CICA 1993 August/CICA.cdr/unzipped/nt/week15/week15.msg

Text File | 1992-10-12 | 466.0 KB | 14,081 lines

#: 11039 S1/Non-tech service
    02-Oct-92  11:54:40
Sb: #10784-UK Dev. Serv CDROM
Fm: wiley 70473,1351
To: Mike Walsh (Helsinki) 72557,3170 (X)

Mike,

Sounds like your are better connected than I regarding this issue.  I'll step
out and let my UK bretheran (and you Commodore toting relation) work out the
issue.  Seems all parties are aware.  Best, Stu Wiley


#: 11046 S1/Non-tech service
    02-Oct-92  13:20:29
Sb: WinNT White Papers
Fm: Lina Au 76666,46
To: 75300,3143

Could you tell me if MS has written any white papers on NT?  If so, can I find
any of them on the CompuServe forums (which one?).  Thanks.

#: 11066 S1/Non-tech service
    02-Oct-92  15:58:31
Sb: Fail to Boot NT
Fm: LLilley 70541,3044
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

Thanks Arther,
                        I will look at the infomation suggested, and get back
to you to let you know how i got on.

                                Len Lilley

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11079 S1/Non-tech service
    02-Oct-92  17:17:21
Sb: #11066-Fail to Boot NT
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: LLilley 70541,3044

Len,

<<I will look at the infomation suggested, and get back to you to let you know
how i got on.>>

Okay. And good luck.

Art

PS: If you want to update your name field for this forum you can do it thru
the main menu options selection.

#: 11090 S1/Non-tech service
    02-Oct-92  18:20:05
Sb: #10517-NT Beta Info
Fm: Karl Mitschke 73650,150
To: Vipul Mehta 70304,1736 (X)

Hello Vipul....

PMJI, but I noticed CAL STATE uses Banyan.... Do all campuses use Banyan? I
ask because I am a currently employed Banyan Network Analyst, and have a very
dear friend living in North San Diego... Also, since I would rather have my
tonsils put back in rather than move to CA, I thought I would probe your brain
on how to setup OS/BLECH! to work with Vines... I have both 4.11(5) and
5.00(5) servers, as well as Vines for SCO boxes on my local ethernet segment,
but can't get OS/2 2.0 to work even with the LA drivers.

Also, just a general comment... As a person who uses Vines and has installed
both NT and OS/2, (neither of which work with Vines at this time) All I can
say is OS/2 definatelly has to be the SLOWEST OS ever developed for an Intel
chip. NT is at least as fast as Win 3.1. ( I realize that is no reason to
write home to your mom {or ex-wife}, but it is much faster than OS/2)

Anyhow, any help you can give me with OS/2 on vines would be appreciated. And,
remember, they don't call me long winded for nothing!!!

Karl

#: 11055 S1/Non-tech service
    02-Oct-92  15:16:32
Sb: Beta Test
Fm: Brian M. Dyer 71371,627
To: SYSOP (X)

I am interested in being involved with your beta test.  I currently operate a
site of 130 installed 386/33 computers with 8 meg of ram.  We are currently
using  Windows 3.1, Excel 4.0, and Word 2.0a.  Please respond on how I could
set up a small number of systems for testing.
Thanks,

#: 11411 S1/Non-tech service
    05-Oct-92  19:37:07
Sb: #11055-Beta Test
Fm: wiley 70473,1351
To: Brian M. Dyer 71371,627

Brian,

The best method is to send a letter of interest in to the Windows NT Beta Test
Coordinator, Microsoft, One Microsoft Way, Redmond, WA 98052. State your hw
and sw configs, reasons and ideas that make you a viable beta site, and any
list of previous beta experience you have had, especially with MS.
 Stu Wiley
 Developer Service Team

#: 11091 S1/Non-tech service
    02-Oct-92  18:20:16
Sb: #10840-Developers Network CDRom
Fm: Karl Mitschke 73650,150
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

Art;

Got mine yesterday... VERY impressive!!! All this info for only $30... Plus,
it is a very attractive disk, so it can be proudly displayed once the new ones
come in!!!!!

Good to see your typing again Art!!!

Karl





There is 1 Reply.

#: 11184 S1/Non-tech service
    03-Oct-92  17:09:39
Sb: #11091-Developers Network CDRom
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 (X)

Karl,

<<Good to see your typing again Art!!! >>

Thanks. It's good to be back again. I was swamped with work for a while. Now
it's time to start all ove again. <g>

Art

PS: I do agree about the CD. MS has been distributing some very nice looking
CD's lately.

#: 11126 S1/Non-tech service
    03-Oct-92  00:06:22
Sb: #10840-Developers Network CDRom
Fm: Otto Fung 76260,631
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

Hello,

        Thanks. Just got mine yesterday. Really impressive work. And the most
'beautiful' computer cd-rom I've ever seen. Better looking than most of my
audio cd-rom <g>.

        Otto Fung


There is 1 Reply.

#: 11131 S1/Non-tech service
    03-Oct-92  06:39:35
Sb: #11126-Developers Network CDRom
Fm: Lyle Zumbach 72740,3515
To: Otto Fung 76260,631

The CD is pretty and full of great stuff, but has anyone been
able to use Viewer on NT? When I try, the CD-ROM access light flashes for a
while but nothing comes up on the screen but the picture of Mr. GUI.

Thanks,
Lyle

#: 11412 S1/Non-tech service
    05-Oct-92  19:37:40
Sb: #11131-Developers Network CDRom
Fm: Otto Fung 76260,631
To: Lyle Zumbach 72740,3515 (X)

>> The CD is pretty and full of great stuff, but has anyone been
able to use Viewer on NT? When I try, the CD-ROM access light flashes for a
while but nothing comes up on the screen but the picture of Mr. GUI. <<

        No, it doesn't work under NT. And sysop in MSDN forum confirmed this
and said that MS NT group are working on this to fix the problem in the
upcoming release.

        Otto Fung

#: 11208 S1/Non-tech service
    04-Oct-92  04:06:40
Sb: NT approval from MS
Fm: Kenneth Nicolson 100113,304
To: Microsoft

I've just completed converting a Windows program to NT. How can we get a
NT-compatible stamp of approval from MS? We do not have the "Ready to Run"
flag for the 3.x version - our software manager got passed all around MS UK
and never got anywhere. Can you tell me who to contact in the UK (or even get
them to contact me!) so that we can register.

TIA,

Ken

#: 11438 S1/Non-tech service
    05-Oct-92  21:03:21
Sb: #11208-NT approval from MS
Fm: Todd Needham [Microsoft] 73650,240
To: Kenneth Nicolson 100113,304 (X)

I don't the exact contact, but get ahold of Brian Iddon in the UK office. He
can put you on the right track.  You can email him from CompuServe by
addressing a CompuServe mail message to:

>internet:[e-mail]

Todd

#: 11461 S1/Non-tech service
    06-Oct-92  02:58:33
Sb: #10632-NT BETA
Fm: Jim Ayson 76300,2074
To: wiley 70473,1351 (X)

Hello Stuart. We are also interested in becoming a beta test site for NT. I'm
from the Asian Development Bank, and we have recently made a major committment
to Windows in the long term for our 1,800 users. Will it be possible to apply
through this forum? And who do we address the request to? By the way, we are
based in Manila, Philippines.

#: 11590 S1/Non-tech service
    06-Oct-92  21:13:19
Sb: #11461-NT BETA
Fm: Karl Mitschke 73650,150
To: Jim Ayson 76300,2074

Hello Jim.

I have been to the Philippines six times with the US Navy... I loved it
there... Beautiful countryside, warm white sand beaches, little crime, and, by
far the biggest attraction, THE BEST BEER IN THE WORLD!!! How I miss cold San
Miguel... The stuff we get over here is terrible... Paper lables even.. Yuck!

Send me a couple cases please!!! (I WISH!)

Karl

#: 11596 S1/Non-tech service
    06-Oct-92  21:37:19
Sb: printing problem
Fm: Hien Nguyen 71204,254
To: ALL

I have an Epson LQ-510 connect directly to my LPT1 port.  When I print a file
from notepad, nothing happens.  NT does not even initialize the printer when I
boot up the system as DOS does. Anyone know what is my problem?? I have gone
through dos2nt procedure to install NT.

#: 11676 S1/Non-tech service
    07-Oct-92  11:52:32
Sb: #11596-printing problem
Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143
To: Hien Nguyen 71204,254 (X)

Hi Hien,

We have support people who specialize in printing under Windows NT in Section
12 (Printing) that should be able to help you out, but you will need to repost
your message in that section so they can see it.  The more we can keep things
in the right sections, the better support we will be able to provide for
everybody. Thanks!

  Steve

#: 11328 S1/Non-tech service
    05-Oct-92  07:42:17
Sb: Intel EtherExpress
Fm: Simon Walker 100023,3042
To: ALL

Is there a driver available yet for the Intel ExtherExpress 16 TP LAN Adaptor

#: 11660 S1/Non-tech service
    07-Oct-92  09:58:45
Sb: #11521-Intel EtherExpress
Fm: Alexander Holy 100021,3721
To: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 (X)

Speaking of drivers...

When will there be an expanded HW compatibility list for the September
Release?

When will the September Release start shipping?

Will the installer of the September Releae support Installation from a remote
CD-ROM on a LM Lan?




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11677 S1/Non-tech service
    07-Oct-92  11:52:40
Sb: #11660-Intel EtherExpress
Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143
To: Alexander Holy 100021,3721 (X)

Hi Alexander,

 >When will there be an expanded HW compatibility list for the
 >September Release?

I will be posting an update once we have a final list. We should have one
relatively soon.

 >When will the September Release start shipping?

The exact ship dates have not been finalized, but we are planning on around
the end of the month to begin shipping updates.

 >Will the installer of the September Releae support Installation
 >from a remote CD-ROM on a LM Lan?

Yes, there will be a way to install (graphical) over the network in the next
release.

Talk to you later,

  Steve

#: 11571 S1/Non-tech service
    06-Oct-92  18:12:51
Sb: Bugs in File Mang.
Fm: David England 73700,1367
To: All

Hi. I just ran into a bug in the File Manager.
I had 862 files in the \system\ folder with 40,170,005 bytes reported and NT
said it couldn't display the dir.
In the DOS shell I did a dir and it was all there.
After del. some files down to 730 and 35,295,875 bytes the dir showed up in
the File Mang.
Is this strange?
or Normal?
Also the Fonts installer didn't erase the deleted font when the remove font
box is checked.
What I've been doing is installing CorelDraw. It put the .TTF files into
\system but not the .FON files. I had to manualy install the fonts.
I would like to see a \FONTS folder inside of \SYSTEM to help orginise the
files a little better. You whould know where to look for your font files.
David

#: 11573 S1/Non-tech service
    06-Oct-92  18:15:03
Sb: Bugs in File Mang.
Fm: David England 73700,1367
To: All

Hi. I just ran into a bug in the File Manager.
I had 862 files in the \system\ folder with 40,170,005 bytes reported and NT
said it couldn't display the dir.
In the DOS shell I did a dir and it was all there.
After del. some files down to 730 and 35,295,875 bytes the dir showed up in
the File Mang.
Is this strange?
or Normal?
Also the Fonts installer didn't erase the deleted font when the remove font
box is checked.
What I've been doing is installing CorelDraw. It put the .TTF files into
\system but not the .FON files. I had to manualy install the fonts.
I would like to see a \FONTS folder inside of \SYSTEM to help orginise the
files a little better. You whould know where to look for your font files.
David

#: 11709 S1/Non-tech service
    07-Oct-92  15:05:22
Sb: #11573-Bugs in File Mang.
Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143
To: David England 73700,1367 (X)

Hi David,

Can you fill out the BUGFOR.TXT bug template in Library 3 and upload it to
Library 3? Include as much information about the problem as you can. I will
pass it on to testing here so they can take a look. Thanks!

   Steve

PS: If this occurs with the next release, please send another report so we
know it has not been fixed.

#: 11740 S1/Non-tech service
    07-Oct-92  21:03:44
Sb: Printing problem.
Fm: Hien Nguyen 71204,254
To: Steve Fait 75300,3143 (X)

Thanks Steve!!

#: 11679 S1/Non-tech service
    07-Oct-92  12:42:19
Sb: mail
Fm: Jeong Ho Lee 70253,1244
To: SYSOP (X)

Hello

I'm a San Fran. PDC attendee. I have not received the mail re:Next release of
SDK and NT beta. I have been receiving other mails , like 3rd party tools,
contest, etc. I just would like to check my name is on the list.

Jeong Ho Lee Park Scientific Instruments 1171 Borregas Ave. Sunnyvale, CA
94089 [phone]

P.S., Another attendee of my company, Vincent Pham, has not received it
either.

Thanks




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11706 S1/Non-tech service
    07-Oct-92  14:45:02
Sb: #11679-mail
Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143
To: Jeong Ho Lee 70253,1244 (X)

Hi Jeong,

Give Microsoft Developer Services a call at 1-800-227-4679 x11771. They should
be able to help get things resolved. Thanks,

   Steve

#: 11770 S1/Non-tech service
    08-Oct-92  10:15:35
Sb: #11679-mail
Fm: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340
To: Jeong Ho Lee 70253,1244 (X)

I checked the list, and you are on it. I also checked our ordering system to
make sure you're updates were entered properly, and they were.

-Dwight (MS)

#: 11710 S1/Non-tech service
    07-Oct-92  15:06:08
Sb: Canadian Beta?
Fm: Ken Westerback 73547,3520
To: Sysop (X)

I read with some excitment the forum news yesterday saying that the new NT SDK
will automatically be sent to all registered owners before the end of October.
Does this apply to those of use in Canada as well, or will the Canadiand
subsidiary be doing it's own thing (i.e. adding a few weeks to the process)?
Is the letter mentioned being sent to Canada and does the same two week panic
date apply?

                                ---- Ken

#: 11769 S1/Non-tech service
    08-Oct-92  10:15:29
Sb: #11710-Canadian Beta?
Fm: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340
To: Ken Westerback 73547,3520 (X)

This is something you will want to ask MS Canada. Shipments outside the US are
always at least a week or two behind the US, even in the best of scenarios. We
build all the SDKs here in the US, then the product starts shipping. We ship
directly to US customers, but for international the product ships first to MS
Canada (or UK etc) who then distribute it to their customers.

I have worked closely with all our subsidiaries with this release, giving them
6 weeks notice to place their orders for their customers, and asking them to
update all their customers automatically. MS Canada is usually one of our best
subsidiaries, so I think this process should go smoothly.

We did not send the letter outside the US, since we are unable to quote a
shipping date. I did send the text of the letter to all our subs and let them
decide whether or not to send it out.

-Dwight Matheny Win32 SDK Product Manager

#: 11777 S1/Non-tech service
    08-Oct-92  10:20:34
Sb: #11710-Canadian Beta?
Fm: wiley 70473,1351
To: Ken Westerback 73547,3520 (X)

Don't panic.  Arrangements are being made (although with a small time lag) to
take care of our Canadians.  I believe the same time frames exist for the
second release.  Please contact the sub for confirmation, and keep an eye up
here.  Best for now.
 Stu Wiley
 Developer Service Team

#: 11102 S1/Non-tech service
    02-Oct-92  19:26:30
Sb: Win NT/Mouse
Fm: - Visitor 71175,2632
To: Customer support

I have entered the seriously frustrated zone with the installation process for
Windows NT. I think I am going to do my Jimi Hendrix with the thing, take it
into the yard, douse it with lighter fluid and set it on fire. It would sure
feel great! I have had the preliminary release of NT for the past month and
have not been able to get the mouse to work. I have asked for assistance three
times and every time I was told the mouse was at fault ( my mouse was not a
microsoft mouse but was claimed 100% compatibility ). I just bought a
Microsoft serial mouse and it doesn't work either, just what I needed a third
mouse! I have to use the dos2nt batch file, my CD-ROM isn't SCSI and dos2nt
doesn't install the mouse driver properly. How can I get the thing to
recognize my mouse. Using Windows without a mouse is like eating with one
chopstick. I would like to get some technical support, I need to know how the
installation process works with NT and how to force the mouse driver to be
loaded, quickly if possible. I have wasted over one months worth of
development time.

Greg Smith

There are 2 Replies.

#: 11136 S1/Non-tech service
    03-Oct-92  07:59:17
Sb: #11102-Win NT/Mouse
Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246
To: - Visitor 71175,2632 (X)

Well I have been through the mouse wars myself.  is the mouse serial or
parallel and it is free from conflict with other IRQs etc?  there is a bug in
NT that is somewhat mouse related.  If I first go into dos and/or windows &
then go into NT, NT may or may not find the mouse.  In such cases, control
panel shows a com port corresponding to the mouse port.  If on the other hand,
I do a fresh boot or a push-the-magic button boot, NT usually finds the mouse.
have been told that this is a known problem & hopefully will be fixed in the
beta release.

                               bob

#: 11292 S1/Non-tech service
    05-Oct-92  03:48:05
Sb: #11102-Win NT/Mouse
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: - Visitor 71175,2632

Greg,

<<I have to use the dos2nt batch file, my CD-ROM isn't SCSI and dos2nt doesn't
install the mouse driver properly. How can I get the thing to recognize my
mouse. Using Windows without a mouse is like eating with one chopstick.>> The
very first thing you'll need to check is do yu have a possible IRQ conflict.
This release of NT does not share IRQs. If you have more than 2 com ports,
ports you are going to have problems.

<<I would like to get some technical support, I need to know how the
installation process works with NT and how to force the mouse driver to be
loaded, quickly if possible. I have wasted over one months worth of
development time.>>

You'll get much better support if you post your messages in the appropriate
sections of the forum. Setup related problems sgould be reported in section 3.
The message should be addressed to All, or Microsoft, or to a specific MS tech
support person. The MS personnel are using a off-line process to retrieve
messages. If they are not addresses properly it'll take longer to be noticed
and acted upon.

I understand your frustratin though. It took me a month and several setup
attempts to get a new network card and get the net up and runnning. If you
want to get NT up and running today see if you can exchange that MS serial
mouse for a MS bus mouse. I've only heard of very old MS bus mice not working
with NT. Somewhere pre-78 or so. I have NT using my Graphics Vantage bus port
with an MS bus mouse on IRQ2. Works great with DOS/Win 3.x and NT.

Art

#: 11427 S1/Non-tech service
    05-Oct-92  20:13:17
Sb: #11102-Win NT/Mouse
Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143
To: - Visitor 71175,2632

Hi Greg,

The best thing to do is to post a message in Section 3 - Windows NT Setup and
list your hardware configuration with all this information. The support
engineers there should be able to get you running (if it is possible with your
hardware - see the 0992HW.TXT file in Library 1) in a reasonable amount of
time. They will also be able to answer any questions you have about the
installation process.

I'm sorry that getting Windows NT running has been problematic for you, but
hopefully the Section 2 guys will at least be able to shed some light on your
problem and find out what is going on. Hardware support will be improving
greatly over the next few months as well if that's the cause.

Talk to you later,

   Steve

#: 11719 S1/Non-tech service
    07-Oct-92  17:40:46
Sb: #11427-Win NT/Mouse
Fm: Greg Smith 71175,2632
To: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 (X)

I did get the mouse going but it was after posting many messages in the setup
section. Posting in this section was out of desparation, I was just trying to
get a response from anyone and didn't seem to be getting any help. The problem
was the presence of a non 100% bus mouse that was stopping the serial mouse
recognition. Thanks Greg Smith

#: 11783 S1/Non-tech service
    08-Oct-92  10:46:26
Sb: #11719-Win NT/Mouse
Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143
To: Greg Smith 71175,2632

Hi Greg,

I am happy to hear you are up and running now. Thanks for letting me know!

  Steve




#: 11069 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  16:17:15
Sb: #10971-NT on Sparc
Fm: John Hall 70750,2341
To: KENNETH R SCHROCK 70621,1521

>>       Why then is there so much talk in the unicode docs about testing the
first byte of the file to see if it was made on l-end or b-end machines? Who
else is using unicode?

