be more to
it than this, or I have not been able to find the right combo yet. When I look
in Windows' System Information, it looks as if (at least some) PCI IRQ settings
differ from what BIOS shows. I will make a more accurate comparison.
Meanwhile, is there another way to set PCI IRQs besides in BIOS?
Wayne
> Hmm... Well, I don't know if there's an easy solution for that, but I can
> watch American DVDs (presumably NTSC??) with my Pioneer DVD player/PAL TV
> combo just fine. This may also have something to do with my TV being
> German; Germans like to cover all bases... :) Japan used to teem with
> Radio/TV repair shops and if they are still around you could likely get
> some good advice or help in one of those?
These beasts are available but they cost much more than
a regular DVD player, which can be picked up for about
6000 yen these days. For playing local DVDs we just use
my kids' Playstation 2 so haven't found the justification
for buying a dedicated DVD player.
>> I was thinking of getting a video card with video out
>> but I don't know what this mobo supports. I know it
>> won't work with Matrox cards, my G400 is sitting unused
>> on top of the box, and I'm forced to use the crappy
>> Intel onboard video :-(
>
> My 'old' "nVidia Riva TNT 64" card has a TV Out option which I have yet to
> test. Otherwise this card works fine with SciTech's drivers; I am using
> their latest SNAP beta right now. I would think most boards support
> nVidia and, given this specific board's age, you might be able to pick one
> up cheaply.
Oh, yes, I've seen them around for under 2000 yen in
'bulk' stores (wrapped in bubble pad, no box) I just
don't want to go in for trial and error :-)
Wayne
Wayne
>> I suppose I was lucky in that everything was recognised straight
>> off. Judging from posts I read in some forums there must be
>> something wrong with my system because I can watch and rip DVDs,
>> burn CDs with K3b, connect to the Net with all the apps in my
>> KDE menu and urpmi updates my system just fine :-)
>
> And there must be something wrong with all of our OS/2 systems that meet
> our needs and work perfectly. ;-)
I think you misunderstood what I was saying, Marty.
A lot of people (newbies) seem to be having problems
with their Linux setups (no mention of OS/2) with
regard to the apps I mentioned above, but mine just
worked. Maybe I was lucky or maybe it was because I
haven't used windows since '94 so don't have any of
the 'baggage' that many newbs carry around :-) I'm
used to tinkering my my system.
Wayne
Marty
Ok. It sounded like you were suggesting McCoy's old refrain of "OS/2
Bad Luck Syndrome". If you're just bashing newbies, I can deal with
that. ;-)
Wayne
> Ok. It sounded like you were suggesting McCoy's old refrain of "OS/2
> Bad Luck Syndrome". If you're just bashing newbies, I can deal with
> that. ;-)
'Bad luck' No, I'm really disappointed that I can't use OS/2
for what I want to do. It's like an old pair of Doc's I've got
around here (and often wear), a bit worn but really comfortable.
I just got tired of booting between 2 OS's, that's all.
I see yet another OS/2 ISV has basically given up and released
their stuff for free. It doesn't bode well when that happens
but there just isn't the market, I know.
Oh Yep, bashing newbies is great sport :-)
Wayne
Wayne
> I might try to respin my source, using the source in gAIM for all the
> protocol-specific stuff, and try to bolt on a native GUI. gAIM
> allegedly uses libfaim for it's AIM stuff, but I can't find the source,
> documentation, or a web site for this library anywhere. The only source
> is what is included in gAIM itself. I would have much rather
> re-implemented the protocol from accurate documentation myself. <sigh>
>
Have you also looked at Kopete, maybe you can get the source
for the protocols there.
Wayne
Mark Dodel
Brehm) wrote:
At least a few of your points are clearly wrong or misinformed.
-> Richard Steiner <rste...@visi.com> wrote:
->
-> > Here in comp.os.os2.advocacy,
-> > and...@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm) spake unto us, saying:
-> >
-> > >Richard Steiner <rste...@visi.com> wrote:
-> > >
-> > >> Here in comp.os.os2.advocacy,
-> > >> and...@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm) spake unto us, saying:
-> > >>
-> > >> >Somewhat ancient. OS/2 has been skipping features for years.
-> > >>
-> > >> Out of curiosity, which features are you thinking about?
-> > >
-> > >The ones usually mentioned when this comes up, plus a few that might not
-> > >have been specifically mentioned.
