AfterDark Screensaver for OS/2 !
A.IDZIK
I saw a message on the FIDONET that if there's enough support
for a version of AfterDark for OS/2, we might get it.
The number I got to call is: 1-510-540-5535
So if you like Afterdark for Windows or Mac, then go after
Berkeley Systems to get one for OS/2.
Adrian
Eric Jacobsen
Is there a shareware program similar to <windows write> for OS/2? If so,
is it available on any ftp sites? I'm using OS/2 2.0, so it doesn't have to
be able to use truetype fonts. I just want something I can print multiple
fonts and create a fairly decent looking, simple document.
Eric Jacobsen
--
***************************************************************************
* For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten son, that *
* whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.*
************************* jaco...@csc.mc.edu ************ John 3:16 ******
Doug Botimer
>So if you like Afterdark for Windows or Mac, then go after
>Berkeley Systems to get one for OS/2.
>
Washer and BocaSoft's product. There are also a few shareware screen
savers. And if you really just have to have Afterdark or one of the
other Windows screen savers, run them under Win-OS/2.
Personally I'll spend my money with a company like BocaSoft that is
already developing for OS/2 rather than trying to persuade others.
That is voting with my dollars.
Just my opinion, not an attack on individual choice.
Doug
Tim Moloney
>Washer and BocaSoft's product. There are also a few shareware screen
>savers. And if you really just have to have Afterdark or one of the
>other Windows screen savers, run them under Win-OS/2.
I've been reading on CompuServe that BocaSoft is working on being
able to use AfterDark modules in its Wipeout screen saver. There
is already a beta that can use DeskPic modules. I currently use
DeskPic, but I have ordered Wipeout since it has sound, is able to
use DeskPic modules, and soon will be able to use AfterDark modules.
And it's native OS/2 of course!
Later,
Tim
Tim Moloney OS/2 Version 2.1
Loral Data Systems
P.O. Box 3041 (813)371-0811 ext5157 Now's your chance
Sarasota, FL 34230 mol...@lds.loral.com to run the world.
Ronald J. Vaniwaarden
>>Why? There are already two commercial screen savers for OS/2, Window
>>Washer and BocaSoft's product. There are also a few shareware screen
>>savers. And if you really just have to have Afterdark or one of the
>>other Windows screen savers, run them under Win-OS/2.
Agreed! However, I look at the # of savers that come with Afterdark and the
offerings of Wipeout are quite small in comparison (but quite well done!)
>I've been reading on CompuServe that BocaSoft is working on being
>able to use AfterDark modules in its Wipeout screen saver. There
>is already a beta that can use DeskPic modules. I currently use
>DeskPic, but I have ordered Wipeout since it has sound, is able to
>use DeskPic modules, and soon will be able to use AfterDark modules.
>And it's native OS/2 of course!
This would of course solve all those problems. I have since abandoned
DeskPic since it refusing to blank when I run any DOS apps or an
application that is a major CPU hog. I have considered BocaSoft's
product and would be interested in the best price! I know they sell it for
$40 but I imagine it is available somewhere else for cheaper (it looks like
a nice Christmas present :-)
--Ron TeamOS2
--
Ronald Van Iwaarden, TeamOS2 |
The OS/2 Source BBS (303)744-0373 | This space available.
230+ megs of OS/2 files |
16 OS/2 Echo Mail areas | Email for leasing arrangements
Henry Pham
and any relate items to it. To save some bandwith, please e-mail me if possible.
Thanks Y'all...
--
% Henry Pham %%% Jet Propulsion Laboratory %
% E-mail: he...@woody.Jpl.Nasa.Gov %%% 4800 Oak Grove Drive %
% Phone: (818) 397-7158 %%% Pasadena, CA 91109 %
The Voch
>Why? There are already two commercial screen savers for OS/2, Window
>Washer and BocaSoft's product. There are also a few shareware screen
>savers. And if you really just have to have Afterdark or one of the
>other Windows screen savers, run them under Win-OS/2.