The consortium developing Unicode does not consist soley of Microsoft,
we will just be the first company I know of shipping product on it.

>>        Why does the names of these other machines keep cropping up in
places like MSJ when they talk about the hardware they studied while designing
NT?

We certainly didn't want to preclude a port to b-end machines.  In fact, the
original MIPS work was done with the machine in b-end mode.


>>        Why such absolute boxing off of the hardware translation layer of
NT?
>>        Seems to me the answer to all of these is pretty obvious.

I don't understand the above, and I was only supplying a perfectly valid
reason (other than resource shortage) for us doing a b-end port.

Actually, some MS executives are on record that if a b-end vendor apporached
us and was willing to place serious work/resources behind the task we would
consider it.


#: 11227 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  09:41:39
Sb: #10248-MEMORY above 16MB on NT?
Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150
To: Robert Chronister 70363,246 (X)

  >> They are perhaps something to consider but the one I looked at
  >> I think at 3 slots and a 65 watt power supply (might have been
  >> the Compaq, don't remember).

You must have been looking at the Compaq; the new model 76s and 77s have a 180
watt power supply; the model 85s have a 480 watt p.s., and model 95s have a
588 watt p.s.  (I assume you were discussing the 76s and 77s, though; the
Ultimedia model is a 77.)  The 76s have three slots and three drive bays; the
77s have five slots and four drive bays.  All slots are free as delivered,
with onboard 32-bit cached SCSI interfaces, 32-bit non-interlaced XGA-2, dual
DMA serial ports, single DMA parallel port, and keyboard and mouse ports built
onto the planar.  All memory is added to the planar, not to a board on the
MicroChannel.  The Ultimedia 77 will have one slot of its five occupied by the
M/Audio sound board.



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11242 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  11:07:42
Sb: #11227-MEMORY above 16MB on NT?
Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246
To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 (X)

RE: New IBM systems

Could have been the compaq.  Saw the new IBM and really was not impressed with
the new inexpensive line.  I prefer all devices internal.  Granted we can
daisy chain SCSI devices internal & external, but internal is far superior.
With a max cable length of about 16 feet, external scsi can be a bear.  Again
matter of opinion.  Non-IBM systems of comparable components are cheaper.

                               bob

#: 11273 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  19:55:00
Sb: #10997-Adaptec 1742a for 1542b?
Fm: Douglas R. Weil 70143,326
To: Sean O'Farrell 72647,1424 (X)

I'd be interested in a swap. I am in Japan and would need to receive the 1742a
to replace the 1542 b. I realize this could be a major leap of faith, but if
yoiu get no other takers I would be interested in the swap. I definitely need
drivers. Do you have drivers for CD-ROM and tape backup (Wangdat)? Regards,
Doug-Tokyo

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11303 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  05:57:46
Sb: #11273-Adaptec 1742a for 1542b?
Fm: Sean O'Farrell 72647,1424
To: Douglas R. Weil 70143,326

Doug,

Sorry.  My 1742a got snapped up last weekend.

Thanks for responding,

Sean

#: 11135 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  07:21:27
Sb: Discussion topics
Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246
To: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 (X)

Karl:

Just noted your message to Art Knowles under the old "bilge banner".  I hold
no hard feelings toward Will or anyone else.  Even if I thought that his
responses were bilge, I am really getting tired seeing the subject matter.  We
need to change the topic and have a return to rationality in subject choice
<BG>.

Let's stop using the old topic and post fresh under a new banner such as I
have suggested.  Will have some trouble with Paul C. but will beat upon his
head some. <VBG>

Not a criticism of your message to ole Art or anything (and I will ignore your
spelling, sensitive area these days <BG>) just a PLEA FOR TOPIC CHANGE. When I
read many of the topics posted here I have to fire up the ole CD and play Ray
Stevens' "Going Crazy".  As I write this I am listening to Cactus Pete and his
pet sidewinder.  It sometimes reminds of some of the messages I have read here
<ROF,L>.

Just a request!

                                       bob



There are 2 Replies.

#: 11154 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  10:28:49
Sb: #11135-Discussion topics
Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205
To: Robert Chronister 70363,246 (X)

Interesting to think about all the different music in the background of these
ASCII threads.  Right now I'm listening to His Name Is Alive and Miranda Sex
Garden, trying to figure out which one to choose as my corporate standard.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11161 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  13:05:48
Sb: #11154-Discussion topics
Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246
To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X)

easy choice for me!  Would take Miranda Sex Garden in a flash (he says never
having heard of it -- the name is fascinating to say the least).

                               bob



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11231 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  10:00:53
Sb: #11161-Discussion topics
Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205
To: Robert Chronister 70363,246 (X)

Miranda Sex Garden specializes in madrigals, an a cappella song form popular
in the 16th century--though their new record sounds more like early Pink
Floyd.  Go figure.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11243 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  11:07:48
Sb: #11231-Discussion topics
Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246
To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X)

RE: Miranda Sex Garden

16th century Pink Floyd, now there is a CD I must here.  <BG>

                               bob

#: 11294 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  04:00:45
Sb: #11135-Discussion topics
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Robert Chronister 70363,246 (X)

Bob,

<<Let's stop using the old topic and post fresh under a new banner such as I
have suggested.>>

FWIW: I see that the old bilge topic has 116 new messages added to it. But
I've been skipping that thread for a while now. Just don't want to keep
reading it. It seems to be getting a bit out of hand again.

Art

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11304 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  06:03:24
Sb: #11294-Discussion topics
Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

Art:

Know what you mean.  Even bilge water gets pumped out from time to time <BG>
as every old sailer worth his salt is aware.

                               bob

#: 11042 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  12:35:40
Sb: Heeee's Baaaack!
Fm: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

Will,

Hey I hear you have a column in the next Upside. Is this be an ongoing column?

John

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11072 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  16:22:47
Sb: #11042-Heeee's Baaaack!
Fm: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657
To: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 (X)

 >Hey I hear you have a column in the next Upside. Is this be an ongoing
 >column?

John,

I think you'll see another column from me in the December (but not November)
issue.  There are no definite plans beyond that at this time.  We'll see. Stay
tuned...

Will

There are 2 Replies.

#: 11153 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  10:25:51
Sb: #11072-Heeee's Baaaack!
Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

I thought Upside went downside.  Or was it just a big editorial purge?

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11213 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  06:09:00
Sb: #11153-Heeee's Baaaack!
Fm: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657
To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X)

 >I thought Upside went downside.  Or was it just a big editorial purge?

I don't know.  I'm not familiar with their recent historuy.  My impression is
that Upside was not meeting its business objectives and was, shall we say,
rearranged.  The October issue just came out and, as far as I know, Upside
will continue to be published.  They've asked me to do a piece for their
December issue.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11250 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  11:29:12
Sb: #11213-Heeee's Baaaack!
Fm: bd (coconut computing) 70034,1062
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

In my humble opinion, Upside does not need Windows vs. OS/2 articles, thank
you.  Once it starts down the PC Magazine road, it's adios muchachos as far as
I'm concerned.  This Upside subscriber demands something better than the same
old PC Magazine filler.

(Wow, I wrote a screed.)

#: 11308 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  06:10:18
Sb: #11072-Heeee's Baaaack!
Fm: Mike Widseth 71151,1430
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

What's Upside - I thought I knew about (and read) most computing magazines,
but I'm unfamiliar with it...  From the other messages on this thread, it
sounds sort of interesting...  Any info would be helpful <g>!

-Mike-

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11334 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  08:47:38
Sb: #11308-Heeee's Baaaack!
Fm: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657
To: Mike Widseth 71151,1430

Mike,

Upside isn't exactly a computer magazine, though the comuter industry and its
technology is the primary focus.  It's subtitle tag line is "Interpreting the
Impact of Technology for Top Managers."  It's a monthly with a U.S.
subscription price of $48 ($75 international).  The phone number for
subscriptions/orders and customer service is 619-745-2809.  Headquarters is
The Upside Publishing Company, 1159 Triton Drive, Foster City, CA 94404.  The
phone number there is 415-377-0950.

Will

#: 11348 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  12:43:15
Sb: #11334-Heeee's Baaaack!
Fm: Mike Widseth 71151,1430
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

Thanks for the info.  I guess that it (Upside) doesn't fit into my reading
habits, but maybe I should order a copy for my boss <g>.

-Mike-

#: 11081 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  17:31:50
Sb: NT BETA INFO
Fm: Vipul Mehta 70304,1736
To: All

To SYSOP,

Hello,

I would like to expres my interest in Beta Testing Windows 3.1 NT. I am
currently employed by Calfornia State University Long Beach, School of
Business, Computer Lab.  I function as technical personnel and I provide
software and hardware support to over 200 users.  The school of Business has
over 200 IBM PS/2 that we support.  Several of these are running Windows 3.0,
IBM DOS 4.0, and IBM DOS 5.0.  We also have four 486 network servers that are
running under unix and support our banyan network. The school also has a Group
Decision Support (GDS) Lab.  An IBM model 90 running under OS 1.3 with LAN
extension serves as a server for this Lab. Currently we are evaluating about
updating the GDS lab and later our network servers to a new operating system.

To that end, I have set up OS2 2.0 on one test platform.  I was wondering if
it would be possible to get a BETA version on NT. I could set up two test
platforms.  One for OS2 and other for NT and compare the operating systems and
ultimately update all our servers to a new operating system.

I also work as a partime consultant and make software and hardware
recommendations to clients.  I am also a registered of the following Windows
3.1, PowerPoint 3.0, Excel 4.0, and Winword 1.1.  I would also like to test
the NT BETA with these products that I have.

I saw software demonstration of NT last saturday at the Orange County PC users
Club by of one your representatives and I was very impressed. The presentation
was conducted in PPT 3.0.  I was wondering If I could get the PPT file or if
you could mail me some technical information about NT that I could use in my
presentations for NT.

I understand that Microsoft also has certified consultant program.  I would
like to request some additional information about the program. If you have
questions, I can be contacted at [phone](W)  [phone](H).

I would request any feedback I can get on any of these questions.

Thank You.

                                                        Vipul Mehta
                                                        70304,1736

#: 11426 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  20:13:08
Sb: #11081-NT BETA INFO
Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143
To: Vipul Mehta 70304,1736 (X)

Hi Vipul,

The best way to apply for the beta program currently is to send a fax care of
the Windows NT Beta Program to [phone] and include all the info in your
message. Thanks!

   Steve



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11447 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  22:14:08
Sb: #11426-NT BETA INFO
Fm: Vipul Mehta 70304,1736
To: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 (X)

Thanks a Lot Steve

Vipul. ?EXIT

#: 11012 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  09:55:03
Sb: #10844-NT vs. NetWare
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

Thanks for th info Art. I'm now recommending a client adopt LanManNT for their
rather complex but small in nodes LAN.  These people won't be able to start
their project until January and right now, thanks to me, have adopted an all
Windows environment.  The 'master' organization has ruled that no net OSes
other than NetWare is allowed so me and the head of networking had a
semi-public battle royal about me 'subverting' the part of the organization I
work with.  I won using dirty tactics.

I seriously doubt NT will be commercial by the time these people will want to
start their project. If not I'll ask MS for a very wide NDA for the purposes
of implementing in beta this very interesting install.  I'm hoping they go
along. Otherwise I can always eat crow and go with NetWare <gag>.

                                  Paul

There are 3 Replies.

#: 11031 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  11:17:08
Sb: #11012-NT vs. NetWare
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

Paul,

Good luck with the lanMan network. From what I have been able to pick up NT
and NT Lan Manager will replace MS's current Lan Manager, so it should be an
easy upgrade when it's time.

I wish I had a bigger and better network to do some *real* serious testing of
NT's Lan capabilities though.

If/When you get the go ahead from MS (but I don't know why you'd need an NDA
since anyone can order the PDK) please let me know how it turns out.

Art

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11164 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  15:19:28
Sb: #11031-NT vs. NetWare
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

Art:

I've just asked MS for info about their LanManNT program that give
certification like CNE, but naturally for the MS product line.  I'm unsure
about how MS will want to test LanManNT and guessed they'd want an NDA since
leaking about any defects would be picked up by the press and run wild.
Perhaps they won't.

Naturally my planning for the new NT net will depend upon MS having a
reasonable product out by the time the client wants to go.  I can't in good
faith tie these people to a shakey system.  OTOH, we should get great support
getting it up if we do so pre-release. The nice thing about this system will
be its broadness.  It'll give any OS a real workout.

                                   Paul

#: 11038 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  11:53:38
Sb: #11012-NT vs. NetWare
Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

Paul

 I hope that you realize that the methods you have used here will probably
keep NT from being adopted by the larger organization EVEN IF IT IS THE
BETTER SOLUTION.

I don't think this was wise.

--Ben


There are 2 Replies.

#: 11106 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  20:03:54
Sb: #11038-NT vs. NetWare
Fm: Clarke 75470,1676
To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X)

Ben, whose to say that NT is the better solution?

NT does'nt have routing capabilites built in, that means your going to have
to buy external (third party) bridges and routers if you have more than one
segment.

Microsoft does'nt provide support for multi-vendor platforms. NT does'nt
support OS/2 HPFS, MAC, or NFS clients for storage on the server.

No SNMP support for NT yet.

NT is a general purpose OS, Netware is a server specific OS. Which one do you
think is going to provide a better server OS? Remember NT is new, and
untried. Novell has been around for a while with 3.11, many companies won't
even touch a product that has not had at least one major upgrade/bug fix
(mine won't).

It's more likly that MS will try to position NT against OS's like Unix, OS/2
and NeXT. That's the type of enviroment where NT will compete best. In the
long run it would be far more expensive to do a enterprise network under NT
than it is under Novell 3.11. The added hardware costs (in routers, bridges
and managment) for third party add-ons make NT less cost effective.
Especially in a mixed platform enviroment.


#: 11360 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  13:15:23
Sb: #11106-NT vs. NetWare
Fm: Tom Johnson [Microsoft] 72370,153
To: Clarke 75470,1676 (X)

Hi Clarke,

Thanks for identifying your concerns. Some responses to your post below.

>Microsoft does'nt provide support for multi-vendor platforms. NT does'nt
>support OS/2 HPFS, MAC, or NFS clients for storage on the server.

The OS/2 redirector for OS/2 1.x or OS/2 2.0 provided for LM will work with
Windows NT.  Microsoft is building Services for Macintosh which will allow a
Mac to use Win NT resources.  Several 3rd parties are building NFS for Win NT.

>No SNMP support for NT yet.

This is important.  It will be there when Win NT releases.

-TJ

#: 11169 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  15:28:42
Sb: #11038-NT vs. NetWare
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X)

Ben:

Oops, I've dropped the thread. What methods have I done here that would block
a superior NT from large organization adoption?  I'm confused (for a change
<g>).

BTW, I didn't start or name this thread if that's what you mean.

                                   Paul

#: 11041 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  12:00:12
Sb: #11012-NT vs. NetWare
Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

Paul
 Oh, forgot. MS also better provide very good NT to Netware interoperation
also or EVERY TIME they have a difficulty going from one network to the
other it will be NT's fault.

I have some experience here, we were the first part of a large corperation
to use UNIX instead of an IBM 4300 to run our MRPII system and although we
were much cheaper and USING the companies OWN UNIX box we had constant
political battles.

--Ben


There is 1 Reply.

#: 11170 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  15:32:18
Sb: #11041-NT vs. NetWare
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X)

Ben:

I agree 100% that NT must offer seamless connections to NetWare of there will
be heck to pay.  And yes, I agree, the onus is on NT since its they who must
match the existing standard: NetWare.

I've had some experience in downsizing and agree, the political battles are
furious. But today with a lot of corps having suceeded, more managment types
will at least listen to reason.  But it depends upon company.

                                         Paul

#: 11027 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  10:47:58
Sb: #10963-NT vs. NetWare
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Clarke 75470,1676 (X)

Clarke:

NT as we have it now isn't in competition with NetWare. To get there we need
to add LanManNT which I suspect will add those tools needed to fully support a
large (250 node) network. And you are right, I'm not using NT on a large LAN
and frankly wouldn't even try to do more with it at this point than
resource/file share on a small basis.

I plan to implement an NT/LanMan LAN about in January which won't have too
many nodes, but will be in all, several LAN's connected into a WAN. Let's get
back together then and I'll let you know how it's going <g>.

                                           Paul

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11047 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  13:21:36
Sb: #11027-NT vs. NetWare
Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

Paul
I will be very interested in your results on this project. It is my belief
that NT's interoperability/connectivity  that will be the major
characteristic of NT as far as the market is concerned (at least when using
NT as a server).

The most common request with this sort of stuff is easy connection to (pick
some or all of the following) IBM m/f's, HP and Dec mini's (all types) UNIX
and other LAN's.

--Ben


There is 1 Reply.

#: 11171 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  15:34:49
Sb: #11047-NT vs. NetWare
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X)

Ben:

Well you know where I am <g>.  The project's not for a while now and it won't
be a LanManNT unless I'm sure that its out and fairly stable even if
pre-release and I can get solid support from MS.  Otherwise I might end up
eating a lot of NT manuals <g>.

Part of the must in this net will be connection to NetWare. If its flakey at
ALL, the project's a nogo.  This is one mission critical part of the LAN/WAN.
Well, we got months to worry about this - it ain't something imminant.

                                      Paul

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11293 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  03:56:52
Sb: #11171-NT vs. NetWare
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563

Paul,

<<To get there we need to add LanManNT which I suspect will add those tools
needed to fully support a large (250 node) network.>>

I could be wrong here, but I'll add my 2 cents worth anyway. A 250 network is
a very small network. Should work right out of the NT box. The LanManNT adds
additional administration services (which you might want) and support for
adminstrating domains. Each server is a seperate domain. LanManNT is offering
the same ability to administer a server as NT does a remote workstation.

Art

#: 11402 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  17:52:45
Sb: #11293-NT vs. NetWare
Fm: Clarke 75470,1676
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

Art, dnot forget bridges and routers, as LanManNT does'nt support interal
bridging or routing...  So in a multi-domain network you'll have to add
additional HW to handle routing.

-Clarke


There is 1 Reply.

#: 11465 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  03:17:33
Sb: #11402-NT vs. NetWare
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Clarke 75470,1676

Clarke,

<<Art, dnot forget bridges and routers, as LanManNT does'nt support interal
bridging or routing...  So in a multi-domain network you'll have to add
additional HW to handle routing.>>

Thanks for pointing this out to me.

Art

#: 11405 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  18:03:31
Sb: #11293-NT vs. NetWare
Fm: Clarke 75470,1676
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

Art, dnot forget bridges and routers, as LanManNT does'nt support interal
bridging or routing...  So in a multi-domain network you'll have to add
additional HW to handle routing.

-Clarke


#: 11034 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  11:43:19
Sb: #10843-NT vs. NetWare
Fm: Glenn Ford 70414,321
To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X)

With the exception of Btrieve for C/S?  What about Oracle?  What about
Ingress?  Btrieve is not the only NLM for doing Client/Server (Although this
is what I use and love it.)..





There is 1 Reply.

#: 11152 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  10:25:01
Sb: #11034-NT vs. NetWare
Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205
To: Glenn Ford 70414,321

Are the Oracle or Ingres NLMs really very popular?  My impression is that
people using those products are much more interested in getting Unix and
NetWare to coexist happily than in moving to an all-NetWare environment.

Many people using the Btrieve NLM may not be very aware of it, as their
accounting software provides all the front-end access.  That's why I figure
it's the one really significant client-server NLM.

#: 11305 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  06:05:11
Sb: #10817-NT vs. NetWare
Fm: Mike Widseth 71151,1430
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563

FWIW, I've heard that OS/2 is running in Boca on an RS/6000, done as an
experiment.  This is (like I said, FWIW) purely a rumor, but it was brought up
by someone that I know fairly well who has been pretty close with the OS/2
development folks.