-> >
-> > Fair enough. Most of what you cite are either third-party applications or
-> > device drivers, however, and not directly related to the OS itself (which
-> > is what I thought you were talking about).
->
-> My point is that what I cited _should not_ be third-party applications
-> or (seperate) device drivers. All these are typical features of a modern
-> operating system.
->
-> > >Support for laptops, all their hardware, sleeping, power saving etc.
-> >
-> > This is either largely or completely lacking in all x86 OSes that I'm
-> > aware of except Windows.
->
-> OS/2 might be in good company, but there is also GNU/Linux which has at
-> least some of these features.
->
Power off works fine, at least on my notebook. The other stuff has
been made mostly unworkable on x86 do to ACPI, instead of having it
controlled in the BIOS. ACPI support is still being worked on for
OS/2-eCS.
-> > >Support for wireless lan.
-> >
-> > Have no idea about this, since I use standard CAT5 cabling everywhere.
-> >
-> > Do people really use wireless networking on non-laptop machines? Isn't
-> > that rather insecure?
->
-> It's handy to connect to your desktop machine from a laptop without a
-> cable. You can buy a seperate base station, but there is no need for
-> that if your OS supports wireless lan out of the box.
Ahem, OS/2 had wireless LAN support before windoze. Granted it was
proprietary IBM hardware, but it was OS/2, DOS and Novell only,
without any windoze support 6 or so years ago. See my review of the
IBM WIreless LAN from June 2000
<http://www.os2voice.org/VNL/past_issues/VNL0600H/vnewsf5.htm>
Now 802.11b is fairly well supported, at least for PCMCIA cards.
There is some PCI/mini-PCI support as well. 802.11g support is being
worked on. See <http://www.os2warp.be/index2.php?name=wifi> for more
info on the topic.
->
-> > >Support for DVD playing.
-> >
-> > I don't have the CPU power to do this on my current machines, but I'd love
-> > to be able to do this in the future.
->
-> My Macs can both do it. It's something I have come to expect from a
-> computer.
->
-> > Then again, I've seen dedicated DVD players for $30 locally, so I may
-> > never care all that much about playing them on my PC. I don't watch
-> > movies down here -- I do computer stuff!
->
-> The thing about features is not that you have to use them but that you
-> can. My laptop can show me a movie when I'm on the train, a dedicated
-> DVD player can't. A portable dedicated DVD player is more expensive than
-> a DVD drive and in some cases more expensive than a cheap iBook.
Well I can play DVDs on my laptop with eCS 1.14 and Warpvision. I
understand that there is also a new project to port Xine to OS/2 as
well. In fact I first saw a DVD player run on OS/2 3 or 4 years ago
at Warpstock in Philly. However the licensing of the decryption logic
was rridiculously expensive, so it never was released.
->
-> > >Support for new 64 bit CPUs.
-> >
-> > They'll still run OS/2, won't they?
->
-> The Opteron does, but OS/2 won't have access to more than 4 GB of RAM.
->
-> > >Support for digital cameras, video and photo.
-> >
-> > OS/2 has some support in this area. I know apps exist to transfer pics
-> > from a fairly large number of common camera models.
->
-> Some support isn't enough. Customers expect more these days.
->
-> > My Casio camera isn't one of them, though. :-(
->
-> Bad luck.
If the Camera supports the MSD standard it is supported under OS/2.
It is only the proprietary devices that won't work.
->
-> > >Support for USB2/Firewire and external hard disks or other devices.
-> >
-> > I don't actually know anyone who uses Firewire at home except a couple of
-> > Mac users.
->
-> Both Firewire and USB2 are fairly common interfaces. Many hard disks
-> come with Firewire and USB2 connectors.
->
-> > USB device support would be a good thing, though, and some USB support
-> > exists for OS/2. Since I have no USB ports, my level of interest is again
-> > somewhat lacking...
->
-> I expect Firewire disks and CD drives to simply work with my computers.
Still no Firewire support, but USB has been supported on OS/2 for
years with updated drivers from IBM. Unlike wintrash which required
expensive upgrades to get the support. UHCI (Intel chipsets) was well
supported in the beginning, with OHCI support spotty up until a couple
years or so ago. EHCI (USB 2.0) has been available since August of
2002.
->
-> > >Support for CD and DVD burning and ripping.
-> >
-> > OS/2 already has *very* good CD ripping and burning software. I don't
-> > know anything about the DVD side, but suspect it's very weak.
->
-> I suspect so too.