Yes...but I'd do ANYTHING (within certain limits) to have Flying Toasters
(tm) on my screen again. It seems a screen saver has become more than a
screen saving utility...it's entertainment too...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Erik Kovach |"God help us...our lives are in the hands of
Kusch Mental Hospital| engineers." --Ian Malcolm, _Jurassic Park_
Bed #410D |----------------------------------------------------
Spam for Points | An Apple Newton recognized my name as Cruz Broccoli.
j...@morlock.inel.gov
|> In article <1993Oct13....@lds.loral.com> mol...@mail.lds.loral.com (Tim Moloney) writes:
|> >>Why? There are already two commercial screen savers for OS/2, Window
|> >>Washer and BocaSoft's product. There are also a few shareware screen
|> >>savers. And if you really just have to have Afterdark or one of the
|> >>other Windows screen savers, run them under Win-OS/2.
|>
|> Agreed! However, I look at the # of savers that come with Afterdark and the
|> offerings of Wipeout are quite small in comparison (but quite well done!)
|>
Personally, I'm rather torn on the quality issue of "WipeOut". Certainly, it IS a 32-bit OS/2-
specific screen saver but, to be totally honest, "AfterDark" seems to be a much more
'polished' product. From my own point of view, "WipeOut" looks very much like a public-
domain quality application that is slightly above the average shareware offerings. It doesn't
seem worth the $40.00+ price they're asking for it.
"Afterdark" for Windows is going for $19.95 in alot of discount houses and offers twice the
number of savers as "WipeOut".
Perhaps a "2.0" version of "WipeOut" would alleviate this uncertainty...who knows? But, I for one,
would very much like to see "AfterDark" be released as a 32-bit OS/2 App. Competition only
helps the consumer by creating improved products and lower prices.
Regards,
JR Rich
--
*************************************************************
JR Rich E-Mail - j...@inel.gov
EG&G Idaho Phone - (208) 526-0505
INEL.GOV EMAIL Postmaster
"...The true mark of the scholar is not that he or she
has mastered a field of study, but rather has begun
to grasp the enormity of what remains unknown."
*************************************************************
Antony Chen
: Yes...but I'd do ANYTHING (within certain limits) to have Flying Toasters
: (tm) on my screen again. It seems a screen saver has become more than a
: screen saving utility...it's entertainment too...
I thought screen savers were so that you wouldn't burn out your screen.
I guess I'm just a practical kinda person that doesn't care if it's flying
toasters or just a blank screen.
--
Antony Chen - tc...@umich.edu
Larry Truesdale
In article <1993Oct14.1...@pmafire.inel.gov>, j...@morlock.inel.gov () writes:
|> In article <81...@copper.Denver.Colorado.EDU>, rvan...@copper.denver.colorado.edu (Ronald J. Vaniwaarden) writes:
|> |> In article <1993Oct13....@lds.loral.com> mol...@mail.lds.loral.com (Tim Moloney) writes:
|> |> >>Why? There are already two commercial screen savers for OS/2, Window
|> |> >>Washer and BocaSoft's product. There are also a few shareware screen
|> |> >>savers. And if you really just have to have Afterdark or one of the
|> |> >>other Windows screen savers, run them under Win-OS/2.
|> |>
|> |> Agreed! However, I look at the # of savers that come with Afterdark and the
|> |> offerings of Wipeout are quite small in comparison (but quite well done!)
|> |>
|>
|> Personally, I'm rather torn on the quality issue of "WipeOut". Certainly, it IS a 32-bit OS/2-
|> specific screen saver but, to be totally honest, "AfterDark" seems to be a much more
|> 'polished' product. From my own point of view, "WipeOut" looks very much like a public-
|> domain quality application that is slightly above the average shareware offerings. It doesn't
|> seem worth the $40.00+ price they're asking for it.
|>
|> "Afterdark" for Windows is going for $19.95 in alot of discount houses and offers twice the
|> number of savers as "WipeOut".
|>
|> Perhaps a "2.0" version of "WipeOut" would alleviate this uncertainty...who knows? But, I for one,
|> would very much like to see "AfterDark" be released as a 32-bit OS/2 App. Competition only
|> helps the consumer by creating improved products and lower prices.
|>
|> Regards,
|>
|> JR Rich
|> --
I use Wipeout and like it alot. Remember that Wipeout is new and afterdark has
been around for quite a while. The number of different "modes" will increase
with time. Also, although I don't actually use it, I think the sound capability
is kinda neat.