Last time I heard, though, it sounded as if IBM was not very interested in
running on RISC hardware anymore - mistake on their part, I think. Yeah, the
P5/80586/??? processor will outperform most RISC machines, but it could be a
good opportunity lost IMHO.

-Mike-

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11310 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  06:39:20
Sb: #11305-NT vs. NetWare
Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736
To: Mike Widseth 71151,1430

Mike
 >if sounded as if IBM was not very interested in running on RISC hardware
 >anymore.

Gee, they seem real interested in the Apple/Moto/IBM PowerPC project to me,
and it seems like it has a fairly good shot at becomming a high end
standard.

--Ben

#: 11594 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  21:27:52
Sb: Moving On
Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403
To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X)

Ben,

I think you have already differenciated the current market situation from
the previous climate. Let me also add that the ug path appears to be less
painful, unlike many of the earlier attempts that required throwing away
good code. As far as backward compatibility goes, well we'll have to wait
and see what is done in the final release.

Darren

#: 11643 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  08:36:08
Sb: #10396-When will NT ship?
Fm: Bill Herder 73417,3431
To: James Ferguson 71477,2345

James...
I've saved this thread to remind you a year or so _after_ Clinton
((probably)(unfortunately)) gets elected.  Should be fun.

#: 11595 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  21:27:59
Sb: What's the Cost?
Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403
To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205

See my previous message.

Darren

#: 11653 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  09:25:51
Sb: #11595-What's the Cost?
Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205
To: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 (X)

What previous message?  That appears to be the root of this topic.

#: 11585 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  20:08:27
Sb: Win NT
Fm: Philippe LAVAL 70441,677
To: sysop (X)

        As a software developper programming under windows and OS/2, I am more
and more interested in Windows NT.  The information I have read about it have
made me very optimistic about its potential.  Is it possible to receive a beta
version of NT?  How?

#: 11674 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  11:52:15
Sb: #11585-Win NT
Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143
To: Philippe LAVAL 70441,677 (X)

Hi Philippe,

You can apply for the Windows NT Beta program by either:

  1) Sending a letter to

       Microsoft
       One Microsoft Way
       Redmond, WA 98052

       Attn: Windows NT Beta Program

  2) Sending a FAX to 936-7329 also with the note "Attn: Windows
     NT Beta Program" on it.

In either case you should include your name, company name, hardware
configuration and any other relevant information. We prefer typed applications
if possible.

Thanks!

   Steve

#: 11675 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  11:52:25
Sb: #11585-Win NT
Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143
To: Philippe LAVAL 70441,677 (X)

I should add that since you are a developer, you can order the Win32 SDK for
Windows NT. That includes the Win32 SDK, 32-bit compiler ,OS and all updates
from here on out. More information is available in the W32SDK.TXT file in
Library 1.

  Steve

#: 11680 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  12:55:27
Sb: DOS Games on NT?
Fm: Jonathan Villegas 76507,2534
To: All

Hi!

Win 3.1 is my main environment for my 33 MHz 386.  My question is, I always
exit to DOS to play games such as Wing Commander or Sierra's adventure games,
so will I be able to play these type of games satisfactorily with NT installed
on my machine?

I'm aware that many (if not all) games write directly to hardware. I would
expect some sort of performance hit with NT since all system services would be
virtualized.  I guess then, my question should be what sort of performance hit
can I expect when playing DOS-based games on a 386/486 with NT installed?

Thanx!
        -- Jonathan

#: 11062 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  15:40:59
Sb: #10966-Developer Network CD?
Fm: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340
To: Al Longyear 70165,725 (X)

I asked someone to check on your C7 CD order. It shipped today 10/2 via Fed X
2 day so you should see it on Monday. Since you're probably doubtful after
waiting for god knows how many months (as I would be) the airbill # is
2320175645.

-Dwight (MS)

#: 11067 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  16:05:54
Sb: #10886-Developer Network CD?
Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143
To: David A. Solomon 71561,3603 (X)

Hi David,

For information about the Microsoft Developer Network CD releases, post a
message in the MSDNLIB forum. There are representatives for the program
monitoring that forum that will know the answer for sure. Thanks!

    Steve

#: 11105 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  19:58:11
Sb: #10966-Developer Network CD?
Fm: David A. Solomon 71561,3603
To: Al Longyear 70165,725 (X)

I have the MSDN CD myself, so I checked first before posting my first note; my
question to MS is where to point customers who want the info that was on that
original "Green CD" passed out at the PDC...

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11108 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  20:23:58
Sb: #11105-Developer Network CD?
Fm: Al Longyear 70165,725
To: David A. Solomon 71561,3603 (X)

Sorry, I mis-understood. Have you tried the MSWIN32 forum?

#: 11439 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  21:03:32
Sb: #11105-Developer Network CD?
Fm: Todd Needham [Microsoft] 73650,240
To: David A. Solomon 71561,3603 (X)

The "Green CD" was published by the Developer Relations Group here at
Microsoft.  It is updated and distributed at major developer events (the PDC,
Novell's Brainshare, etc) on an irregular basis.  Most of the content is
currently distributed on CompuServe or is available commercially.  For
instance, the ODBC pre-release SDK that was on the CD is now available as
final product.

Todd




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11498 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  08:59:56
Sb: #11439-Developer Network CD?
Fm: David A. Solomon 71561,3603
To: Todd Needham [Microsoft] 73650,240

Ok thanks -- just one follow-up then (I realize this is off the topic for this
conference!) - where is the proper place to point people to for the following
two items that were on that CD?  The items are:
    LSAPI (License Service Application Programming Interface)
    MAPI (Messaging Application Programming Interface)

Thanks!

#: 11567 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  17:24:27
Sb: #11439-Developer Network CD?
Fm: Al Meadows 70650,2022
To: Todd Needham [Microsoft] 73650,240 (X)

Todd, I've not yet reeceived my developer network CD.  When should I start to
worry about it?

Al

#: 11655 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  09:31:18
Sb: #11567-Developer Network CD?
Fm: PhilD 71650,2154
To: Al Meadows 70650,2022 (X)

I've had my developer CD for two weeks.  I'd worry now...

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11714 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  15:49:05
Sb: #11655-Developer Network CD?
Fm: Al Meadows 70650,2022
To: PhilD 71650,2154 (X)

>> I'd worry now...

It came today!

#: 11598 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  22:10:50
Sb: SQL Server/Sybase for NT
Fm: Rex Wheeler 70712,110
To: All

Anyone heard anything about if/when SQL Server or Sybase will be released for
NT. (Other then the fact that Sybase has said "We are committed to providing
Sybase on NT") Is Sybase going to write/provide/support it or is MS?

Rex

#: 11720 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  17:47:26
Sb: #11598-SQL Server/Sybase for NT
Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143
To: Rex Wheeler 70712,110

Hi Rex,

SQL server for Windows NT availability is currently targeted for just after
Windows NT ships. The SQL Server SDK for Windows NT (which includes Win32
versions of DB-Library, Open Data Services (ODS) and the ISQL and BCP
utilties) is available from Microsoft Inside Sales (Systems Software) at
1-800-227-4679 already.

Sybase would be the best to talk to regarding Sybase on Windows NT.

You may want to check out section 3 of MSWIN32 for more information about the
SQL server SDK for Windows NT.

Talk to you later,

   Steve

#: 11600 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  22:13:10
Sb: IRQ Sharing
Fm: Rex Wheeler 70712,110
To: Sysop (X)

Are there plans for NT to share IRQ's? (Can I have multiple COM ports on
the same IRQ...) (No, not now. Later.)

#: 11749 S2/General Discussion
    08-Oct-92  04:29:33
Sb: #11600-IRQ Sharing
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Rex Wheeler 70712,110

Rex,

<<Are there plans for NT to share IRQ's? (Can I have multiple COM ports on the
same IRQ...) (No, not now. Later.)>>

If you have an EISA machine you can share IRQs. I have NT up and running now
and it is sharing IRQ5 for com2 and lpt1. If you have ISA, well that's not
working for me with this release. Maybe a future release will.

Art

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11751 S2/General Discussion
    08-Oct-92  04:41:17
Sb: #11749-IRQ Sharing
Fm: Anthony Murfet 70602,1634
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

Art,
        Can you expand a little on why/how EISA allows IRQ sharing? -- my
ignorance is showing.
                                        Tony.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11760 S2/General Discussion
    08-Oct-92  07:01:22
Sb: #11751-IRQ Sharing
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Anthony Murfet 70602,1634

Tony,

<<Can you expand a little on why/how EISA allows IRQ sharing? -- my ignorance
is showing.>>

I'll tell you what little I know...

ISA cards use an "edge trigger" to signal an interrupt. This method does not
support IRQ sharing. EISA and MCA both support "level triggering" which does
support IRQ sharing. A level trigger has a priority associated with it. So it
can cascade thru the associated devices.

As you can see my ignorance is showing too. For a more detailed response we
need some hardware guru to explain it all.

Art

#: 11768 S2/General Discussion
    08-Oct-92  09:01:39
Sb: Event Log Errors
Fm: Ken Granderson 76307,3571
To: ALL

I have an event log full of error messages which I do not understand.
For instance, some of the messages claim that drives D: E: and F: are full.
Unfortunately, they have an average of 16MB free disk space apiece.  Also, the
log reports not being able to find mail slots and other network-related erros,
although I am able to run NT as a server without any problems except random
"sharing violation" errors on the client.

Does anyone know where to find information on the Event Viewer error messages?

#: 11730 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  18:55:03
Sb: Help with reading messag
Fm: Douglas MacDonald 70760,20
To: Sysop (X)

In the "How to Get the NT Preliminary Release" article in the NTFAQ the
suggestion is made that more information is available in messages WINNT: #400
& 401 and MSWIN32: #7161 & 7162.  When I try to read them Compuserve tells me
that they can't be found.  I tried playing around with CHANGE to no avail. I
take it I can't just do READ NUMBER 400.  I have not found Compuserve's user
interface to be very friendly.  Thank goodness for TAPCIS. Thanks,  Doug
MacDonald



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11752 S2/General Discussion
    08-Oct-92  04:43:40
Sb: #11730-Help with reading messag
Fm: Anthony Murfet 70602,1634
To: Douglas MacDonald 70760,20

Doug,
        Messages scroll off the board depending on how busy the forum is. Some
forums, such as *this* one archive their messages in one of the libraries.
Check out lib 5 here.
                                                best...Tony.

#: 11788 S2/General Discussion
    08-Oct-92  11:33:08
Sb: #11730-Help with reading messag
Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143
To: Douglas MacDonald 70760,20 (X)

Hi Douglas,

The information you are looking for should be in the W32SDK.TXT file in
Library 1. You can just Browse and when you get to that file, type "rea" and
the file will scroll across the screen. You could download it also if you want
to.

This forum currently can contain 1250 messages at a time. When a new message
comes in, the oldest message is removed. There are weekly archives in Library
5 if you want to check any of them out.

TTYL,

   Steve

#: 11723 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  18:09:03
Sb: Win NT Beta
Fm: DAVID BROWN 71165,745
To: All

I was wondering when to expect my Beta copy of NT.  All recent magagine
articles indicate MS is preparing to ship by the year's end and clearly Beta
testing must begin soon?

David Brown

#: 11789 S2/General Discussion
    08-Oct-92  11:33:19
Sb: #11723-Win NT Beta
Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143
To: DAVID BROWN 71165,745

Hi David,

See the BETA.TXT file in Library 1 for more information about the beta
schedule. The schedule has been changed since we are expecting a huge amount
of feedback from the beta and it will take a long time to get through it all.

The beta release is slated for the end of this month and we are targeting
early 93' to ship the final product.

Thanks,

   Steve

#: 11044 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  12:35:52
Sb: #11008-NT= OS2/3.0
Fm: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

Will,

You are forgetting the 9/90 IBM/MS division of labor where it was agreed that
IBM would assume sole dev responsibility of OS/2 1.X & 2.X, and MS would
assume sole dev responsibility on OS/2 3.0 (and Windows, which always gave me
chuckle). For about a ~9 month period the NT kernel was the official basis of
OS/2 3.0.

I don't disagree that IBM didn't completely buy in to OS/2 3.0 as MS wanted to
configure it (the WIN32 susbsystem in particular). They also were disagreeing
about how Win16 apps would be supported on OS/2 2.0. As I remember IBM wanted
what they eventually did, MS was in favor of a revised WLO implementation. And
of course the whole 1.3 thing was interesting.

John



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11070 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  16:22:28
Sb: #11044-NT= OS2/3.0
Fm: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657
To: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 (X)

John,

I didn't forget the 9/90 division of labor.  Rather, in retrospect, I think it
is clear that neither IBM nor Microsoft really expected much to come of that.
I *know* that IBM never bought into NT as OS/2 3.0.  It was, in effect, a
proposed approach by Microsoft that IBM considered briefly but never accepted.
Equally clear is that Microsoft never really intended to put the PM API on NT.
When they talked about that in early '91, their assumption was that they'd
have NT out with WIN32 by mid-'92 and that there would be no need ever to
bother to keep the promise of a PM API on NT.

Will

There are 3 Replies.

#: 11150 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  10:18:21
Sb: #11070-NT= OS2/3.0
Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

>>I *know* that IBM never bought into NT as OS/2 3.0.  It was, in effect, a
proposed approach by Microsoft that IBM considered briefly but never
accepted.<<

Interesting.  All the more reason Microsoft was right to dump IBM and chart
its own course.  If the two of them were still working together, we'd probably
have *neither* Windows 3.1 nor OS/2 2.0.

IBM created the PC market by accident and never understood it.  At this point
they've given up on the app side, and are struggling to stay in the mainstream
hardware market.  Their systems division is strong, but has an understandable
heavy slant toward big corporate customers and big-iron-based enterprise
computing.

I'm not underestimating IBM's ability to turn things around, just pointing out
they've got a tough row to hoe.

#: 11195 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  20:02:21
Sb: #11070-NT= OS2/3.0
Fm: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

Will,

>>that IBM considered briefly<<

Seeing as IBM has only recently ruled out NT as the basis of OS/2 3.0, I don't
think you can characterize their consideration as brief<g>.

John

#: 11323 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  06:44:42
Sb: #11070-NT= OS2/3.0
Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

Will (and John Oellrich) It looks to me as an outsider on this as if what
you're trying to say is this:

Once there was an IBM/MS joint OS.2 development. (this I know) IBM and MS had
a disagreement. Both are working on new operating systems. When MS started
they hoped the new OS (which we know as NT) would become OS/2 3.0, but this
didn't happen.

Correct?

Andy.



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11333 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  08:47:30
Sb: #11323-NT= OS2/3.0
Fm: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657
To: Andy Champ 100064,2267

 >Once there was an IBM/MS joint OS.2 development. (this I know) IBM and MS
 >had a disagreement. Both are working on new operating systems. When MS
 >started they hoped the new OS (which we know as NT) would become OS/2 3.0,
 >but this didn't happen.

 >Correct?

Yes, to the best of my knowlege (and I know quite a bit, though certainly not
everything <g>).

#: 11045 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  12:56:18
Sb: #11008-NT= OS2/3.0
Fm: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

So what did NT start out as, other than as a blue-sky research project?

Jon

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11071 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  16:22:35
Sb: #11045-NT= OS2/3.0
Fm: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657
To: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732 (X)

NT started out as a) Dave Cutler's pet project at DEC that DEC didn't want to
fund anymore and then became b) Microsoft's answer to Unix.  Only later did it
become c.) Microsoft's version (never accepted by IBM) of what OS/2 3.0 ought
to be [ca. fall '90 until early '91] and finally d) Microsoft's alternative to
OS/2 [mid-'91].  That, at any rate, is the charitable interpretation.

The sinister interpretation is that BillG & Co. intended all the way back in
1988 to eventually dump IBM and OS/2 and try to rule the world with Windows. I
think the charitable interpretation is more plausible.

Will

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11142 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  08:38:13
Sb: #11071-NT= OS2/3.0
Fm: Raymond Chuang 72441,3652
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

Will,

Better watch out for Windows.

I still remember WAY back in June when everyone laughed at my suggestion that
Windows NT be ported to the Sequent Symmetry 7000 server on the ZNT:EDITORIAL
forum; no one's laughing now when Sequent demonstrated EXACTLY SUCH A THING at
the Downsizing Expo in San Francisco back in August.

Raymond Chuang

#: 11620 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  04:09:41
Sb: #11142-NT= OS2/3.0
Fm: Dion Gillard 100026,470
To: Raymond Chuang 72441,3652

Better watch out?

Why?? Does Will underestimate Windows NT? What exactly are you predicting???

dIon

#: 11603 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  22:31:10
Sb: #11071-NT= OS2/3.0
Fm: Michael Price 76330,236
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

        Will, I started this thread a while back and thats the best answer
yet!!!!!
        I'll keep waching though you never know what will turn up
        TTYL            Michael Price

#: 11147 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  10:09:29
Sb: #11008-NT= OS2/3.0
Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

>>The only basis for the claim that NT == OS/2 3.0 (or vice versa) is what
Microsoft briefly (and insincerely) said ca. January '91.<<

"... the NT development team had its mission--to create Microsoft's operating
system for the 1990s.  Originally, the plan also called for NT to have an
OS/2-style user interface and provide the OS/2 API as its primary programming
interface.  Midway through the development of the system, however, Microsoft
Windows 3.0 hit the market and was an instant success, in contrast to OS/2,
which had not caught on among large numbers of users.

"Recognizing this marketplace mandate and the complexities involved in
enhancing and supporting two incompatible operating systems, Microsoft decided
to alter its course and direct its energies behind a single, coherent
operating system strategy."  --from Inside Windows NT, Helen Custer, Microsoft
Press, 1992 (excerpt included with Win32 SDK)



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11212 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  06:08:55
Sb: #11147-NT= OS2/3.0
Fm: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657
To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X)

What, exactly, is your point in quoting revisionist history from a Microsoft
source published in 1992?  Of course, that's what Microsoft says now.  That
isn't what Microsoft said back then, however.

If you think you are refuting my statement which you have drawn out of context
then you are a more muddled thinker than I thought you were.  The statement by
me was obviously referring to the [then] contemporary basis for the NT == OS/2
3.0 claim, not to Microsoft's subsequent revisionist history.

That statement you quote from Custer's book flatly contradicts what Microsoft
folks said in the past.  Permit me to quote one of them.  Perhaps you've heard
of him.  His name is Bill Gates:  "I believe OS/2 is destined to be the most
important operating system, and possibly program, of all time.  As the
successor to DOS, which has over 10,000,000 systems in use, it creates
incredible opportunities for everyone involved with PCs...The goals for OS/2
were extremely ambitious.  We wanted to create a system that would set the
standard for desktop use for the next decade."  (from the Forward to "OS/2
Programmer's Guide" by Ed Iacobucci.)

The passage from "Inside Windows NT" which you quote refutes nothing I've
said.  It merely demonstrates Microsoft's cavalier willingness to ignore the
facts and to re-write history into a version that is more convenient to the
present party line at Microsoft.  It also demonstrates your willingness to
believe that revisionist history.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11260 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  16:23:04
Sb: #11212-NT= OS2/3.0
Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

If the NT project wasn't going to be OS/2 3.0, then what the hell was it?
Perhaps Microsoft never persuaded IBM that OS/2 3.0 should have been portable,
but I assume that Microsoft saw it as their next-generation OS.  At one point,
Microsoft believed the API for the 90s was PM; later, they abandoned PM to put
100% of their efforts behind Windows.  Precisely when Bill Gates made that
decision is something we may never know.  I think it was well after the NT
development effort started, but several (perhaps many) months before Microsoft
finally stopped talking as if they hadn't given up on PM.

Now, why would Microsoft say one thing and do another?  There are lots of
reasons in this case, but the biggest I can think of is that they wanted to
break away from IBM without getting involved in the mother of all lawsuits.
From the day in November 1989 when Microsoft and IBM issued that bizarre
double-talk joint announcement on the future of OS/2 and Windows, I stopped
paying attention to what they had to say on the subject and just watched what
they did.