Incorrect. Latest versions of RSJ since release 5.0 burn DVDs just
fine, and OS/2 has had UDFS support for DVDRAM and DVDRW for a while
though its still somewhat slow. I don't know about creating
multimedia DVDs from scratch, but that is a realm that software
development is probably lacking.
<Snip the remainder. Others can address those issues>
Mark
--
From the eComStation of Mark Dodel
http://www.os2voice.org
Warpstock 2003, San Francisco, October 18-19th -
http://www.warpstock.org
Mark Dodel
wrote:
-> -> > >Support for laptops, all their hardware, sleeping, power saving etc.
-> -> >
-> -> > This is either largely or completely lacking in all x86 OSes that I'm
-> -> > aware of except Windows.
-> ->
-> -> OS/2 might be in good company, but there is also GNU/Linux which has at
-> -> least some of these features.
-> ->
->
-> Power off works fine, at least on my notebook. The other stuff has
-> been made mostly unworkable on x86 do to ACPI, instead of having it
-> controlled in the BIOS. ACPI support is still being worked on for
-> OS/2-eCS.
->
Forgot to add that power saving works on my laptop as well.
Andrew J. Brehm
> On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 18:57:46 UTC, and...@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm)
> wrote:
>
> At least a few of your points are clearly wrong or misinformed.
>
> -> > >Support for laptops, all their hardware, sleeping, power saving etc.
> -> >
> -> > This is either largely or completely lacking in all x86 OSes that I'm
> -> > aware of except Windows.
> ->
> -> OS/2 might be in good company, but there is also GNU/Linux which has at
> -> least some of these features.
> ->
>
> Power off works fine, at least on my notebook.
What do you mean "power off"? I was talking about system sleep and power
saving. Does it work with OS/2?
> The other stuff has been made mostly unworkable on x86 do to ACPI, instead
> of having it controlled in the BIOS. ACPI support is still being worked
> on for OS/2-eCS.
So it doesn't work, does it?
> -> > >Support for wireless lan.
> -> >
> -> > Have no idea about this, since I use standard CAT5 cabling
> -> > everywhere.
> -> >
> -> > Do people really use wireless networking on non-laptop machines?
> -> > Isn't that rather insecure?
> ->
> -> It's handy to connect to your desktop machine from a laptop without a
> -> cable. You can buy a seperate base station, but there is no need for
> -> that if your OS supports wireless lan out of the box.
>
> Ahem, OS/2 had wireless LAN support before windoze.
Grand.
> Granted it was proprietary IBM hardware, but it was OS/2, DOS and Novell
> only, without any windoze support 6 or so years ago. See my review of the
> IBM WIreless LAN from June 2000
> <http://www.os2voice.org/VNL/past_issues/VNL0600H/vnewsf5.htm>
>
> Now 802.11b is fairly well supported, at least for PCMCIA cards. There is
> some PCI/mini-PCI support as well. 802.11g support is being worked on.
> See <http://www.os2warp.be/index2.php?name=wifi> for more info on the
> topic.
So if I install OS/2 (most current release) on a laptop, will wireless
LAN work? Can I access VPNs? Can I find my home network?
>
> ->
> -> > >Support for DVD playing.
> -> >
> -> > I don't have the CPU power to do this on my current machines, but I'd
> -> > love to be able to do this in the future.
> ->
> -> My Macs can both do it. It's something I have come to expect from a
> -> computer.
> ->
> -> > Then again, I've seen dedicated DVD players for $30 locally, so I may
> -> > never care all that much about playing them on my PC. I don't watch
> -> > movies down here -- I do computer stuff!
> ->
> -> The thing about features is not that you have to use them but that you
> -> can. My laptop can show me a movie when I'm on the train, a dedicated
> -> DVD player can't. A portable dedicated DVD player is more expensive
> -> than a DVD drive and in some cases more expensive than a cheap iBook.
>
> Well I can play DVDs on my laptop with eCS 1.14 and Warpvision. I
> understand that there is also a new project to port Xine to OS/2 as well.
> In fact I first saw a DVD player run on OS/2 3 or 4 years ago at Warpstock
> in Philly. However the licensing of the decryption logic was
> rridiculously expensive, so it never was released.
Is Warpvision a part of the OS?
> ->
> -> > >Support for new 64 bit CPUs.
> -> >
> -> > They'll still run OS/2, won't they?
> ->
> -> The Opteron does, but OS/2 won't have access to more than 4 GB of RAM.