Larry
--
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| LARRY W. TRUESDALE INTERNET ADDRESS: lar...@bnr.ca |
| |
| Work: (214) 684-4790 BUSINESS ADDRESS: RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: |
| Home: (214) 442-7074 Bell-Northern Research Mr. Larry Truesdale |
| Pager: (817) 667-6846 Post Office Box 833871 Post Office Box 1574 |
| Fax: (214) 684-3711 Richardson, TX 75083-3871 Wylie, TX 75098-1574 |
| Data: (214) 442-1035 Mail Station D0112 |
| ESN: (444) 684-4790 |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
The Voch
>I thought screen savers were so that you wouldn't burn out your screen.
>I guess I'm just a practical kinda person that doesn't care if it's flying
>toasters or just a blank screen.
Yes, but they are also a source of entertainment, too. People saw mine back
in my Windoze days and said "I want that". So they bought a copy and now
their screens are safe *AND* entertaining.
Tom Hatton
>j...@morlock.inel.gov () writes:
>>rvan...@copper.denver.colorado.edu (Ronald J. Vaniwaarden) writes:
>>> mol...@mail.lds.loral.com (Tim Moloney) writes:
>>> >>Why? There are already two commercial screen savers for OS/2, Window
>>> >>Washer and BocaSoft's product. There are also a few shareware screen
>>> >>savers. And if you really just have to have Afterdark or one of the
>>> >>other Windows screen savers, run them under Win-OS/2.
>>>
>>> Agreed! However, I look at the # of savers that come with Afterdark and the
>>> offerings of Wipeout are quite small in comparison (but quite well done!)
>>>
>>Personally, I'm rather torn on the quality issue of "WipeOut". Certainly,
>>worth the $40.00+ price they're asking for it.
>>
>>"Afterdark" for Windows is going for $19.95 in alot of discount houses and
>>offers twice the >> number of savers as "WipeOut".
>>
>> Perhaps a "2.0" version of "WipeOut" would alleviate this uncertainty...
>>who knows? But, I for one, >> would very much like to see "AfterDark" be
>>released as a 32-bit OS/2 App. Competition only helps the consumer by
>>creating improved products and lower prices.
>>
>been around for quite a while. The number of different "modes" will increase
>with time. Also, although I don't actually use it, I think the sound capability
>is kinda neat.
Does After Dark allow using video clips as a screen saver (which
Wipeout does)? It's a nice touch.
--
Tom Hatton
hat...@cgl.ucsf.edu
(415)-476-8693
chan...@husc.harvard.edu
>I thought screen savers were so that you wouldn't burn out your screen.
That's a myth. Old monochrome screens would burn in, but
modern SVGA color monitors take a LONG time; people have
accidently left monitors on here at work over the weekend
with images on them, w/o damage. (power usage may be more
with an image, though)
The point of screen savers is to impress other users with
your operating system!
JMC
Gordan Todorovac
>So they bought a copy and now their screens are safe *AND* entertaining.
Well, modern monitors are incredibly resistant to burn-in: it would take hours
upon hours of display of a bright static screen for any possibility of a
permanent phosphorus burn-in (actually, it's more like days). So, for a
conventional domestic computing situation (apparently the most common setting
for these screen-savers) the protective function is lost. What remains is
entertainment.
Additionally, they can serve to hide the contents of your screen from a random
passerby, but they'd better be password protected in this case!
Personally, I find the lockup feature adequate for both purposes: it is
password protected (actually, I don't think you can opt to turn the password
protection off!), and it is immensely entertaining to ponder the thoughtlesness
of IBM that is the culprit behind their failure to make the lock-cursor move
smoothly rather than jerkily ;) (this little change would be a cinch to make,
but it would give the whole thing a slicker look).