#: 11576 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  18:27:33
Sb: #11547-NT= OS2/3.0
Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

Posix has always been a publicly-acknowledged IBM goal for OS/2 3.0; this is
not new.  IBM's stated plans for DCE/DME support guarantee a level of Posix
support, even if it had not been explicitly mentioned in their product plans.
I'm surprised, frankly, that you don't recall that Posix has been promised for
"some future version" of OS/2.

What is new, though, is that some IBMers presented a dog-and-pony at a Chicago
OS/2 user's group meeting last month including a slide showing "Win32/Win32s
API support" or somesuch as a future feature of OS/2.  (Is there a distinction
between future feature and future fact? <g>)  The IBMers gave lots of
disclaimers, etc., about the fact that there were no official commitments
being expressed, no dates, etc., but they were talking about it, which is
interesting, and I saw other messages several months ago from OS/2 developers
discussing the feasibility of supporting Win32 apps on OS/2, so I'm sure the
concept is not new within IBM.  I am repeating (paraphrasing perhaps wildly)
only a miniscule portion of a message posted by John Bridges over in
CIS:OS2SUP under the title "OS/2 Direction" which in turn is a repost of a
message by Timothy F. Sipples that was found on BIX and FidoNet, then reposted
by Bruce Hallberg over in ZNT:EDITORIA.  An interesting message, btw, but can
hardly be construed as an official IBM announcement.  Still, given the way
things have been progressing in Personal Systems, I don't discount much if
anything that I saw reported.

There are 2 Replies.

#: 11579 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  18:58:20
Sb: #11576-NT= OS2/3.0
Fm: phil hystad 73260,114
To: Mercer Harz 70431,150



>>>>IBM's stated plans for DCE/DME support guarantee a level of Posix
    support...

Huh?  What do DCE and DME have to do with Posix.  These are technology
releases from OSF which must be engineered and installed on vendor
systems (such as being done by IBM, DEC, and H-P).  Neither are part
of Posix and I know that both DCE and DME are not POSIX compliant
because they were developed largely by contributing groups before even
POSIX 1003.1 was complete the first time (1988).

Now, there is a little overlap between DCE and 1003.8 and a little
overlap between DCE Threads and 1003.4A but this is representative of
common technology and not supporting any particular standard.  Besides
neither 1003.4A or 1003.8 are complete yet.  There is some overlap
as well between 1003.7 and DME but since 1003.7 is very immature at
this time, it cannot be said that DME is posix compliant.

DCE also supports aspects of OSI in its name server (i.e. X.500) and
RPC which is part of DCE is now a part of OSI, it used to be a part
of POSIX but it got moved.

#: 11729 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  18:41:19
Sb: #11579-NT= OS2/3.0
Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150
To: phil hystad 73260,114 (X)

Ahh, well I could have worded that better.  In all the presentations I've seen
IBMers give wherein they delineate their DCE and DME plans for OS/2, Posix
compliance is shown as a collateral feature.  Never identifying spec numbers
as you did, however.  They have always made the point, btw, that DCE and DME
can be implemented on a range of OSs, not just those with **ix roots.  Then
practically in the same breath they tell us about MVS getting Posix, DCE and
DME.

#: 11623 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  05:55:48
Sb: #11576-NT= OS2/3.0
Fm: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657
To: Mercer Harz 70431,150

Mercer,

I know IBM has said they intend to include POSIX support eventually, I just
haven't heard anything specific yet so I didn't have anything specific to say
about it.  I've also seen the whole John Bridges posting.  That is, however,
second hand information and not very specific.  As I said in my previous
message, I'm not inclined to comment until I've seen some specifics directly
from IBM.  If either is in the plan for any time soon, I'm sure IBM will say
so directly before long with more details.  Without that, however, I don't see
how one can comment sensibly.

Will

#: 11614 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  00:11:27
Sb: #11547-NT= OS2/3.0
Fm: Bruce Hallberg[Genelabs] 76376,515
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

Will,

Check out a thread in OS2USER called OS/2 Directions. In it is a write up of
some very interesting comments made recently by an IBMer at a recent Chicago
meeting. The thread is also in ZNT:EDITOR, General Info (I posted it last
night).

It will likely surprise even you. (smallest tidbit contained: as of two
weeks ago, 1.4m copies, excluding all electronic sales, internal use copies,
or free promotions, have been shipped. IBM estimates over 1 million OS/2
users at this time. More tidbits that directly answer the POSIX and
Win32s/Win32 question (answer:yes!). Much, much more.

Bruce

#: 11791 S2/General Discussion
    08-Oct-92  11:34:40
Sb: #11547-NT= OS2/3.0
Fm: Paul Bradshaw 70003,5145
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657

It's called "Speculation", Will.  If IBM was indeed planning on adding a Win32
or Win32s subsystem to OS/2 (whatever future version), what do you think that
would mean?  Would it be a good thing, or would it simply boost Windows?  Why
do you think that anyone in IBM is even considering it, considering WinNT
isn't even out yet?  It's certainly food for thought, and fodder for a wild
thread of messages, is it not?

#: 11841 S2/General Discussion
    08-Oct-92  22:31:07
Sb: Windows filenames
Fm: Phil Brooks 70632,1112
To: SYSOP

 Is it true that Windows NT will only allow 8 character file names? How about
multiple displays and or plain ascii terminals? I have read a posting on
netcom that states the above, but I can't believe that it is true.
                               Phil Brooks

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11844 S2/General Discussion
    09-Oct-92  03:04:39
Sb: #11841-Windows filenames
Fm: James Ferguson 71477,2345
To: Phil Brooks 70632,1112

Phil,
  If you use the HPFS or NTFS file systems you can use longer names. The 8.3
names will be manufactured for you automatically.

-- Jim F.

#: 11855 S2/General Discussion
    09-Oct-92  04:01:34
Sb: #10878-order now or later?
Fm: Rell W. Ambrose 70000,1062
To: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340

>but from the plans I've seen I know ALL end-users will definitely
>want to be on the beta program.

So How does one get to be in the BETA program?

-Rell

#: 11827 S2/General Discussion
    08-Oct-92  17:51:50
Sb: ATM 2.02
Fm: Robert H. Bernard 71210,246
To: All

I have Adobe Type Manager v2.02 running on WIN31.  The icon that appears on
the startup screen says 2.02 32.  Does that mean that it is a 32-bit program?


More important, I wondered does it imply that ATM 2.02 is WIN32-compatible,
and what would happen if I tried to install it on WINNT?

To test this out, I attempted to replace ATM 1.15 that came with WINNT with my
2.02.  I first made a backup of my WINNT directories, and then used the ATM
control panel dialog to deinstall ATM 1.15.  When I clicked the restart WINNT
button, WINNT would not shutdown, claiming that the file WINLOGOF.EXE was
damaged or could not be found.  the other way to logout (e.g. leave ATM
Control Panel without restarting WINNT and then select Logoff) gave the same
symptom.  I had to power off and on to restart.

After the restart, I could logoff successfully, and everything seemed normal.

Should one be able successfully to deinstall ATM in WINNT?  If so, why did I
experience the problem with logging off after doing so?

If one could get ATM 1.15 deinstalled, is ATM 2.02 compatible with WINNT, and
can I install it the same way I did with WIN31?



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11861 S2/General Discussion
    09-Oct-92  05:46:46
Sb: #11827-ATM 2.02
Fm: Bob Chronister 70363,246
To: Robert H. Bernard 71210,246

Robert:

  I have been requesting type 1 support in NT for so long that I had forgotten
it <bg>.  To get to the nitty-gritty: NT is a protected and protecting
product.  This means that you can install something or de-install something
that violates this protection.  ATM configures itself into the win system
files, this is an NT no no!   To make a long story short, don't know how ATM
can exist in NT.  Really thing that it needs to be there but that is just my
opinion.

                               bob

#: 11872 S2/General Discussion
    09-Oct-92  07:50:04
Sb: Profiler Setup
Fm: Jim McGiness 74160,1270
To: sysop

This is for your information.  I received the User Beta signup packet and had
some problems running SETUP.EXE under RC2 of Windows for Workgroups. Dbl-click
on Setup.EXE, Setup would initialize and then nothing.  No error, just looked
like I never ran the application.  I was able to run it under the pre-beta
developer copy of NT I have.  Just thought I would let you know their may be a
problem that others encounter.

#: 11569 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  17:45:02
Sb: #10735-Windows NT beta update
Fm: Jeff Thomson 71460,3222
To: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 (X)

Steve,

> Since you do not have to respond unless there is an address change, you
> should be OK as far as the letter is concerned.

I phoned in a change of address to Developer Services last week. Am I correct
in assuming that there's no need for me to respond to the letter if/when I
get it ? It may have gone to the address of my former employer, so I have no
idea if I'll even get my hands on it.

Thanks,

       -- Jeff

#: 11722 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  18:04:39
Sb: #11569-Windows NT beta update
Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143
To: Jeff Thomson 71460,3222

Hi Jeff,

If you contacted Developer Services and they have the address change, that
should be all you have to do.

   Steve

#: 11885 S2/General Discussion
    09-Oct-92  08:13:58
Sb: #11722-Windows NT beta update
Fm: Centre File 100015,3565
To: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143

Steve,

Any idea when international attendees of the July PDC will receive their ;
    1.   Developers CD-Rom &
    2.   NT Beta update.

Thanks

A.L

#: 11803 S2/General Discussion
    08-Oct-92  15:41:10
Sb: #11524-Windows NT beta update
Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143
To: Paul Fletcher [OWL] 72057,703 (X)

Hi Paul,

You should contact your subsidiary over there to get your address changed.
Shipments outside the US are sent to them and they in turn distribute it to
their customers.

I have been told that we did not send the letter outside the US, since we are
unable to quote a shipping date. The subs were sent the text of the letter,
however, and it was at their discretion whether to send it our or not.

Talk to you later,

   Steve

#: 11822 S2/General Discussion
    08-Oct-92  17:30:10
Sb: #11524-Windows NT beta update
Fm: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340
To: Paul Fletcher [OWL] 72057,703 (X)

The only exception to Steve's reply would be if you attended the Win32 PDC in
San Francisco. Orders for international PDC attendees are being sent directly
from the US. If you are in this situation, you can contact our International
Customer Service dept at 206-936-8661 to make the address change.

-Dwight (MS)




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11857 S2/General Discussion
    09-Oct-92  05:11:09
Sb: #11822-Windows NT beta update
Fm: Paul Fletcher [OWL] 72057,703
To: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340

Thanks to both of you.  This "cannot quote a ship date" thing worries me
though.  Does this mean that the notice about shipping the next release
release before the end of October only applies for people in the US?

Paul

#: 11825 S2/General Discussion
    08-Oct-92  17:44:46
Sb: #10735-Windows NT beta update
Fm: Mark L. Fendrick 76417,3264
To: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 (X)

Steve,

  I am now running the July WIN 32 SDK and I received no letter of a newer
release.  Do I have to contact someone to check it out?

Mark

#: 11271 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  19:33:24
Sb: Basic Information
Fm: Ed Tiley 72007,3455
To: All

HELP!

I'm an author preparing (trying to prepair is more like it) an outline for an
upcoming book on NT. This is just in the planning stages at this point, and I
realize the preliminary release is meant for development. But I have accepted
the King's shilling, and must come up with a preliminary outline this week.

I have looked in vain for basic information on NT like features and
specifications for the operating system. I've tried MSL and the Knowlege Base
but can't find a thing.

Can anybody direct me to a source for some of this information?

Thanks

Ed





There are 2 Replies.

#: 11298 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  04:39:36
Sb: #11271-Basic Information
Fm: Anthony Murfet 70602,1634
To: Ed Tiley 72007,3455

Ed,
        Try Windows Magazine, it is full of the type of info you are looking
for, otherwise look thru the libraries here on Compuserve, there is a lot of
useful documentation in WINNNT and MSWIN3.
                                        best...Tony.

#: 11329 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  07:48:13
Sb: #11271-Basic Information
Fm: Robert Reinstein 76270,1541
To: Ed Tiley 72007,3455

Ed,

Why not install it and find out?

Also, MS has a spec sheet available.

#: 11725 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  18:30:30
Sb: #11545-Basic Information
Fm: Ed Tiley 72007,3455
To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X)

Robert,

Somehow I have missed that. Where in the SDK is the pamphlet?

Thanks

Ed

#: 11771 S2/General Discussion
    08-Oct-92  10:15:41
Sb: #11725-Basic Information
Fm: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340
To: Ed Tiley 72007,3455 (X)

The is no pamphlet advertising "Inside Windows NT" in the SDK. Robert must
have gotten the pamphlet at the Win32 PDC or somewhere else.

-Dwight (MS)




There are 2 Replies.

#: 11785 S2/General Discussion
    08-Oct-92  11:10:06
Sb: #11771-Basic Information
Fm: Ed Tiley 72007,3455
To: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 (X)

Dwight,

Yeah, I think I know where he got it.

Thanks

Ed

#: 11834 S2/General Discussion
    08-Oct-92  18:56:01
Sb: #11771-Basic Information
Fm: Tim Jones 70750,701
To: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 (X)

Ed and Dwight,

I think the pamphlet that is being mentioned is the "Microsoft(r) Win32(tm)
Preliminary Software Development Kit for Windows NT(tm) July 1992 Release
Notes" (just read it on the cover of my copy).  While it isn't the MOST
complete document to come out of MS, it did get ME up and running.

Tim

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11887 S2/General Discussion
    09-Oct-92  08:30:00
Sb: #11834-Basic Information
Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205
To: Tim Jones 70750,701

No, the doucument I'm talking about is "A Special Preview of Inside Windows
NT" by Helen Custer.  Maybe it was part of the press material that came with
the SDK rather than the SDK itself.

#: 11849 S2/General Discussion
    09-Oct-92  03:20:12
Sb: #11546-MS networking history
Fm: Tom A. Hodges 70550,2540
To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X)

Robert, I remember a product called MS-Net in the early days.  I'm not sure
whether MS wrote it or not, but they sold it as as an OEM product, for vendors
to write front-ends for.  PC LAN Program 1.2 &  1.3 from IBM were OEM
implementations of MS-Net, as was CBIS OS/Network, Performance Technology
PowerLAN, and some others (I thind DCAs product was also based on this).  I
believe that the MS-Net DOS redirector is still pretty much the same one for
LAN Server clients, as the original.  We did some extensive testing on these
products vs. Netware 2.0 & 2.1 back in '88 (or was it '87?).   I'm sure that
Frank Derfler is an expert on this subject.  He was doing a lot of testing of
these products back then.....

Tom Hodges


There is 1 Reply.

#: 11864 S2/General Discussion
    09-Oct-92  06:54:58
Sb: #11849-MS networking history
Fm: John Oellrich 72611,1452
To: Tom A. Hodges 70550,2540

Tom,

Just for completeness MS-NET was used with AT&T's StarLAN software as well
(the software became known as StarGroup when it went to a LAN Mgr base).

John

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11888 S2/General Discussion
    09-Oct-92  08:31:11
Sb: #11864-MS networking history
Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205
To: John Oellrich 72611,1452

Yes, I've seen a whole lot of MS-Net LANs over the years.  I just never saw
MS-Net itself, or an MS-Net SDK, or anything else with Microsoft's name on it.

#: 11010 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  09:47:52
Sb: #10825-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X)

I think you have more ability to predict ship dates than I do.  I have no
experience working in a large shop on a project even approaching any of the
Win's so I can't see how the shape of the OSes are now and therefore when they
can ship.

I'm wondering if NT lite can be a parallel project to the full NT.  If so, and
if it's mostly a truncated NT with some relaxation for ill behaved DOS support
included, can't it be shipped almost at the same time as full NT?  Am I
missing some concept here?

                                    Paul

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11036 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  11:53:28
Sb: #11010-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

Paul
 >I think you have more ability to predict ship dates than I do.

Probably just more willingness to stick my neck out, on the other hand I've
gotten the ship date for every project that Sheryl has worked on within
about half a month.

 >I'm wondering if NT lite can be a parallel project

I think the developement can be done on parallel to some extent but that the
bulk of the test (especially the beta) will have to be after NT is pretty
stable, that is still going to be 6 to 10 months, wouln't you say?

--Ben


There is 1 Reply.

#: 11167 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  15:25:59
Sb: #11036-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X)

Ben:

Hmm, that's a good point about the beta. To my knowledge, no Lite NDA's are
out and that implies at least a nine month beta from start. OTOH, I'm aware of
a *very* tight, fast track beta MS did that went from a rough product to a
finished one in a few weeks. That too was a derivative product like I suppose
Lite will be, so perhaps I"m all wrong on how long it'll have to be in beta.

If you've predicted Sheryl's projects that well, how could you escape
bmillions in consult fees? <g>.  I for one would be happy to have an accurate
prediction on just ONE project <g>

                                  Paul

#: 11011 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  09:50:03
Sb: #10837-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X)

Oh, I remember Dvorak taking after Tandy (called their computers 'Radio Shack
shlock') which was the fire point of his being canned by I_World. Perhaps I
remember wrong or that was just a cover for the real reason he left Infoworld.
Whatever, I think Infoworld lost.

                                         Paul

#: 11013 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  09:56:26
Sb: #10845-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Robert Chronister 70363,246 (X)

Bob:

It's you who beat on me for my Corel comments.  OK, let's make a deal, we
don't beat on each other, but team up to beat on others <G>.

                              Paul

#: 11014 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  10:02:41
Sb: #10853-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Scott Edgar[COL Systems] 70053,105 (X)

I disagree that W4W will be a niche OS.  As I wander around I find Netware in
its various incarnations often used inappropriately.  I haven't formally
compliled statistics on this, but my seat of the pants feel is that people are
laboring under Netware to do such minor items as email, printer (or other
resource) sharing, file sharing.  These people often don't even know about
Lantasic as a better alternative since they think: network == netware.

W4W can and should replace all these overly complex Netware installs. It also
should end further inapproriate installs.  My guess is Lantastic hasn't done
this due to it's lower profile in the market.  I also think W4W is a superior
product to Artisoft's.

Personally I think the world is easily large enough to accomodate OS/2 and NT.
What gripes me are people who insist these are directly competitive products
and declare OS/2 the winner since it's here & NT ain't.

                                   paul

#: 11015 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  10:05:32
Sb: #10859-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 (X)

Yah, I saw it and was saddened about his comments that we were being
discourteous (well, his implication that we were, anyway).  I felt he was
including me and some others in that comment.  I'm mildly resentful of that
since it was he who whacked Bob for Bob's spelling errors and he who called me
a MS bigot.  If I remember right, neither Bob, I, nor anybody else ever called
Will a name.

                                     Paul

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11117 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  22:43:03
Sb: #11015-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

Will has been on the defensive since everybody, including MSFT, is hounding
him about his OS/2 comments.

Did you read in InfoWorld that Novell is divorcing itself slowly from OS/2 and
moving to UNIX rather than NT. A good move for them although I'd like to see
NT as the OS base for the 90s.

Tom

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11176 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  15:45:24
Sb: #11117-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702

Tom:

Yah, I knew that Novell was moving toward NetWare 4 (a mystery to me) and a
new version of Unix called UnixWare (naturally).

I'm not hounding Will about his OS/2 comments, but rather what I feel are his
biased reporting to anything MS and especially NT.  I'm wanting to know why
he's on a tear after NT.  What's it to him if NT succeeds?  Why is he making
it a mission to tear it all down?

                                             Paul

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11219 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  09:34:29
Sb: #11176-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

>>What's in it for WFZ if NT succeeds?  Why is he making it a mission to tear
it all down?<<

The only explanation I can think of is that, as a consultant, he's been
telling his clients to bet the farm on OS/2, and if OS/2 goes down, his
company's going with it.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11241 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  11:05:17
Sb: #11219-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X)

Oh, good point. I didn't know he did any outside consulting.  Geeze, I'd hate
to have told my clients to bet the farm on OS/2 or *anything*.  I'm obviously
a beliver in NT, but I sure haven't told people to put their all behind it -
at least before it ships!