> ->
> -> > >Support for digital cameras, video and photo.
> -> >
> -> > OS/2 has some support in this area. I know apps exist to transfer
> -> > pics from a fairly large number of common camera models.
> ->
> -> Some support isn't enough. Customers expect more these days.
> ->
> -> > My Casio camera isn't one of them, though. :-(
> ->
> -> Bad luck.
>
> If the Camera supports the MSD standard it is supported under OS/2. t is
> Ionly the proprietary devices that won't work.
So what happens when you connect a (working) camera to an OS/2 box?
> ->
> -> > >Support for USB2/Firewire and external hard disks or other devices.
> -> >
> -> > I don't actually know anyone who uses Firewire at home except a
> -> > couple of Mac users.
> ->
> -> Both Firewire and USB2 are fairly common interfaces. Many hard disks
> -> come with Firewire and USB2 connectors.
> ->
> -> > USB device support would be a good thing, though, and some USB
> -> > support exists for OS/2. Since I have no USB ports, my level of
> -> > interest is again somewhat lacking...
> ->
> -> I expect Firewire disks and CD drives to simply work with my computers.
>
> Still no Firewire support, but USB has been supported on OS/2 for years
> with updated drivers from IBM. Unlike wintrash which required expensive
> upgrades to get the support. UHCI (Intel chipsets) was well supported in
> the beginning, with OHCI support spotty up until a couple years or so ago.
> EHCI (USB 2.0) has been available since August of 2002.
So what would happen if I connected an USB2.0 hard disk to an OS/2 box?
> ->
> -> > >Support for CD and DVD burning and ripping.
> -> >
> -> > OS/2 already has *very* good CD ripping and burning software. I
> -> > don't know anything about the DVD side, but suspect it's very weak.
> ->
> -> I suspect so too.
>
> Incorrect. Latest versions of RSJ since release 5.0 burn DVDs just fine,
> and OS/2 has had UDFS support for DVDRAM and DVDRW for a while though its
> still somewhat slow. I don't know about creating multimedia DVDs from
> scratch, but that is a realm that software development is probably
> lacking.
So what would happen if I installed OS/2 on a box with a DVD-R or DVD+RW
drive? Could I burn DVDs instantly?
Sten Solberg
> Oh, yes, I've seen them around for under 2000 yen in
> 'bulk' stores (wrapped in bubble pad, no box) I just
> don't want to go in for trial and error :-)
Understandable. Now, I could at least have tested if TV Out works here, had I
only had a S-Video cable. I _will get one, though. One of these days... :)
Wayne
>> Oh, yes, I've seen them around for under 2000 yen in
>> 'bulk' stores (wrapped in bubble pad, no box) I just
>> don't want to go in for trial and error :-)
>
> Understandable. Now, I could at least have tested if TV Out works here,
> had I only had a S-Video cable. I _will get one, though. One of these
> days... :)
Egads, you're as bad as me! I've been thinking about getting
a couple of coaxial plugs for the last few months! Every time
I go out I get sidetracked and forget what I wanted them for!
Wayne
Richard
"Andrew J. Brehm" <and...@netneurotic.de> wrote in message
news:1g8pv39.i96wozzc408mN%and...@netneurotic.de...
[snip]
> > The other stuff has been made mostly unworkable on x86 do to ACPI,
instead
> > of having it controlled in the BIOS. ACPI support is still being worked
> > on for OS/2-eCS.
>
> So it doesn't work, does it?
>
> > -> > >Support for USB2/Firewire and external hard disks or other
devices.
> > -> >
> > -> > I don't actually know anyone who uses Firewire at home except a
> > -> > couple of Mac users.
> > ->
> > -> Both Firewire and USB2 are fairly common interfaces. Many hard disks
> > -> come with Firewire and USB2 connectors.
> > ->
> > -> > USB device support would be a good thing, though, and some USB
> > -> > support exists for OS/2. Since I have no USB ports, my level of
> > -> > interest is again somewhat lacking...
> > ->
> > -> I expect Firewire disks and CD drives to simply work with my
computers.
> >
> > Still no Firewire support, but USB has been supported on OS/2 for years
> > with updated drivers from IBM. Unlike wintrash which required expensive
> > upgrades to get the support. UHCI (Intel chipsets) was well supported
in
> > the beginning, with OHCI support spotty up until a couple years or so
ago.
> > EHCI (USB 2.0) has been available since August of 2002.