-Gordan
Unusual disclaimers apply...
Mark Schaffer
>[...]
>I thought screen savers were so that you wouldn't burn out your screen.
>I guess I'm just a practical kinda person that doesn't care if it's flying
>toasters or just a blank screen.
Animated screen savers do have a practical side to them. Under dos and/or
windows, it's nice to come back to your pc and see the screen-saver going
and know, with that glance, that your pc hasn't hung while you were away.
If the screen were blank, you wouldn't even know the difference between the
system being dead of if the cpu were turned off, etc.
This is, of course, only useful at a glance at a distance, but it is handy
to some of us.
--
------------------(Posted From: plo...@vu-vlsi.vill.edu)----------------
Mark Schaffer Department of Chemical Engineering
(Class of 1992) Villanova University
1644...@ucis.vill.edu Villanova, PA 19085
James Blizard
>
>Animated screen savers do have a practical side to them. Under dos and/or
>windows, it's nice to come back to your pc and see the screen-saver going
>and know, with that glance, that your pc hasn't hung while you were away.
>--
>------------------(Posted From: plo...@vu-vlsi.vill.edu)----------------
> Mark Schaffer Department of Chemical Engineering
> (Class of 1992) Villanova University
> 1644...@ucis.vill.edu Villanova, PA 19085
I've never been much of a Windows user but I guess this is why. I've never
thought of having a mechanism that would(at a glance) tell me if my machine was
locked up. Different strokes I guess.
================================================================================
The task of the software development team is to engineer the illusion of
simplicity.
Grady Booch
The task of the technical trainer is to create the FACT of simplicity in the
mind of the user.
================================================================================
Jim Blizard Team OS/2
Technical Trainer ji...@comtch.iea.com
OS/2 2.1 All Day Every Day
--
================================================================================
The task of the software development team is to engineer the illusion of
simplicity.
Grady Booch
Robert Dewar
making sure your screen doesn't get burned out. Actually there is some
controversy with modern CRT screens as to whether this is a real concern
in practice. It may well be that the *only* purpose of screen savers these
days is entertainment :-)
Jeffrey Gustafson
>Well, apparently in article <29k4du$f...@terminator.rs.itd.umich.edu>, tc...@pindar.ccs.itd.umich.edu (Antony Chen) wrote:
>>[...]
>>I thought screen savers were so that you wouldn't burn out your screen.
>>I guess I'm just a practical kinda person that doesn't care if it's flying
>>toasters or just a blank screen.
>Animated screen savers do have a practical side to them. Under dos and/or
>windows, it's nice to come back to your pc and see the screen-saver going
>and know, with that glance, that your pc hasn't hung while you were away.
I work in the technical support department of a computer
company. This feature of screen savers is VERY useful. "Erratic
lockups you say? Boot windows and leave on overnight. Call us back
tomorrow." Works great!
...Jeff
>If the screen were blank, you wouldn't even know the difference between the
>system being dead of if the cpu were turned off, etc.
>This is, of course, only useful at a glance at a distance, but it is handy
>to some of us.
>--
>------------------(Posted From: plo...@vu-vlsi.vill.edu)----------------
> Mark Schaffer Department of Chemical Engineering
> (Class of 1992) Villanova University
> 1644...@ucis.vill.edu Villanova, PA 19085
--
Jeffrey Gustafson jef...@netcom.COM
Netcom - Online Communication Services San Jose, CA
March Hare
> : PS another item, in the Settings page, set te minimize behaviour to
> : minimize to desktop, not viewer.
>
> It does not matter. My setting is minimize to viewer. It simply works fine;
> no icon appears on the desktop. I'm using version 1.32. I noticed somebody
> still uses older version. Although it won't get updated, but the latest
> version is generally preferred.
I thought 1.2 was the latest. Where can I find 1.32?
John
--
#ifdef SIG
DEFINE SIGLESS
#else
DEFINE SIG
#endif
I don't hate Windows. It runs great under OS/2!