                                        Paul

#: 11016 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  10:08:26
Sb: #10862-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 (X)

I'm expecting a good *IX implementation with UnixWare altho it will hardly be
the first. The best derivitive I've ever seen is Mach/Nextstep and that's gone
nowhere in the market to my surprise and disappointment.  I've always been a
Unix fan, but never saw it as practical to business apps my clients need to
run.  If UnixWare is a success, it would be a fine irony that the *IX that
finally succeeds comes from Novell <!!>.

                                    Paul

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11118 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  22:51:47
Sb: #11016-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

UNIX will explode on the thousands (millions?) of NetWare LANs out there. The
systems will be used as high-performance servers and/or workstations. It has
only been in the last few weeks that I have realized the market momentum that
is coming our way.

I had a thought about OS/2 earlier today. If you had such a product that
filled a nitch today while users wait for NT, UNIX, or other "big" OSs,
wouldn't you do and say anything to hype it as the best OS on the market?
Perhaps IBM knows this product won't last, but they can grab a market share
for an "intermediate" OS and hang on to it for a long time, sort of like what
MSFT did with DOS.

Tom

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11177 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  15:50:14
Sb: #11118-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702

I'll have to think this one out, Tom. I'm unsure what Unix from Novell will
bring to servers especially since I know Novell is working hard on something
called NetWare 4 which is a radical net product, not a reheat of NetWare 3.x.

Given that Novell will be torn between selling its Unix and it NetWare, I'm
wondering if it will overcome the diversity of the *IX's that have been their
downfall as far as popular acceptance has been.  My strong feeling for NT is
that by definition it is a one vendor OS.  I've felt for years that if one *IX
vendor could rise above the crowd, Unix would finally come to the fore.

That AT&T never did it indicates to me it can't be done.  But nobody can argue
the *IX's bring all the needed technology to the table. It's just the politics
ain't there.

                                   Paul

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11190 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  17:53:17
Sb: #11177-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

Paul
I would like to point out that all x85 *IX's ARE compatible.

UNIX's problem is the COST of the applications.

If the NT application folks price their apps. more then 30% more then the
DOS version then NT will die the same way.

--Ben


There is 1 Reply.

#: 11235 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  10:42:16
Sb: #11190-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X)

Ben:

My clients see the Unix world as the Fragnix world and I've given up on
changing their minds.  They just don't want an *IX solution.  I'm not in
agreement with them and in fact if the entire world would accept an *IX
solution of one sort or another my life would be simplified mucho.  But it
won't seem to be.

I see NT apps priced right at Win prices and the usual u/g incentives will
abound.  MS who's arguably the premier Win app maker will surely price their
apps within reach for obvious reasons.

                                     Paul

#: 11017 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  10:10:46
Sb: #10863-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732 (X)

Sorry Jon, I'm having a slow day here. I don't understand your query: >>
...allow a dos machine to connect to a Windows server...>>

I don't know I have the answer if I understood the question, but could you
please clarify? Thanks.

                                      Paul

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11048 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  13:27:31
Sb: #11017-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

A dos machine can connect to a Win4Work (or presumeably an NT) machine and
treat it just like a server (disc and printer sharing) by using a package that
MS will do called Workgroup Connection. These are the dos drivers (effectively
a Netbeui package) with a "net" program and they just connect that dos machine
into one of these "servers". There is no peer-to-peer sharing of the dos
machine's facilities by the other machines, it is just like a Novell-style
connection.

Funnily enough, WGC comes with the dos client MS Mail 3 software too, so your
dos machines can have email accounts too.

Sorry, should use the future tense here: it will ship when Win4Workgroups
ships - this has been publically discussed at a press briefing here in London,
so I'm not treading on any NDAs

Jon

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11172 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  15:36:15
Sb: #11048-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732 (X)

Ah, now I understand you and yah, I agree.  As to your press announcements,
you just confirm that the UK's somehow treated better..<g>.

                                    Paul

#: 11018 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  10:17:27
Sb: #10864-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732 (X)

Jon:

Yah, I'm hitting this too and I"m encouraging companies to become, if not MS
exclusive, than at least Win exclusive. One client who's going from DOS to
Windows is leaning toward QPWindows instead of Excel but other than that are
MS 100%.  Frankly given the Windows standard, I don't see they will be hurt if
they do go QPW in the mix so I"m not recommending against it at all.

NetWare is a nightmare but it wasn't worth addressing until we had a
reasonable alternative on the horizon.  Now we do.  I'm hoping NT/LanManNT and
the rest of the family is easier to install and support - gosh it can't be
worse!  OTOH, if NetWare 4 is a re-think rather than adding another kludge
layer, it too might be great.

I think you have a great point that MS is now getting in a position to be a
one stop software house for every need. I 100% agree that nothing else is even
close.  Hmm, what'd I do with my stockbroker's phone #? <g>.

                                     Paul

#: 11019 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  10:19:37
Sb: #10866-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732 (X)

Yah, I'm comfortable discussing stuff to some extent after its been shown. But
not 100% comfortable. I'm in a beta project with a product that's been shown
regularly now and today learned that the feature set's been unfrozen and the
publisher wants to keep that very secret while the spin doctors do their
stuff.  Besides, the UK is always ahead of we here on this end of the pond
<g>.

                                       Paul

#: 11020 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  10:23:17
Sb: #10867-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732 (X)

I'm in agreement that NT is extremely important to MS, but even if it fails
miserably it won't sink MS.  AFter all MS is doing great today on apps, not
NT.  There will be new versions of other-than-NT OSes for MS and u/g's to
Excel, Word4Win, etc.

A great deal of the ship rests on NT and for that reason I think MS will make
sure it works great.  My guess is NT will work as anticipated and it will be a
marketing effort that will make it suceed or fail, not technology.

                                 Paul

There are 2 Replies.

#: 11035 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  11:53:22
Sb: #11020-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

Paul

My first impression was that it could sink MS but a more careful friend and
I did some 'back of the envelope' numbers and what is is more likely to do
is give them a couple of years where most of the profits will be eaten by
NT.

--Ben


There is 1 Reply.

#: 11165 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  15:22:09
Sb: #11035-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X)

Ben:

Yah, I see MS as on such a roll that nothing will sink them.  They could be
handed a severe face loss if NT fails, but after all, look how great they're
doing now with very little net biz.  What they might do is, if NT is a tech
failure, spend so much shoving it around even so, that *that* might hurt them,
but that scenario supposes two highly unlikely events: NT is a bust and MS
doesn't recognize it.  I'm betting on neither.

                                      Paul

#: 11122 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  23:04:31
Sb: #11020-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

NT will make it because of the momentum behind Windows




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11178 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  15:52:52
Sb: #11122-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702

Perhaps, but if the OS/2 folks here are right, the next version of it will
bring Win 3.1 support.  The only prob for OS/2 for standalone computing, IMHO,
now, is its size (too big for 80% of the machines) and its not running Win
right.

My guess is Win momentum won't mean much to NT. They're dif products. I'm also
a bit disappointed that NT has such a, well, Windows like interface. I was
hoping for some new sleeknesses. Owell.

                             Paul

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11228 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  09:43:34
Sb: #11178-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

OS/2 2.0 has four problems:  too big for much of the installed base,
incompatible with many clones, not a better Windows than Windows, and no
drivers for most third-party hardware.  Five problems, if you count IBM's
marketing.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11249 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  11:28:41
Sb: #11228-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X)

I'm gonna add OS/2's other problem - that it's vended by a hardware vendor.
Having spent most of my life fighting IBM bigots in the basement, I'm not a
Blue Believer.  IBM might be the only HW vendor big enough to try and float an
OS, but that they are so, make them not very creditable to me.

                                Paul

There are 3 Replies.

#: 11255 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  12:48:28
Sb: #11249-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563

Seventh problem: sorry guys, but this *is effectively no native software* from
the major software houses for this platform. There might be in the future, but
they have cut out the whole "normal" (ie non vertical) marketplace.

Jon

#: 11259 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  16:05:39
Sb: #11249-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563

"Hi, Mike?  This is Jim over at IBM.  Listen, we've got this great new
operating system, way better than Windows, and we'd like you to start
preinstalling it on all Dell's systems ..."

#: 11694 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  14:05:19
Sb: #11259-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Bill Lee 76366,656
To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X)

"Hi, Mike?  This is Billy over at MSFT.  Listen, we've got this great new toy,
heck, we'll call it an operating system, and we'd like you to start
preinstalling it on all Dell's systems ... or else ... "

????????????????????

#: 11313 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  06:43:36
Sb: #11249-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563

Of course MS have this problem with NT - It's shipped by an Apps. vendor and
that makes all other Apps. companies suspicious....

#: 11880 S2/General Discussion
    09-Oct-92  08:08:29
Sb: #11313-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Andy Champ 100064,2267 (X)

Yah, but no more so than them shipping DOS in the past. I think more *users*
fear an OS/HW company than an OS/APPS one.  And users buy the OS and then
ISV's have to develop the programs to run under it.  That ISV's might fear MS
means little in the market - IMHO.

                                    Paul

#: 11021 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  10:31:44
Sb: #10901-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 (X)

No, I still disagree. I think SMP will be very important once it's available.
Perhaps today users don't see the need for this or even understand it. But in
my personal experience, I've been discussing NT's specs with clients and when
I explain what SMP is, and what it'll mean for them, they get wildy
enthusiastic.  These people are now demanding some sort of practical
multiprocessor support in their enterprise OSes.

As to people associating multiplatform with a lot of overhead, well, again if
they do a little education that NT uses a VMS like method to get this done
will put that fire out.  If excessive overhead is an issue, OS/2 is a prime
offender.  Much of its size comes from having to run Win apps. Its strength,
IMHO, comes from its native support for OS/2 apps and as the BEST DOS
multitasker out there.

In short, I think a very short course on what NT offers over OS/2 will make a
lot of people percieve it as a superior OS, but that's only my guess now.
Tomorrow, when I start the educating, I'll *know* <g>.

                                    Paul

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11160 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  12:56:37
Sb: #11021-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

Paul,

You are correct that Windows causes overhead in OS/2, but it is largely
optional. If you don't want it you don't install it. But Win16, DOS, POSIX,
C2, integrated networking, SMP, Portability all cause overhead on NT. Here
again largely optional, but not quite as much (hence the higher CPU & memory
REQ's).

If you are so hot on SMP, why wait for NT? I presume you like LAN Manager,
otherwise NT wouldn't be so critical. Guess what? You can buy today a full
32-bit SMP OS running Lan Man. Its called UNIX SVR 4 with StarGroup 2.0. You
can plop it right on top of a AT&T/NCR StarServer E (up to 4 - 486's) or one
of the NCR 3550's (even more 486's) and go to town. And thats just the start.

And SMP is far from the only way to skin the mips cat. Sparc, MIPs, .....

NT is a good OS, no doubt about it. But it isn't a panacea.

John

There are 2 Replies.

#: 11166 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  15:25:05
Sb: #11160-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736
To: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 (X)

John
 What is the pricing on a StarServer E, say with one and three procs.?

--


There is 1 Reply.

#: 11331 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  08:18:00
Sb: #11166-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452
To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X)

Ben,

Expensive & more expensive? I'll have to check to see if I have current
pricing somewhere.

John

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11335 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  09:41:38
Sb: #11331-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736
To: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452

John
 >Expensive and more Expensive.

No need to check, you made my point, it will (IMO) be more cost effective to
move to a RISC machine and update your applications (the BIG advantage of NT
on multiple CPU's after all) then it will be to move to an SMP X86 machine
for the forseeable future.

NT (in fact any OS) is better serving the market that needs increments of
performance (rather then reliability, recoverability) by being portable then
by being capable of SMP.

--Ben

#: 11429 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  20:24:03
Sb: #11335-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452
To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X)

Ben,

>>No need to check, you made my point,<<

For the market the StarServer E is intended, Expensive & More Expensive, is
appropriate pricing. It essentially blew away any remnant of the original 3B
market, and did so very cost effectively, using an architecture that a lot of
customers are comfortable with (Intel & EISA).

For customers who were more adventurous, we also had the System 7000 SMP
(RISC) for ultimate performance.

On the otherhand we also had the StarServer FT (Fault Tolerant, can you spell
TANDEM?) for those that valued availability above all else.

The point being, as much as we would like to, you can't stereotype customers.
They all have their individual hot buttons & needs. No one solution fits all.

I personally like SMP with reasonable fault tolerance (not full availability,
as in SS FT/Tandem, but ECC memory/RAID/hot spare) for server applications.
Whether it is running *IX or NT or whatever. While I tend to pooh-pooh for the
near term SMP on a client or standalone box, that doesn't hold on the server
end. People today are becoming CPU bound on the fastest chips available, be
they Intel or Sparc or whatever. In this case SMP is about the only way out of
the box.

John



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11454 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  23:15:06
Sb: #11429-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Daniel Peterson 70363,2541
To: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 (X)

PMI But.........

The point being, as much as we would like to, you can't stereotype customers.
They all have their individual hot buttons & needs. No one solution fits
all.<<


Tell that to the MAC evanglest!

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11471 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  05:43:54
Sb: #11454-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452
To: Daniel Peterson 70363,2541 (X)

Daniel,

As an employee of the company that first deified an operating system, I can
assure you that the Mac camp has no lock on fantacism ;->

John

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11492 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  08:04:01
Sb: #11471-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Daniel Peterson 70363,2541
To: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452

<ROTF,L> :)
At the risk of repeating my self "tell them that"

the Mac camp has no lock on fantacism ;->



Dan :)

#: 11182 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  16:05:29
Sb: #11160-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 (X)

John:

The resistance to any Unix in the my client base is why I don't push these
solutions.  It seems that the *IX's are big enough to get the attention of the
mainframers and they're down on them hard where they just tend to ignore
Win/DOS as gnats.  Then those who have come up on PC's veiw *IXes as huge
monsters with no support.

Then too there's the look and feel issue, ease of installation and
maintenance, and what programs run under it as important considerations as to
what OS is appropriate.  I'm hoping NT will bring the best mix of those things
to my clients.

Naturally I can't know this since its hardly complete yet, but I'm hoping.
It's not as if I'm liking NT for SMP only, but rather the entire mix of what
it is, and what I think it'll be.

I'm hardly married to it tho. If it turns out to be a dog, I'm not gonna use
it.

                                            Paul

#: 11022 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  10:33:49
Sb: #10903-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 (X)

John:

Since MS has cheerfully let me out of NDA's for discussing certain projects
with certain people, I"m sure Will could sign and still write rather freely.
I'm surprised he has that policy (of not agreeing).

                                  paul

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11037 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  11:53:33
Sb: #11022-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

Paul
I believe that Will's policy of 'no NDA's' is a result of many years of
writting about IBM products.

Those guys take NDA's VERY SERIOUSLY indeed.

--Ben


There is 1 Reply.

#: 11168 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  15:27:16
Sb: #11037-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X)

Ben:

I think Will Z once worked for Blue.  But that's no reason to avoid all NDA's.
After all, I will, tonight cross a street even tho a car once passed right
over where I'll be walking.

                                           Paul

There are 2 Replies.

#: 11191 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  17:53:24
Sb: #11168-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

Paul
 I'm sure Will will correct me if I'm wrong but I don't believe that Will
ever worked for IBM.

H. Ross Perot yes, Will Z. no.

--Ben




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11236 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  10:44:16
Sb: #11191-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X)

Ben:

I hope Will pokes in here soon to resolve this. I *think* I remember him being
taken to task for IBM bashing with the implication that he does (oops, did) so
as an embittered employee. Perhaps he'll come back on the air and settle this
for us <hope>.

                                     Paul

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11262 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  16:43:55
Sb: #11236-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563

Paul

 Will was certainly accused of IBM bashing (and for many years too) but, as
he has said he was never an employee of IBM.

--Ben

#: 11871 S2/General Discussion
    09-Oct-92  07:47:09
Sb: #11262-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Ben Sano 72401,2736

Ben:

Yah, I got a message from him. Dunno where I got this idea.  When he waws
accused of bashing IBM i was on his side, but I truly think he's lost
proportion when it comes to MS.  Well, we'll see how he goes from here. I only
see him now in PC Mag so the  treat will only be once or twice a month.

<g>.

                                      Paul

#: 11211 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  06:08:46
Sb: #11168-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

 >I think Will Z once worked for Blue.

Not so.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11240 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  11:03:41
Sb: #11211-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

Sorry. I thought I remembered this from years ago.  Will let Ben know I
remembered wrong.

                                 Paul

#: 11023 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  10:41:03
Sb: #10956-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

Will:

I agree that what an OS or other program delivers is what counts, not paper
advantages.  Per my discussion on this will John, I think SMP *will* become
advantageous to the OS when users learn what it will do for them. Right now
users aren't demanding this, of course. They don't know how much utility it
will bring to their installations.

A long time ago I read an essay by Cmdr. Grace Hopper about her disappointment
that parallel processing seemed to be rather back burnered in the IBM
dominated computing world.  After that read, I became a parallel fan, but
understand one needs to know what it'll do before demanding or even wanting
it.  As soon as people see it in action, they'll want it.

The message que is another (to users) very obscure technical spec. That NT has
multiple que's will mean a lot in percieved performance to users even if they
don't know or care what a message que is.  As to C2, well, here's something
that means nothing to me, but others tell me how they yearn for it.

                                    Paul

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11224 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  09:41:09
Sb: #11023-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

Users aren't demanding SMP because users can't afford SMP.  When users can
afford the technology, they'll demand it; however, at that point they'll be
able to get it in several forms, among them Win/NT, OS/2, and **ix, not to say
Taligent or God knows what other OS.

As for Grace Hopper's disappointment that parallelism hasn't taken the world
by storm, the same argument pertains.  IBM didn't quash parallel computers; on
the contrary, it's led the way in research on parallelism.  The practical uses
for it are limited at present, not only by the types of business problems that
constitute the bulk of system automation now, but also because of the expense
and challenge involved in doing it right.  (I assume you are discussing true
parallelism and not simply symmetric or asymmetric multiprocessing.)
Businesses are much more interested in practical, and cheap, solutions to
their problems; chasing a holy grail of parallel computing is thus not a
high-priority development strategy for most computer vendors.  Yet.

As to the multiple message queue question, the OS/2 developers are adding
multiple message queues to OS/2.  Aside from issues of focus management, that
are principally of painful interest to developers, it is not clear to me that
the practical advantage to an NT user of multiple message queues will be
obvious to that user, compared to a user of OS/2 2.0, who sees the keyboard
and mouse unlock after the launch of a long operation *today*, as soon as the
user moves the cursor out of the window in the case of non-PM apps, and even
with no cursor movement, if the app is native PM.  The famous "bad app" that
locks the PM message queue and prevents the other apps from receiving key or
mouse messages is a rare beast in practice; nobody builds such an app on
purpose, unless they wish to demonstrate an OS/2 "weakness," one shared by
Windows, btw.



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11247 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  11:20:24
Sb: #11224-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 (X)

No, I'm not talking about true parallelism but just the implementation we'll
get in NT - SMP.  For very little extra money, mfg's can build mainboards with
additional sockets for more processors so when a user or a net admin feels the
need for more speed, they only need plug and then play.

This was Hopper's complaint.  She said when our ancestors found a mule didn't
have the power to pull up a stump, they didn't go out and breed a bigger mule,
but added another one to the team. Whether IBM intentionally quashed
parallelism, well, I dunno, but I believe it was her contention that they did
so, perhaps unintentionally.

And don't we say this today? If a user says his 386/16 is too slow what is the
answer? To add a few more 386's or to u/g to a 486/66? Of course due to the
nature of most of our OSes, the latter's the only choice.

I'm ready for an OS that runs the apps my clients need, has security, built in
net support, SMP so I can stop waiting for the bigger mules, and multiple hw
support.  My guess is NT will deliver these and my other needs with the least
compromises. We'll see.