>
to have a stranglehold on matters; much time effort etc and I think I got
the right work around for that issue, then the USB issue hit me.
OK for people who live in places that have access to a large market of
hardware OS/2 (or eCS) are still quiet viable as a good option if although
you live places where anything else except the de facto standard of hardware
is excessively expensive you end up bowing to the pressure and 'toeing the
line'.
Mark Dodel
Brehm) wrote:
-> Mark Dodel <madode...@ptd.net> wrote:
->
-> > On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 18:57:46 UTC, and...@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm)
-> > wrote:
-> >
-> > At least a few of your points are clearly wrong or misinformed.
-> >
-> > -> > >Support for laptops, all their hardware, sleeping, power saving etc.
-> > -> >
-> > -> > This is either largely or completely lacking in all x86 OSes that I'm
-> > -> > aware of except Windows.
-> > ->
-> > -> OS/2 might be in good company, but there is also GNU/Linux which has at
-> > -> least some of these features.
-> > ->
-> >
-> > Power off works fine, at least on my notebook.
->
-> What do you mean "power off"?
The ability to "power off" the system from the shutdown function.
That is a feature of APM.
>I was talking about system sleep and power
-> saving. Does it work with OS/2?
->
I can only speak to the features I use. I don't use those as my
laptop is always running except when I'm traveling. I have heard
people have those features working and others who don't. You will
have to hear from others on that. My response was not to get into an
endless discussion with you finding more faults to focus on, but to
demonstrate where you were spreading FUD. As I stated in a followup
to my post: "Forgot to add that power saving works on my laptop as
well." That's all I know on the subject.
-> > The other stuff has been made mostly unworkable on x86 do to ACPI, instead
-> > of having it controlled in the BIOS. ACPI support is still being worked
-> > on for OS/2-eCS.
->
-> So it doesn't work, does it?
->
As I said ACPI is being worked on.
-> > -> > >Support for wireless lan.
-> > -> >
-> > -> > Have no idea about this, since I use standard CAT5 cabling
-> > -> > everywhere.
-> > -> >
-> > -> > Do people really use wireless networking on non-laptop machines?
-> > -> > Isn't that rather insecure?
-> > ->
-> > -> It's handy to connect to your desktop machine from a laptop without a
-> > -> cable. You can buy a seperate base station, but there is no need for
-> > -> that if your OS supports wireless lan out of the box.
-> >
-> > Ahem, OS/2 had wireless LAN support before windoze.
->
-> Grand.
Glad you are content about something.
->
-> > Granted it was proprietary IBM hardware, but it was OS/2, DOS and Novell
-> > only, without any windoze support 6 or so years ago. See my review of the
-> > IBM WIreless LAN from June 2000
-> > <http://www.os2voice.org/VNL/past_issues/VNL0600H/vnewsf5.htm>
-> >
-> > Now 802.11b is fairly well supported, at least for PCMCIA cards. There is
-> > some PCI/mini-PCI support as well. 802.11g support is being worked on.
-> > See <http://www.os2warp.be/index2.php?name=wifi> for more info on the
-> > topic.
->
-> So if I install OS/2 (most current release) on a laptop, will wireless
-> LAN work? Can I access VPNs? Can I find my home network?
->
Are you related to the tinybrained one? I said it works. I am typing
this on a notebook that has been using a wireless LAN for years. I
have both TCP/IP and NETBIOS (in this case Peer) working so unless
there is some other sort of LAN that I am unaware of of course it
works. What would be the point if it didn't? You can read all about
the capabilities at the URL mentioned. What does a VPN have to do
with wireless LAN? Or are you just trying to throw out enough
nonsense to obfuscate your FUD? As to your last question "Can I find
my home network?" since I don't know the details on your "home
network" I'd have to guess that you mean its a wireless AP or router.
Of course it will find it, assuming its either not using WEP, or if it
is you have entered the correct WEP key into the wireless settings on
the OS/2-eCS system.
-> >
-> > ->
-> > -> > >Support for DVD playing.
-> > -> >
-> > -> > I don't have the CPU power to do this on my current machines, but I'd
-> > -> > love to be able to do this in the future.
-> > ->
-> > -> My Macs can both do it. It's something I have come to expect from a
-> > -> computer.
-> > ->
-> > -> > Then again, I've seen dedicated DVD players for $30 locally, so I may
-> > -> > never care all that much about playing them on my PC. I don't watch
-> > -> > movies down here -- I do computer stuff!