                                        Paul

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11270 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  19:18:45
Sb: #11247-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563

The fallacy in your position is your insistence that adding SMP support to the
hardware will be done "for very little extra money."  These designs are not
trivial motherboard changes, and they will be priced accordingly for several
years.  The economics of the current situation are that it simply is more
cost-effective to move to a faster processor than it is to add additional
cpus.  One day, SMP motherboards will become available in the sub-$1000 range.
Not soon enough to give NT any sort of strategic advantage over the other OSs
that will, or do, support SMP when SMP systems finally do become affordable
for end-user systems.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11320 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  06:44:24
Sb: #11270-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267
To: Mercer Harz 70431,150

Also when SMP HW is that cheap it may be that IBM will have got around to
adding it to OS/2 in the form of v3.0.  I still think it's mass  of apps. that
matters.  And I still think that with time OS/2 will have an NT emulator and
NT and OS/2 - if either become sufficiently important.

Pro of multiple OSes - keeps their price down. Con  - higher app dev costs!

#: 11434 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  21:01:18
Sb: #11320-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150
To: Andy Champ 100064,2267

I think you missed one or two of my earlier messages; that was exactly the
point I was making to Paul, namely that by the time the SMP hardware is
affordable for the desktop end-user, NT and **ix will not be the only SMP OS
alternatives.

IOW, I agree with you (though I think the NT (or Win32) emulator on OS/2 and
OS/2 emulator on NT will be a long time in coming... perhaps even obsoleted by
events).

#: 11875 S2/General Discussion
    09-Oct-92  08:00:00
Sb: #11270-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Mercer Harz 70431,150

I disgree that my 'insistance' on the bennies of SMP support is fallacious.
While I agree that system boards with multiprocessor support won't cost
pennies over what we have today, their cost will be well within the
cost/benefit return that enterprises can afford.  When I mean 'I'll' plug in
extra processors, I don't mean me as a standalone user - at least for a few
years - but I as providing a solution to a client.

Adoption of NT today will mean accessibility to SMP tomorrow.  People buy
enterprise solution with at least a 5 year horizon (s/b more).  That few SMP
boxes exist today (plenty do at a price) means nothing. They will tomorrow.

                                        Paul

#: 11033 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  11:36:04
Sb: #10995-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: James Ferguson 71477,2345
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

re: I very much doubt that Win3.1 will be able to hold the fort until "NT
Lite" is ready...

Until sales (and even usage) of OS/2 surpass those of Win 3.1 I think it's
safe to say that Win 3.1 is "holding the fort."

-- Jim F.



There are 2 Replies.

#: 11049 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  13:27:39
Sb: #11033-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732
To: James Ferguson 71477,2345 (X)

Quite so. And with a 3.1 run-rate of 1M copies per month, it has some catching
up to do.

Jon

#: 11140 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  08:38:03
Sb: #11033-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Raymond Chuang 72441,3652
To: James Ferguson 71477,2345 (X)

James,

With the VAST majority of major clone makers preinstalling Windows 3.1 with
their machines, it'll be extremely hard for IBM to stop this momentum.

Raymond Chuang



There are 2 Replies.

#: 11146 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  09:56:27
Sb: #11140-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205
To: Raymond Chuang 72441,3652

>>With the VAST majority of major clone makers preinstalling Windows 3.1 with
their machines, it'll be extremely hard for IBM to stop this momentum.<<

Especially when IBM is preinstalling Windows 3.1 itself!

#: 11193 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  20:02:07
Sb: #11140-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452
To: Raymond Chuang 72441,3652

Raymond,

>>it'll be extremely hard for IBM to stop this momentum.<<

Preinstall may not represent the same level of momentum. When you get
something for 'free' it means you haven't invested anything. So DEL *.* has no
pain.

John

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11319 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  06:44:16
Sb: #11193-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267
To: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 (X)

Umm maybe but it still costs extra.  When you buy a car with a radio, you tend
to keep it, even though it was 'free', because another has to be enough better
than the exisiting one to make you go and buy the new one.  Selling your
product to someone who has nothing is easier than selling to someone who has
something, even if it's not very good (no comment on Windows implied).

Andy.

#: 11043 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  12:35:46
Sb: #11005-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452
To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X)

Robert,

>>Corporations are a very profitable segment of the PC market, but they don't
lead the market.<<

This is close to being oxymoronic. I assume by 'lead' you mean lead in volume.
Which makes one think of the ol' "So what if we lose 10 bucks a unit, we'll
make it up in the volume."

But in anycase, NT is architected as corporate OS and will need that market.
It will wither & die if it doesn't make there. Your average Ma & Pa operation
is going to keep chugging on Netware (Lite, 2.X, 3.X,...) or maybe WFWG (Win
for WorkGroups, WFW makes me think of Word for Windows) or LANTastic.....

John

#: 11051 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  13:38:57
Sb: #10958-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Scott R. McKee 76304,723
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

Will I mainly go (for me) West to Colorado. I 've heard the ice in the East
can be nearly as tough as being the subject of CIS threads. Scott



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11125 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  00:01:04
Sb: #11051-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657
To: Scott R. McKee 76304,723 (X)

Scott,

In fact, the alleged distinction between skiing in New England and skiing in
the Rockies is quite a bit overblown.  It's one of those standard tourist
myths like beer in Germany and wines and perfume in France.  As with the
above, there is an element of reality behind the myth, but I've seen light
fluffy powder in New Hampshire and Vermont and scraped over hardpack in Aspen,
too.  The contrast isn't nearly as sharp as many folks make it out to be.

Anyway, we also expect to drive out to Colorado for a bit of skiing in
January, too.  We're dropping in on the OS/2 developers conference in Colorado
Springs the 3rd week in January and then hoping to spend the following couple
of weeks skiing in Aspen.

Will

There are 2 Replies.

#: 11129 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  05:08:19
Sb: #11125-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Scott R. McKee 76304,723
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

Have a really good time! Scott

#: 11194 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  20:02:15
Sb: #11125-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

Will,

Seems we are slightly out of phase, skiing-wise. I'll be hitting Stowe & Vail
for my big trips this year again.

But we definitely agree on the East vs West. I find the Colorado ice much more
dangerous than Vermonts. I came flying down one hill at Vail last year, set an
edge, immediately hit an ice patch and liked to split my self right up the
middle. Why more dangerous? I wasn't skiing as I would as if I was sure I
would hit an ice patch at some point and paid the penalty.

John

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11218 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  09:26:27
Sb: #11194-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Bruce Biermann [ZiffNet] 72241,261
To: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 (X)

John,

For the best in ice skiing, try Whistler/Blackcomb and Crystal Mountain. Both
areas test a skier's ability and stupidity.

       Bruce




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11332 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  08:18:04
Sb: #11218-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452
To: Bruce Biermann [ZiffNet] 72241,261

Bruce,

Nah, you can't beat Vernon Valley/Great Gorge, NJ, for ice skiing on a Sunday
afternoon after the hordes have scraped it down to the 'firm granular' ;->

John

#: 11092 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  18:20:28
Sb: #10181-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Karl Mitschke 73650,150
To: Alexander Holy 100021,3721

IBM is *about* to release OS/2 2.1  very much like MS is *about* to release
NT.. Both are currently in pre beta. In my humble, usually wrong, opinion, NT
is a far better product than OS/2 2.1......

As far as 3.1 being unreliable and unstable, I have never had as many problems
with 3.1, including very early beta versions, as I have had with the
commercial release of OS/2 2.0...... I do recall, however, when I used to
laugh a dry, synacal (OK, WILL Z. couldn't spell it either) laugh when various
other beta testers declared 3.1 to be stable... Then I found that if 3.1 was
configured correctly it worked great... Also, I have to admit, using windows
apps instead of dos apps is a smart idea!

And, WFW doesn't really slow a PC or a person down as much as you would
think... Considering the benifits, the pain is well worth it.

Karl (just trying to elicit angry letters!)




There are 2 Replies.

#: 11120 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  22:59:12
Sb: #11092-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52
To: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 (X)

Hey, I sure agree with you on WFWk not slowing a PC much!  Load time is a bit
slower, but stuff seems to run without much, if any, degradation. I wish I had
MS stock - they're doing more things right than wrong, unlike another big
company whose initials are close to HAL.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11145 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  09:42:23
Sb: #11120-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Karl Mitschke 73650,150
To: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52 (X)

Speaking of a big company with those three initials, I called them up to get
the OS/2 development CD which is free, with a 15 dollar shipping charge, and
they wouldn't ship to me because I don't have a credit card, and they wouldn't
even give me an address to send the check to. The next day I called and
requested to be on the OS/2 beta, and she said sure, well ship that to you
fed-ex... Looks like they are learning from Microsoft slowly.

speaking of slow, has anyone but Will Z actually had to suffer through using
OS/2?? What a dog.

Karl






There is 1 Reply.

#: 11226 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  09:41:28
Sb: #11145-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150
To: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 (X)

By your own admission, you had to spend time configuring Win3.1 properly to
get it to be reliable and stable.  If OS/2 is performing like a "dog" on your
system, it must be because it is configured improperly.  I could use a dog
metaphor for OS/2 on my system, too; the dog I'd use, however, is a greyhound.
There are aspects of OS/2's performance that could be improved; for example,
ATM font initialization during bootup.  On the whole, however, its performance
is better than DOS+Win3.0, and with the Win3.1 support and 32-bit GRE, it's
better than DOS+Win3.1.



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11234 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  10:42:01
Sb: #11226-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Karl Mitschke 73650,150
To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 (X)

The time I had to spend configuring WIN31 was in creating PIF's to run dos
apps. WIN31 running windows apps is faster than OS/2 running windows apps on
my system. And, usind TAPCIS in the background, I can download messages in the
background far faster under WIN31 than OS/2.

Every do app I have run is far slower using OS/2. Perhaps I should spend the
five minutes to read the manuals that come with OS/2 and see if there arte any
hints on configuring the system.

Karl




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11268 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  19:18:27
Sb: #11234-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150
To: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 (X)

Funny; TAPCIS, as well as FTTERM, have a way of blowing up my Win3.1 DOS box,
but they charge full bore ahead under OS/2 at 9600bps; TAPCIS usually achieves
around 850-890 cps for downloads, 760 cps for message downloads (late at
night).  Native Win3.1 is definitely faster than the Win3.0 support shipped
with OS/2 so far; however, that is not the final word in Win-OS/2 support. The
beta Win-OS/23.1 support, combined with the 32-bit GRE, is faster than Win3.1
(at least in the cases being reported on the OS/2 fora; why don't you go over
there and see?), and the interapp protection under Win-OS/2 can't be matched
in Win3.1.  Of course, you have the option, in OS/2, of running an app using
Win3.0 support, Win3.1 support, allowing multiple Winapps to share the same
session, or putting each Winapp in its own session.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11274 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  20:10:23
Sb: #11268-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Karl Mitschke 73650,150
To: Mercer Harz 70431,150

I will definatelly have to look at my settings on my dos window, 'cause I
often think my machine has locked up when I am in Tapcis under OS/2... Also,
sometimes, at the end of a session it doesn't hang up the phone. Then, about
half the time, it doesn't get a dial tone when I try to dial out.

Only thing I did in WIN31 to make it run was make the default.pif execute in
the background, and change the background priority to around 400.

Let me know how you got tapcis to work so well with OS/2

Karl

#: 11437 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  21:01:44
Sb: #11274-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150
To: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 (X)

I use the following initialization and reset strings:

  Init:  ATV1E1X4&C1&C3DT
  Reset: ?2+++?2ATH0^M?2ATZ^M?2

  Set HW_TIMER "on"
  Set IDLE_SECONDS to 0
  Set IDLE_SENSITIVITY to 100

#: 11322 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  06:44:37
Sb: #11092-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267
To: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 (X)

Karl I run windows for Workgroups & I've noticed no slowdown.  Main thing is
it has smaller RAM occupancy than LANMAN.

P.s. - cynical.

#: 11093 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  18:20:45
Sb: More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Karl Mitschke 73650,150
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

Paul;

I have to agree with you that the OS shoud'nt be compromised for compatability
with older programs that don't necessarilly follow the rules..

And, by this, I even include programs that use UNDOCUMENTED features (as if) I
think back fondly to that machine that is so well known as a Multi-Media
machine, and how the clever folks in the OS programming department decided
that they would make an OS that delivered better performance, and if certain
apps didn't work, the people responsible for writing those non conformist apps
would have to make changes.

Before anyone thinks I am bashing a company that has a logo that looks like
C=, I should point out that most of what fails on the new Amiga OS are
programs that deliberatly used undocumented feartures.

Anyhow, if people can't run WordStar 3.11 or whatever with NT, perhaps they
should upgrade!

karl





There is 1 Reply.

#: 11173 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  15:40:23
Sb: #11093-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 (X)

Well we agree in principle, but in practice, if a NT/LanMan net won't run what
I consider to be a hopless/hapless program like WP51, it'd be seriously
compromised in the marketplace.  My last holdout for WP is gonna switch to AP
or W4W very soon, but there are a lot of dinosaur brains out there who love to
F7 their way to heaven.

My guess is the talent's in Redmond to catch any calls no matter how weird and
return what the calling program wants.  My guess is, then, that MS will make a
program by program decsion to support this or that misbehaved DOS program.

I really miss my Amiga sometimes...<sigh>

                              Paul

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11203 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  00:06:58
Sb: #11173-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Karl Mitschke 73650,150
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

Paul;

You say you really miss your Amiga sometimes.... Don't tell me, you sold it?
How could you! Tell me you didn't fall into the same trap I did and buy a
Compaq <g>! I still have my Amiga, just bought it a 68030/68882 combo board
with an additional 4MB of 32bit ram, and will probally have to buy it a
toaster as well to keep it from being jealous of this Intel box I do most of
my playing on...

TTYL..

karl




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11239 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  11:02:30
Sb: #11203-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 (X)

Karl:

Yah, the Amiga and the ST are down the road.  I got married a while back and
acquired a step child age (now) 8.  I figured either the Amiga or the ST would
be the kid's machine, but not to be. She wanted a computer 'just like me' so
she got a 386/33.  Then too her mom, my wife is a student so she needs a
machine to do homework and its a lot easier for her to be able to use her
kid's new 386 or my office / programming machine so we've invested in PC apps
for her.

A very funny thing happened.  Both my wife and s_child were computer illterate
when they came here.  By having Win auto load and having them run the
tutorials (CBT) from MS, they both became quite able to use the computer
programs w/o manuals or instructions from me.  Karin, the kid, on her own,
discovered the spell checker in W4W and uses it to self check her spelling
homework.

We just didn't have the room for all the computers. These guys want furniture.
The place *was* decorated in modern computer and it didn't fly with the new
family.

                                         Paul

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11312 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  06:43:32
Sb: #11239-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563


>>Both my wife and s_child were computer illterate...
..Karin, the kid, on her own, discovered the spell checker in W4W...

Computer illterate?  Gonna ask her for lessons???<g>

#: 11593 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  21:27:45
Sb: #11173-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563

>>...My last holdout for WP is gonna switch to AP or W4W very soon, but
there are a lot of dinosaur brains out there who love to F7 their way to
heaven.<<

HEY!!!!! I TOLD YOU ABOUT THAT BEFORE!

Darren

#: 11111 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  20:51:54
Sb: #10891-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403
To: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732 (X)

John,

I think you are on the right track in taking the position that you do. I get
a little tired of the dog and pony shows that come my way from the marketing
types. I usually prefer not to be introduced until after I have asked my
first series of questions that help me determine if the person giving the
demo has the slightest idea what they are talking about. But you are right
at the level where you are making major corporate decisions/recommendations
you need as much data as possible to make a informed judgement call or risk
going belly up.

The problem or delema that you face as the OS developer is how to allocate
resources (meaning those most intimate with the code) between finishing the
project and going out to do dog and pony shows that would help in making
informed decisions. It's a tough call for anyone, lose the business because
you have to dedicate the resources to completing the project in a reasonable
time or letting the project slip to get the word out.

I really think forums like this one keep us somewhat abreast and up todate
on the latest code and ETA on what in the pileline (when we are told<G>). I
have to admire Brad Silverburg, he really rolls up his sleeves and gets into
his projects. I see him alot on his beta forums doing the Q&A thing. He
really invites a lot of feed back on what the users want. Another one is
Stu. Make no mistake about it it really helps when you hear from someone
that tell you that this is the *real* direction this is going.

Darren

#: 11112 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  20:52:00
Sb: #10820-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

You forget DBase, 'dox4Windows...

Darren

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11174 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  15:41:28
Sb: #11112-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 (X)

Darren:

Where you been?  Haven't heard from you in months.

                                   Paul

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11287 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  22:36:21
Sb: #11174-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563

I'll e-mail you later this week and give you the saga. Or you can post your
number to me again (lost it) and I'll call you.<g>

Darren

#: 11113 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  20:52:06
Sb: #10776-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403
To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X)

at some point you just have to use the caveman approach (club them and drag
them by the hair).<G>

Darren

#: 11114 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  20:52:12
Sb: #10813-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

thats right announce a e-mail message and keep us all in suspense. I think
that's really underhanded of you.<g> Really makes me curious what you have
to say.

Darren

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11175 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  15:43:01
Sb: #11114-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 (X)

Darren:

Sorry about that email note. I wrote a column that will go out under my byline
Monday reviewing OS/2 2.  I pretty much say it's a great DOS multitasker,
which, I belive, it is.  I'm curious to hear Will Z's response, but haven't
yet.

                                    Paul

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11288 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  22:36:26
Sb: #11175-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563

I don't know why you guys can't see that you are saying the same thing.

What pub is the article going to be in and when?

Darren

#: 11115 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  20:52:20
Sb: #10914-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403
To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X)

You miss the point, soon connectivity will be built into the OS's from MS.
It is rumored that MSDOS6 will be a client out of the box and WFW seems to
be a complete peer-to-peer out of the box, both being able to see the NT
server or beeing seen by the server. So you buy WFW instead of WIN31 to get
the connectivity.

Darren

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11155 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  10:38:06
Sb: #11115-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205
To: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 (X)

Winwork will cost more than basic Windows, so my point that you can't compare
the cost of one copy of NT with the cost of one copy of NetWare is still
valid.  I'd be surprised to see Microsoft put client drivers in basic DOS
6--if they were going to do that, they'd put client drivers in basic Windows
as well, wouldn't they?  More to the point, Microsoft's unlikely to give away
free what its competitors charge good money for.  Peer-to-peer network
software lists for around $100 a node, and Artisoft's selling plenty of copies
of LANtastic.

#: 11592 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  21:27:39
Sb: #11155-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403
To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X)

>>Winwork will cost more than basic Windows, so my point that you can't
compare the cost of one copy of NT with the cost of one copy of NetWare is
still valid.<<

I'm going to concide part of this to you only because we are talking about
unreleased products and don't yet know what the final street prices are
going to be. However, Windows for WorkGroups has built-in peer-to-peer so I
would expect to pay slightly more for it. The same thinking goes for NT.

>>I'd be surprised to see Microsoft put client drivers in basic DOS 6--if
they were going to do that, they'd put client drivers in basic Windows as
well, wouldn't they?<<

I'm not part of the DOS 6 beta so I don't know for sure what will actually
show up in DOS 6, I've heard rumors of disk compression and a few other
things; but, it seems to me that I heard that these things were being
offered in WFW for sure (atleast to LAMMAN).

>>More to the point, Microsoft's unlikely to give away free what its
competitors charge good money for.<<

Seems to me that getting peer-to-peer networking, mail services and the
Schedule + products in WFW you're getting a wooping amount, maybe not free,
but...

>>Peer-to-peer network sftware lists for around $100 a node, and Artisoft's
selling plenty of copies of LANtastic.<<

Well for me (a dedicated Windows user, and I can only speculate here)
spending $100/node for Lantastic plus $45/node for vanilla Windows would be
more than the $125/node that I think WFW will actually sell on the street
for.

Darren

#: 11654 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  09:31:18
Sb: #11592-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205
To: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 (X)

Price considerations will vary a lot depending on what people want and what
they already own.  In most cases, I don't think people will find that WFW is
cheaper than NetWare.  On the other hand, I don't think the two will be far
enough apart that price will be a major factor in the decision.

#: 11123 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  23:14:32
Sb: #10822-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

When you talk about enterprise computering, you must consider SPX/IPX and
TCP/IP. NT will have trouble keeping up with NetWare+UNIX networks. SCO and
Univels products support SPX/IPX now, and client-server apps are ready to take
off. The corporate guys aren't going to wait for NT. Not when what they need
on a proven platform is already available. But I'm not saying NT won't make
it. Microsoft will just buy everybody's vote on it. Windows products and
vendors are behind it. If it's cheap enough, people will view it as a "gotta
have."

P.S. you like my new word "computering" in first line? <g>

Tom

There are 2 Replies.

#: 11130 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  06:09:35
Sb: #11123-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Darren Davis 71174,262
To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702

Just a note on enterprise computing...  I work in a mixed Mac and PC
environment- one of the curses of being at a major university- and am ver
intereseted in connectivity between the two.  Unless Novell makes some major
changes in Univel I know I will not be putting it on any of our servers.

I will argue that NT and OS/2 are taking a much saner approach to networking
than Novell.  For example, the main protocal on our network is TCP/IP and all
of our PCs and Macs support the basics (telnet and ftp) as well as NFS and NIS
to bring in the file connectivity that we need. Both NT and OS/2 come with
these capabilities out of the box- for OS/2 you have to buy the networking
version and NFS on NT is yet to be delivered as far as I know- in fact the NT
implementation of TCP/IP is one of the best that I have seen in the micro
world.

I look at it this way- I buy UNIX for what it offers- Open Systems. Unless
Univel and Destiny are an incredible out of the box system, which I doubt in
the first release, I have no desire to move to it.  I would much rather
continue along with UNIX as I know it and love it.  Then take advantage of the
connectivity options in OS/2, Windows/WinNT, and System whatever to provide me
the TCP/IP connectivity I need.

Connectivity is the buzzword of the 90s- and I do not think that you will see
the DOS of network computing ever appear.  Too many users with too many needs.

Darren

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11201 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  21:08:36
Sb: #11130-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Karl Mitschke 73650,150
To: Darren Davis 71174,262

Take a look at Vines on SCO.... Very nice product....

Karl

#: 11179 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  15:56:05
Sb: #11123-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702

Yah, I'm all for computering.  I used the term computist once and wondered if
I made it up.  So much for English <g>.

I'm assuming that MS wouldn't issue a LanManNT w/o support for SPX/IPX and
TCP/IP.  Sure w/o that MS could sell a few NT's to people who want to remain
firmly isolated, but why go to all this development work for such a tiny niche
market.

My guess is the first LanManNT will have these supports in place and a great
deal of beta testing will be compliance and performance.

                                      Paul

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11314 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  06:43:42
Sb: #11179-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563

Paul, the correct term for one who uses computers is a computor isn't it?
It'll never catch on!!!

#: 11881 S2/General Discussion
    09-Oct-92  08:09:11
Sb: #11314-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Andy Champ 100064,2267 (X)

I don't know. Is it 'computor'?  Sounds wrong. Owell.

                                   Paul

#: 11124 S2/General Discussion
    02-Oct-92  23:27:55
Sb: #10814-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

"Novell officials last week acknowledged they see the future in Unix, not
OS/2." (Infoworld, 9/28/92).

Somebody big just stepped on OS/2s toes.

Paul, this is in response to your message to Will Z and the continuing OS/2
debate.

Tom

There are 3 Replies.

#: 11141 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  08:38:06
Sb: #11124-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Raymond Chuang 72441,3652
To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702

Tom,

Especially the Univell project going on not far from my workplace. People who
have seen it said the combination of UNIXWare and NetWare is a knockout.

Raymond Chuang



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11181 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  15:59:43
Sb: #11141-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Raymond Chuang 72441,3652

Raymond:

Is the combination of Unix and NetWare called NetWare 4 or is that an entirely
different product?

                                     paul

#: 11180 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  15:58:40
Sb: #11124-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702

Yah, if Novell's out of OS/2, that must be quite a blow.  I'm surprised.
Doesn't Novell and IBM have (had?) some sorta strategy?  I mean, wasn't IBM
gonna sell NetWare?  I wonder if they will now.

                                      Paul

There are 3 Replies.

#: 11192 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  17:53:32
Sb: #11180-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

Paul

 IBM and Novell have been selling NetWare. I heard that the relationship has
soured because NetWare was unable to support IBM's large shops in the manner
that they had grown accustomed to from IBM (I believe that American Airlines
was one of the complainers).

AA wanted to upgrade all of their 5000 servers and have it done over a
single weekend and Netware couldn't do it.

Just a rumor of course.

Things like this are what MS has to be getting ready to make work if they
want the corp. market for NT.

My guess is that they will have to pump $100 to $200 million dollars into NT
service for the first three or four years if they are serious about
customers like this.

--Ben


There is 1 Reply.

#: 11237 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  10:49:40
Sb: #11192-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X)

Ben:

I'm not sure if NT can reasonably made to compete like that AA example you
rumor/quote.  I'm very surprised IBM backed NetWare in a customer who might
want such astounding service as you cite.  After all, if IBM had to work on
5,000 seperate servers over a weekend and coordinate it all, I doubt even they
could do it w/o a Gen Schwartzkopf on their staff <g>.

IBM can u/g a large 'net' using their traditional architechture where they
just need to load a tape or two on one or at worst a few mainframes, but 5,000
geographically distant servers at once?

I'm not surprised Novell/Netware failed at this. I don't see NT suceeding
unless the initial install had this eventuality in mind when it was spec'd.
My guess is the NetWare install didn't.

                                         Paul

#: 11586 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  20:46:17
Sb: #11192-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Dale Lewallen [PC/C] 76000,21
To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X)

BS>> "My guess is that they will have to pump $100 to $200 million dollars
into NT service for the first three or four years if they are serious about
customers like this."

Of course, were MS to decide to do this, it wouldn't be too hard, right? The
entire amount could come out of the "petty cash" account at MS..

-Dale

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11616 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  01:38:14
Sb: #11586-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736
To: Dale Lewallen [PC/C] 76000,21

Dale
 Gee, wasn't their profit something like $500 million last year? Spending
half of your profit for the next 3 or 4 years on NT sounds like a fair sized
risk (but not a 'bet the company move').

Doesn't sound like petty cash to me, but I'm not sure of the figures.

--Ben

#: 11705 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  14:44:18
Sb: #11616-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Dale Lewallen [PC/C] 76000,21
To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X)

Could be, Ben. I didn't pay attention to what profit was.. had the impression
that they had more than that to throw around..

-Dale

#: 11225 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  09:41:20
Sb: #11180-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

Novell is not *out* of OS/2; they are going to emphasize the Univel
connection, however.  But they are clearly not announcing that they have
decided to abandon their agreements with IBM; that may come, but it was not
announced in the article being discussed.  A careful reading of that article
simply demonstrates that InfoWorld is not above printing very self-serving
vendor press release/public relations propaganda as news.

Most of Novell's problems with IBM and IBM customers stem from the inability
of Novell's current products to be installed and/or upgraded easily and
quickly throughout an enterprise.  Changing the Novell platform to a NetWare
merged into a Unix base will not necessarily alleviate these problems.  Novell
doesn't *seem* to appreciate (yet) that their upgrade procedures don't scale
well, or at all.  Lord knows, they've had enough time to fix most, if not all,
the complaints that sites have about mass upgrades.  Still, for many sites,
the effort involved in moving from 2.x to 3.11 or (shudder) to 4.0 *BY WAY OF
3.11* (the currently announced plan) is enough incentive to cause many to
consider the option of installing a new NOS entirely.



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11248 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  11:26:13
Sb: #11225-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 (X)

Well, I didn't say Novell was out of OS/2, others did. I missed the article.
And I 1000000% agree with you that NetWare u/g's are about the worst
nightmares out there other than the initial implementation.

Now my understanding is that NetWare 4 *won't* be installable thru 3.X, that
this plan's been dropped. The rumor (I have no Novell connections) goes on
that 4 won't be a souped up version of 3.x but an utterly new effort aimed at
competing with NT.

I'm pretty darn confused about all this NetWare/UnixWare merge talk people are
all up in arms about.  What sort of problems now inherent in NetWare will go
away when Novell throws an *IX at the problem?  Is this a manifestation of my
ignorance?  I'm lost at what's to be gained here except another layer of
complexity for the hapless net admin who's trying to keep all these layers
operating.

                          Paul

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11254 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  12:48:19
Sb: #11248-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563

Quite so. So the prospect of a NOS that comes on a CD-ROM, takes 15 minutes to
install and which sets up sensible sets of user accounts will appeal.

I cannot forgive Novell for it's *totally appalling* documentation, for
example.

On the subject of "will people go for a mixed NOS of Win4Work + NT versus
traditional solutions (inc Novell)", I think the answer is "yes". We already
see how one NT machine can control another through RPC. Don't forget that MS
has done RPC implementations for Win3.1 as well. So remote, net manager
control of Win4Workgroup machines shouldn't be too difficult.

Remember that MS supposedly has a raft of Win4Workgroup apps and applets
coming out during the next 6 months -- maybe they'll do a full package of
remote "server" control for NT and Win4Work machines. (I'm totally speculating
here, but it would make real sense).

Jon

#: 11870 S2/General Discussion
    09-Oct-92  07:44:44
Sb: #11254-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732

I'm with you in thinking (I'm inferring here) that if MS can get a great group
of templates out for W4WG soon ( 6 months) it'll mean wonders to promote the
product as well as lifting MS as a net solution to the general public.

LanMan wasn't (isn't) that bad of a product really but its sales and MS's rep
as a net vendor are pretty poor.  We'll have to see how good an implementation
of W4Wg is (with it's wizards), how well it'll integrate with Netware, hhow
difficult it'll be to u/g to NT server, etc.  In other words, I see this as
the very beginning of a furious horse race.

                                     Paul

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11889 S2/General Discussion
    09-Oct-92  08:37:07
Sb: #11870-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563

>>LanMan wasn't that bad of a product

It might be okay today, but the initial release of 2.0 that couldn't run 1-2-3
or Paradox was a dog.

#: 11230 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  09:51:16
Sb: #11180-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

IBM's strategy was LAN Server.  They were losing so many sales to NetWare that
they eventually gave up and became a Novell VAR.  Kind of the way they've
given up on Office Vision OS/2 and become a Lotus Notes VAR, kind of the way
they dumped their applications division once WordPerfect et al. had ground
Displaywrite etc. into the dust, kind of the way they've started selling
ISA-bus PS/2s and Ethernet.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11251 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  11:31:57
Sb: #11230-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X)

Yah, the strategy of defeaaaaaaaaaaa [AWhenever IBM finds itself in a
competitive position, they find they can't cut it.  I'm actually surprised at
how good OS/2 is compared with other IBM efforts like Topview and MCA.  OK,
MCA is technically OK, but IBM's done such a job on it that even in IBM
machines its getting to be a niche buss.

If history's any measure, OS/2 2 has about 2 weeks to live.  Too bad, really.

                               Paul

#: 11196 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  20:08:41
Sb: #11124-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Bruce Hallberg[Genelabs] 76376,515
To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702

>>"Novell officials last week acknowledged they see the future in Unix, not
OS/2." (Infoworld, 9/28/92).

>>Somebody big just stepped on OS/2s toes.

Tom,

Gee, I wonder if they had a vested interest in saying that? Do you think?
Gosh, what a surprising comment, coming from them.

Bruce

#: 11127 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  00:21:54
Sb: #10956-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: David Coffin 76200,674
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

Will, I completely agree with you.  It doesn't mean squat to me!  I have a ten
person company and we have have three PC's.  SMP, C2 security, POSIX
compliance?  Who cares.  We don't need SMP or C2 or POSIX.  There are a
thousand fold more companys OUR size than those who might need the above
mentioned feature set.  Does Quicken make their money on the Fortune 1000?
Hah!  Better yet, Does MS make their money on F1000? Not in anyones life they
didn't.   OS/2 fills a void that MS's Windows and yet to be NT have created.
My moneys on that void in the middle.  Especially since low end machines today
are the solidly in the middle ground.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11321 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  06:44:30
Sb: #11127-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267
To: David Coffin 76200,674

Yeah Posix doesn't mean anything much to 99.9% of all customers.  Trouble is
the other one is the US Federal Government.  And they are big enough to notice
even if no-one else ever uses it.

Andy.

#: 11435 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  21:01:20
Sb: #11321-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: David Coffin 76200,674
To: Andy Champ 100064,2267

Well then have they noticed DOS?  Is NT being developed for the government or
the general public?  To whom are all these developers who are jumping on the
NT bandwagon going to be selling there products too? Uncle Sam?

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11472 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  05:45:55
Sb: #11435-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246
To: David Coffin 76200,674

I suspect that they feel that developmnt for NT will easily be handled in the
future not only by NT but also by the win32 kernel.  Drivers should be similar
etc.  All the arguments pro & con NT vs OS2 are somehow missing the fact that
win 3.1 is currently selling over a million copies a month and that windows
apps are now outselling dos.  Once NT is up and running, how long do you think
it will take MS to throw its energy (& big bucks <BG>) into the successor to
3.1?  I do not like to guess or predict the future (hard enough for me to get
through a day) but suspect that the buyer is dictating the reality.  I talk to
a lot of major developers who have told me straight out that, sure they could
write for OS2 or NT, if they choose but right  now, they are concentrating on
win 3.1.  Why?  simple.  An almost guaranteed decent return on their efforts.
Claris, the dean of Macdom, is porting apps to windows very quickly. Rumor
even has it that hypercard will be ported.  Ok, where now? Logical jump -- the
window 32 kernel.  Makes sense to me, but I could be totally wrong.  If I was
forced to make a bet, I would probably cast my ticket with MS.  If I lose, it
will not be the first time.                          bob

#: 11199 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  21:07:42
Sb: #10956-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Tom Bragg 71101,3060
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

Will,

PMFJI...

>>  OSs win or lose in the marketplace [not on promises but on what] they
>>  deliver

On this criteria, both NT and OS/2 lose to Unix for Intel, which delivers far
more than either today.  Problem is, its software is way too expensive, and
DOS / Win-3 has too large an installed base to play off of.

>> Like the old Beta vs. VHS

This, arguably, is precisely where OS/2 and NT sit, but in reverse order.
Beta is like OS/2: there first, low market penetration, marginal technical
superiority at an early point in time but no staying power in the long run.

A better bet would be to expect Unix on the big servers, NT on big desktops,
Win-3 or 4 or NT-Lite on little desktops, and OS/2 hanging on in Blue shops
or where interoperability with legacy systems or AS/400s is an issue.

>> (POSIX compliance, SMP, and C2 ...) don't matter squat to the overwhelming
>> majority of ordinary users

True as stated, but this misses a major point.  These features are precisely
what's required to bid an OS on the Government procurements of $100 M up to
close to $2 Billion, of which a *number* will be hitting the street in the
next few months (and years).  Also, these features make NT eligible as
technology insertion in existing contracts where OS/2 can't qualify.  The
Govt is a major buyer of computer systems; your dismissal of these features
is ill-considered, IMO.

>> how much memory ... how compatible an OS is with [what they've already
>> got] is what counts

How much memory is less an issue every day.  Plot the average memory density
on the desktop over time.  The interesting memory issue is this: with NT
around, there's no reason to switch a low memory machine over to OS/2 because
it introduces yet another operating system to deal with, and because NT
provides an upgrade path.  IOW, NT makes Win-3 a *viable* placeholder.  And
compatibility, one would expect, is greater from DOS/Win-3.1 to NT than to
OS/2.

[More]


There is 1 Reply.

#: 11200 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  21:07:47
Sb: #11199-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Tom Bragg 71101,3060
To: Tom Bragg 71101,3060 (X)

[Continued]

Having said all that, and having run the NT prelim release, *and* having
followed the trials and feedback of a diverse group of OS/2 users.... I think
you're pretty far out on that limb you've constructed! <G>  Of course, that's
not all bad, look at what it's done for Al Sharpton's visibility, for
example. ;->

However, all things are possible.  MS could fall on its face.  OS/2 could
become a winner as the OS of last resort (although it seems debatable whether
the marginal cost of moving from Win-3 to OS/2 is worth the marginal benefits
of such a move for most users). OTOH, the Unix vendors could finally wake up,
price their software intelligently, commit to ABI compatibility, and walk off
with the prize, given their _already_ superior technology.  None of us really
know.

I confess: I remember looking at DOS 1.0 and the original PC in 81 or 82, and
confidently pronouncing it a loser because CP/M-86 was superior, was here
now, ran on much better hardware, had an inventory of applications in the
field, etc. etc.  I was right technically, but a *lousy* predictor!  I think
I've learned from that mistake (and from others over my own 21 years in this
business <g>): I think NT is to be taken much more seriously than, say, OS/2.

No personal attacks here, just (hopefully) food for thought.  FWIW.

-Tom.


There is 1 Reply.

#: 11216 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  09:16:33
Sb: #11200-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657
To: Tom Bragg 71101,3060 (X)

 >No personal attacks here...

On that point, at least, we are in agreement.  As I am sure is already
apparent, on most of your points we are not in agreement.  I do find it
refreshing, however, to have someone state their disagreement with me without
needing, in the process, to attack me personally or to repeat false
allegations about me (like that I supposedly wrote about Windows 3.1
compatibility problems without having installed and run the product myself).

#: 11202 S2/General Discussion
    03-Oct-92  21:08:45
Sb: #10810-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Karl Mitschke 73650,150
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

Paul;

I was at the Association of Bayan Users meeting in April, and an editor from a
networking mag found out I had beta'd WIN31, and was running Vines 4.10(5)
(supposedely verboten) and asked me what I thought of Will Z's column about
WIN31 breaking apps. I said I had the magazine in my office, hadn't bothered
top read the article, but found it to be total trash. The editor asked me whho
I could make an oppinion when I hadn't read it, and I said if certain people
can state that they haven't installed WIN31, but didn't like it, I could
dislike certain columns!

Karl




There are 2 Replies.

#: 11220 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  09:37:01
Sb: #11202-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205
To: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 (X)

>>Will Z's column about WIN31 breaking apps

The funny thing about that column is that his big example was Superprint, a
kind of souped-up third-party printer driver--exactly the kind of program that
you'd expect to break from one version to the next.  Of course Superprint
works perfectly under OS/2 2.0, right?

#: 11238 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  10:55:41
Sb: #11202-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 (X)

Karl:

I'm a bit surprised that Will hisself seems surprised at our outrage about his
late columns.  As far as I can see, this MS bashing is a new thing with him.
He's been around PC Mag and others for a loooong time. In the past I've found
him to be a sometimes contrversial guy, but not one who's column is
predicatble in advance.  Why he decided to make war just about the time that
3.1 and OS/2 2 were release, well, I dunno.

I'm gonna speculate tho.  I'm gonna guess he felt it was <is> is duty to voice
a contra opinion to Windows madness. And madness it seems to be with the
entire world of new purchases going over to Win or Win apps.  DOS apps sales
are falling fast and Win apps rising each period.  Rather than cooling down,
Win madness is continuing to heat.

I've had several clients who know nothing about W4WGroups or NT recently
declare they are now all Win shops. Well, it makes me happy, but I'm confused
over their sudden conversions.