-> > ->
-> > -> The thing about features is not that you have to use them but that you
-> > -> can. My laptop can show me a movie when I'm on the train, a dedicated
-> > -> DVD player can't. A portable dedicated DVD player is more expensive
-> > -> than a DVD drive and in some cases more expensive than a cheap iBook.
-> >
-> > Well I can play DVDs on my laptop with eCS 1.14 and Warpvision. I
-> > understand that there is also a new project to port Xine to OS/2 as well.
-> > In fact I first saw a DVD player run on OS/2 3 or 4 years ago at Warpstock
-> > in Philly. However the licensing of the decryption logic was
-> > rridiculously expensive, so it never was released.
->
-> Is Warpvision a part of the OS?
->
No. Is that a requirement? If so then windoze can't do it either.
And neither can my iMac. But they can if I install the appropriate
software package.
-> > ->
-> > -> > >Support for new 64 bit CPUs.
-> > -> >
-> > -> > They'll still run OS/2, won't they?
-> > ->
-> > -> The Opteron does, but OS/2 won't have access to more than 4 GB of RAM.
-> > ->
-> > -> > >Support for digital cameras, video and photo.
-> > -> >
-> > -> > OS/2 has some support in this area. I know apps exist to transfer
-> > -> > pics from a fairly large number of common camera models.
-> > ->
-> > -> Some support isn't enough. Customers expect more these days.
-> > ->
-> > -> > My Casio camera isn't one of them, though. :-(
-> > ->
-> > -> Bad luck.
-> >
-> > If the Camera supports the MSD standard it is supported under OS/2. t is
-> > Ionly the proprietary devices that won't work.
->
-> So what happens when you connect a (working) camera to an OS/2 box?
->
It appears as a drive and you can either click on the images (does
that get extra points since OS/2-eCS can natively view JPGs?), or do
whatever you want with them. I prefer PMView for viewing images.
-> > ->
-> > -> > >Support for USB2/Firewire and external hard disks or other devices.
-> > -> >
-> > -> > I don't actually know anyone who uses Firewire at home except a
-> > -> > couple of Mac users.
-> > ->
-> > -> Both Firewire and USB2 are fairly common interfaces. Many hard disks
-> > -> come with Firewire and USB2 connectors.
-> > ->
-> > -> > USB device support would be a good thing, though, and some USB
-> > -> > support exists for OS/2. Since I have no USB ports, my level of
-> > -> > interest is again somewhat lacking...
-> > ->
-> > -> I expect Firewire disks and CD drives to simply work with my computers.
-> >
-> > Still no Firewire support, but USB has been supported on OS/2 for years
-> > with updated drivers from IBM. Unlike wintrash which required expensive
-> > upgrades to get the support. UHCI (Intel chipsets) was well supported in
-> > the beginning, with OHCI support spotty up until a couple years or so ago.
-> > EHCI (USB 2.0) has been available since August of 2002.
->
-> So what would happen if I connected an USB2.0 hard disk to an OS/2 box?
->
No idea as I don't have one, but from what I hear, if it is USBMSD
compliant, it just appears as a new drive object, same as the camera
discussed above. What did you want it to do? Here is an article on
the specific subject
<http://www.os2voice.org/VNL/past_issues/VNL0204H/vnewsf5.htm>
->
-> > ->
-> > -> > >Support for CD and DVD burning and ripping.
-> > -> >
-> > -> > OS/2 already has *very* good CD ripping and burning software. I
-> > -> > don't know anything about the DVD side, but suspect it's very weak.
-> > ->
-> > -> I suspect so too.
-> >
-> > Incorrect. Latest versions of RSJ since release 5.0 burn DVDs just fine,
-> > and OS/2 has had UDFS support for DVDRAM and DVDRW for a while though its
-> > still somewhat slow. I don't know about creating multimedia DVDs from
-> > scratch, but that is a realm that software development is probably
-> > lacking.
->
-> So what would happen if I installed OS/2 on a box with a DVD-R or DVD+RW
-> drive? Could I burn DVDs instantly?
->
This was stated already. Are you having reading comprehension
problems? Can you burn a DVD-R on windoze or a Mac without installing
a software package? You can of course write to a DVD+RW or DVD-RW or
DVDRAM with UDFS which is part of the base OS. To write DVD-Rs you
need RSJ which is a commercial package.
Marty
Thanks for the pointer, Wayne!!! I found some more up-to-date Oscar
documentation there. I'll give it a shot when I get my computer back up.