                                       Paul

#: 11221 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  09:40:46
Sb: #10965-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150
To: Al Longyear 70165,725 (X)

Ben is right, though:  Philippe Kahn is on the record over in the ZNT:EXEC
forum stating that Borland has no current plans to produce OS/2- or
NT-specific versions of their apps (and here I'm talking about Paradox,
Quattro Pro, dBase, etc.; the languages are another story), for quite a while,
until the market picture stabilizes somewhat.  Reason?  Both environments will
support their current DOS and Windows versions quite well, providing excellent
performance.  As far as their apps, not language products, go, Borland is
putting its efforts into their DOS and Windows versions.  For now.  Mr. Kahn
is open to developing for the 32-bit platforms, but only after it's apparent
that the market demand for the apps is there; he's not interested in
developing first, in the hopes that a market will be there at some point in
the future.  Mr. Kahn clearly perceives NT to be oriented at servers and other
narrow markets, not at the end-user mass-market that is Borland's traditional
base.  He seems to believe OS/2 will provide somewhat broader application
opportunities, but is not convinced that it will become much of a factor
outside of mainframe shops.  Until he is convinced otherwise about both OS/2
and NT, Borland's priorities (for apps) will revolve around DOS and Win16. At
least, that's what he's saying TODAY.  (Actually a couple of days ago.)

However, even Borland's language support for OS/2 is lukewarm; Mr. Kahn also
reiterated that Borland has no plans to develop a Turbo Pascal for OS/2.  I
hope he changes his mind on this, but he's turned thumbs down on the OS/2 TP
for about a year now, and shows no inclination to change, probably because
TP/Win runs so well on OS/2.  A mistake, in my opinion, but he knows best
where his dollars need to be spent.  BC++ is at about the same stage of
development for both OS/2 and NT, i.e., in EEP, but TP for OS/2 would be a
much bigger seller, based on my admittedly primitive "market research."



There are 2 Replies.

#: 11301 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  05:00:55
Sb: #11221-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Al Longyear 70165,725
To: Mercer Harz 70431,150

I am afraid that Ben's statement was logically incorrect. His statement was
"there are NO applications for OS/2 in 32 bit mode". That type of statement is
impossible to prove. All that it takes is one application to prove it invalid.

If you wish to bander about reguarding a definition of what an application is
then fine. I'll leave you to discuss that. That type of discussion is of
little to no value for me.

However, the simple fact of the matter is that there ARE applications for OS/2
2.0 in 32 bit mode. If you don't wish to accept Object Vision then you must
accept "Describe version 3.0 for OS/2 2.0". Describe has no "language" vs.
"application" group. They only have one application. Their application is for
three different platforms.

With the mention of one application, the statement is invalid. Accept it or
not. The fact of the matter is that I have shown the statment to be wrong.

Now, if the statement was that there are "FEW" applications for OS/2 then I
would have agreed with him. But I can not accept the "NO" term. OS/2 is very
new. Windows NT hasn't been shipped (commerically). If you wish to discuss
commerical operating systems then you can say that there are "NO" applications
for Windows NT. But you can not say that for OS/2.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11306 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  06:07:49
Sb: #11301-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736
To: Al Longyear 70165,725

Al
 What I said was:

>I have been unable to confirm that Borlands application divison (not its
>languages group) has ANY  native OS/2 applications in development.

To refute this you need to name a native OS/2 application in development by
Borlands application division.

I can't, can you?

--Ben

#: 11436 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  21:01:31
Sb: #11301-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150
To: Al Longyear 70165,725

I think you misread Ben's message; he said that Borland wasn't working on
32-bit OS/2 apps at present, not that *no one* was working on 32-bit OS/2
apps, and he is apparently correct, if Mr. Kahn is to be believed.  Since P.K.
could leave himself and Borland open to stockholder suits if he's subsequently
found to have lied knowingly when making public statements about Borland's
development directions (depending on how those directions turn out), I'm
inclined to believe him... at present.

ObjectVision is the sole exception to the rule here; it and BC++ are
acknowledged by Mr. Kahn as the only 32-bit OS/2 products (not apps) that
Borland is working on.  I think Mr. Kahn indicated that an NT version of OV is
in the works too, but I'm not sure; BC++ for NT is a definite yes.  OV is
produced by the Borland Languages group, though, not the apps group; Mr. Kahn
considers OV a tool with which to build apps, rather than an app per se.  The
distinction is a fine one, but I can see the rationale.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11460 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  01:13:10
Sb: #11436-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736
To: Mercer Harz 70431,150

Mercer
 >Mr. Kahn considers OV a tool with which to buld apps. rather than an app
 >per se.

Well I heard a rumor that the reason that OV was moved to the langauges
group (it USED to be in the apps group, I believe) was that the Windows
products groups were becoming so large that management was cumbersome so
they decided to move some folks under another report, OV was the (obvious I
think) pick.

--Ben

#: 11575 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  18:27:15
Sb: #11460-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150
To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X)

Yeah, I think calling OV a language is definitely bogus, but it is quite
properly an app-building tool, rather than an app in and of itself.  So maybe
the group should be called Languages and Tools.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11584 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  19:37:36
Sb: #11575-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736
To: Mercer Harz 70431,150

Mercer

I think that Brief (the text editor) is in this group also so it probably is
called 'Lanaguages and Tools' or will be soon.

--Ben

#: 11302 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  05:12:22
Sb: #11221-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Al Longyear 70165,725
To: Mercer Harz 70431,150

As for Borland, I would hope that they port all of their software to both
platforms. Let the market decide which platform they like the best. After
that, Borland can decide which platform that the wish to continute to support.

I don't know how difficult it is for Borland to offer two code generators. It
may be simple (if the two languages -- BCC and TWP) have a common base. Or it
may be difficult if the two are totally seperate scanners, analizers,
generators. (The answer to the question is not really important and makes
little difference to me other than for a curiosity.)

As for me, I must write to Windows 3.x. It will work on all three platforms,
Windows with MSDOS, OS/2 2.0, and Windows NT. IBM is lacking the tools to
allow me to port to OS/2 2.0 PM. Atleast Microsoft offers some help in porting
from PM to Windows NT. IBM offers nothing.

(I am not an advocate for OS/2. Personally, I belive that Windows NT is a much
superior operating system to OS/2. But, I am paid to do a job. The job
currently requires Windows.)

Is this the same Mr. Kahn who said that his company would never have a C
compiler. That C was an "american delusion" (delusion, invention, I don't
remember the exact quote). And that "Pascal was the language for the rest of
the world." He must have changed his mind to offer only C for his language
entry.

#: 11587 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  20:46:23
Sb: #11221-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Dale Lewallen [PC/C] 76000,21
To: Mercer Harz 70431,150

Mercer..

Kahn's statement (as quoted by you) raises an interesting question: as OS/2
2.0 gets better and better with its Windows 3.1 support, don't you think some
percentage of current Windows developers will just not write for OS/2 since
"OS/2 runs my app just fine under WINOS231?"

-Dale

#: 11727 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  18:41:05
Sb: #11587-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150
To: Dale Lewallen [PC/C] 76000,21

Gee, was I quoting?  I thought I was simply paraphrasing (leaves me more
wiggle room, ya know).

As to your point, of course; and Kahn made the point himself.  Of course, I
think the same thing is obviously true wrt Win16 support on Win/NT (except for
those unfortunate Win16 apps that require a device driver).

#: 11222 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  09:40:52
Sb: #10830-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X)

Yes, but the development for the Win base will continue, for quite a few
years, to be concentrated primarily on Win16, and not Win32.  Just look at the
comments by P. Kahn over on the ZNT:EXEC forum.  He clearly views NT as *NOT*
being a force for application sales for quite a while (he puts OS/2 in this
category as well, but seems to believe it will have a larger end-user presence
than will NT), because Microsoft is pitching it as a niche product, for
servers/SMP/RISC etc.  The bread and butter for the app developers will
continue to be DOS+Win16 for at least several more years.  After that, who
knows?  But for the immediate future, the fact that both OS/2 and Win/NT will
support these DOS+Win16 apps, and provide inter-app multi-tasking if not
intra-app MT, only provides the developers with more incentive to place the
bulk of their resources on DOS+Win16.  Borland and others will develop tools
for the new environments, and the odd application, but they are reserving
their development dollars first and foremost for upgrades to their DOS and
Win16 apps.



There are 2 Replies.

#: 11246 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  11:12:20
Sb: #11222-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 (X)

The migration path moving from Win16 to NT is so straightforward that sure,
people will continue to develop for Win16 and also in parallel for NT. This is
one rarely discussed areas where NT will have it over OS/2. NT, Win, and OS/2
need rewrites from the ground up for proper migration of DOS apps.  I know DOS
to Win ports can be done, but aren't particularly fine reps of Win apps.

But once you have your Win code, porting over to NT is relatively simple. My
prediction pretty well matches yours with the addition that I think just about
every Win app will have an NT version too.  I would guess that few apps will
be NT exclusive, but the one mistake everybody seems to make about this
industry lately is underestimating how fast power desire moves.

I remember that 18 months ago the common knowledge was that only heavy hitters
needed any implementation of the i486. Now we all have this and I for one am
eyeing the P5.  Today the common knowlege is that standalones don't need NT or
SMP.  I'm predicting this will seem like a silly short horizon look by 1994.

                           Paul

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11269 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  19:18:35
Sb: #11246-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563

I agree that it will be fairly easy to get a Win16 app recompiled to run under
Win32s or Win/NT.  However, to take advantage of the new features in Win32 and
Win/NT will require redesign of that app.  That's why I think you will see
minimal effort expended by most developers towards development of "native"
Win/NT apps.  And if the apps aren't rewritten/redesigned to utilize such
things as threads (and multi-threading support with proper interprocess
communication is not a trivial enhancement to an app) and the GDI
improvements, they will suffer by comparison to those apps that are written to
exploit the new APIs fully.  So, eventually, the native NT apps will surface
(or perhaps native Win32 would be a better term), but they won't become part
of the mass market until there is a Win32 implementation (not Win32s) that has
achieved mass market penetration.

I could be wrong.  But the experience of so many developers that went
whole-hog into OS/2 development based on Microsoft's and IBM's promises seems
to have left the majority reluctant to pour development dollars into either of
the new environments, until there is a market to support them.  And NT is
definitely not going to achieve mass market status, the way things are going.
Win32, perhaps, if we are talking the 32-bit version of Windows that will run
on a future version of DOS, but unless NT becomes priced at OS/2 levels, and
goes on a severe diet, it won't cut the mustard.  So I see at least eighteen
months before a 32-bit version of Windows arrives that will sustain
mass-market application development for native 32-bit Winapps and not straight
ports.

#: 11874 S2/General Discussion
    09-Oct-92  07:55:56
Sb: #11269-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Mercer Harz 70431,150

Well, we'll have to see here. I think a lot more programs will appear for
Win32 and NT due to the great tools MS has.  Do you have the NT SDK or the
Dev. Network CD?  Either will show how easy it is.

You will need to add specific code for multithreading of course.  But
developers want to make their apps run best and adding this tweak will give
such rewards I suspect they'll do this without much prodding. OS/2 requires a
ground up re-write. Were NT to require this, I think developers *would* be
gunshy after the OS/2 mess, but it won't.

Then too, I think SMP will come from 'free' with a native NT app.  That too
will prod people to move apps over to it.  But you never know the market.  Why
aren't we, for example,all using NeXTStep or Unix V?

                                           Paul

#: 11252 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  11:48:27
Sb: #11222-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: James Ferguson 71477,2345
To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 (X)

Mercer,
  You seem to have an awful lot of faith that P. Kahn is telling the whole
truth and nothing but the truth in laying out his company's future marketing
plans before the whole world... I'd be amazed if Borland isn't working away
furiously on NT apps as we speak. I expect they will also work on more OS/2
apps if they can con IBM into coughing up some more front-end development
money...

-- Jim F.



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11309 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  06:20:41
Sb: #11252-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Brian Moura 76702,1337
To: James Ferguson 71477,2345


Before Gene Wang left Borland, he was raving about Win32s at the Windows &
OS/2 Conference in Boston in August.  So the talk of Win-16 only work at
Borland sound suspicious.....

#: 11223 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  09:41:01
Sb: #10951-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150
To: Ladislav Nemec 70732,3207 (X)

Have you considered DCF/2?  Produced by Proportional Software, Inc., Fort
Collins, CO; phone [phone]OS2, fax [phone]OS2 (phone number supposedly
works in Canada, too; if you need a non-800 number, I'll see if I can dig it
up).  $129 (on special for $99 til end of year, I believe), and supports both
FAT and HPFS volumes (but not the SWAPPER.DAT file, yet).  Also comes with DOS
device drivers.  It's my understanding that Stacker-OS/2 won't support HPFS
initially.  I don't know whether Stacker-OS/2 will include the DOS device
drivers, either, or whether you'll have to have the DOS Stacker product as
well, to dual boot for example.  More info on DCF/2 is available over in the
OS/2 fora, but with the recent forum reorg, I don't know where in the
libraries the product announcement has ended up.



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11229 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  09:50:41
Sb: #11223-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Ladislav Nemec 70732,3207
To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 (X)

Thanks for the info, I did not know about that product. I was wondering about
Stacker support for HPFS; it is probably the reason why they are still working
on it. However, for the time being, I am not switching to HPFS since the bulk
of my work on all machines I use is with FAT. I already have Stacker and works
without a glitch. But,  one should ALWAYS consider alternatives.
Thanks, LN.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11267 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  19:18:21
Sb: #11229-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150
To: Ladislav Nemec 70732,3207

My understanding is that the first release of Stacker-OS/2 will not have HPFS
support, but that it will be added shortly.  After all, if DCF/2 can do it,
Stacker should be able to do so as well.  The Stacker-OS/2 product will be a
separate product from Stacker for DOS, at least as its been explained on the
OS/2 fora; I imagine, but don't know, that there will be some sort of upgrade
offered from the DOS version.  Since they are working on an NT version as
well, and probably NTFS as well as HPFS support for NT, perhaps the non-FAT
file system support will show up contemporaneously on both the NT and OS/2
versions.  All of this is sheer speculation, however; there haven't been any
public official pronouncements from Stacker principals that I'm aware of.  I
also use pencils with erasers.

#: 11281 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  22:35:46
Sb: #10891-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403
To: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732 (X)

John,

I think you are on the right track in taking the position that you do. I get
a little tired of the dog and pony shows that come my way from the marketing
types. I usually prefer not to be introduced until after I have asked my
first series of questions that help me determine if the person giving the
demo has the slightest idea what they are talking about. But you are right
at the level where you are making major corporate decisions/recommendations
you need as much data as possible to make a informed judgement call or risk
going belly up.

The problem or delema that you face as the OS developer is how to allocate
resources (meaning those most intimate with the code) between finishing the
project and going out to do dog and pony shows that would help in making
informed decisions. It's a tough call for anyone, lose the business because
you have to dedicate the resources to completing the project in a reasonable
time or letting the project slip to get the word out.

I really think forums like this one keep us somewhat abreast and up todate
on the latest code and ETA on what in the pileline (when we are told<G>). I
have to admire Brad Silverburg, he really rolls up his sleeves and gets into
his projects. I see him alot on his beta forums doing the Q&A thing. He
really invites a lot of feed back on what the users want. Another one is
Stu. Make no mistake about it it really helps when you hear from someone
that tell you that this is the *real* direction this is going.

Darren

#: 11282 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  22:35:52
Sb: #10820-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563

You forget DBase, 'dox4Windows...

Darren

#: 11283 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  22:35:56
Sb: #10776-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403
To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X)

at some point you just have to use the caveman approach (club them and drag
them by the hair).<G>

Darren

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11307 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  06:07:55
Sb: #11283-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736
To: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403

Darren
 >at some point you just have to use the caveman approach

Well as I said in an earlier message, we have needed this since the 1401 but
eveyone who has tried it has been answered with a loud NO by the market.

MS's attempt to do it by providing easy (and they hope cheap) upgrades of
the popular WinApps. is an interesting attempt and (since the current market
IS different in important way then the older markets that had large amounts
of in house code) a possiblly successful one, but I think no one should
underestimate the risk that MS is taking by not having very high backward
compatibility in NT.

--Ben

#: 11284 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  22:36:03
Sb: #10813-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563

thats right announce a e-mail message and keep us all in suspense. I think
that's really underhanded of you.<g> Really makes me curious what you have
to say.

Darren

#: 11285 S2/General Discussion
    04-Oct-92  22:36:10
Sb: #10914-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403
To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205

You miss the point, soon connectivity will be built into the OS's from MS.
It is rumored that MSDOS6 will be a client out of the box and WFW seems to
be a complete peer-to-peer out of the box, both being able to see the NT
server or beeing seen by the server. So you buy WFW instead of WIN31 to get
the connectivity.

Darren

#: 11398 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  15:53:45
Sb: #11285-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205
To: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 (X)

I didn't miss your point, I just don't think you're adding up the price
correctly.  Software to run NT on your server(s) plus WinWorkg on your
workstations may well cost more than copies of NetWare for your server(s).
I'll believe free DOS client software for NT/WinWkg when I see it.

#: 11299 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  04:45:35
Sb: #10697-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267
To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X)

Gee ben MS have got to be able to buy these porsche 959's for Bill to drive
around in your 55mph limits so they've got to make some profit - don;t be too
hard on them....

#: 11300 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  04:45:39
Sb: #10736-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267
To: phil hystad 73260,114


>It is blazingly fast, the overall design of today's capability is 400 MHz
>with dual instruction issue (read as 800 MIPS) and these 400 MHz machines
>should be out in great number by the end of 93 or beginnning of 94.  Today's
>chip is 100, 150, and 200 MHz.

Don't work for DEC do you?  That looks a little like some kind of eulogy!
Still, Phil, the DEC alpha has one big thing going against it.  We're part of
the Fujitsu group, the worlds no. 2 IT company. Dec's number three and we
don't want them going past us again!!!

#: 11442 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  21:46:54
Sb: #11300-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: phil hystad 73260,114
To: Andy Champ 100064,2267

Andy...

>>>...don't work for DEC do you...

Funny you should say that.  No, I don't work for DEC and others at work
think that I am too negative on DEC.

However, I do appreciate good technology, and despite the fact that DEC is
not an Intel or Fujitsu, or whatever, they have come out with some very
good products...the best so far have been the PDP-11 and the VAX.

I believe that, unless DEC makes some fatal business or marketing mistake,
that the Alpha will truely take off.  Those that we have inhouse have been
everything that DEC has claimed they would be.

By the way, DEC can easily make some blunder that will hinder the success
and acceptance of Alpha.  They have done it many times in the past, though
they create some nice technology, they are often dodo-like in the
marketplace.

Also, I should note, I doubt that the Alpha will upset the Intel market
too much, but you will see low-cost (under $5000) desktop systems running
the Alpha chip and DEC has even promised a Laptop running Alpha.  For a
little bit more money on the desk top you can get an Alpha with a
FutureBus-Plus backplane.


There is 1 Reply.

#: 11455 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  23:19:27
Sb: #11442-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Daniel Peterson 70363,2541
To: phil hystad 73260,114

PMI but....
By the way, DEC can easily make some blunder that will hinder the success and
acceptance of Alpha.  They have done it many times in the past, though they
create some nice technology, they are often dodo-like in the marketplace.<<

We have had 13 450st on order for over two months and first they were ordered
with 850 SCSI drives then they say "We dont have any 850M drives" now the
order is pushed back three more weeks.

Thats screwing up if ya ask me! but nobody did so.....

#: 11311 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  06:43:27
Sb: #10783-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267
To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702

Tom, if MSFT are busily integrating Networking into NT and WFW, and rumoured
to be DOS6 (or was it 7?) so that when you buy an MS OS you get networking,
how will Novell survive?  One answer is to go out with a better DOS than DOS
<g> and ship DR DOS with Novell.  Looks to me like MSFT are after Novell's
market so Novell are going for MSFT's OS market.  Fair enough?

#: 11582 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  19:06:46
Sb: #11311-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702
To: Andy Champ 100064,2267

Yes, it's interesting that MSFT will use W4W to move into desktop networking
for small to medium size companies. That's something they didn't pull off with
LAN Man. In the mean time, Novell is targeting enterprise networking and the
integration of many OSs on one platform. "Platform" is the key word here.
Novell is selling more than just a file server OS. They have multiprotocol
routers, UnixWare, and other modules that attach to NetWare or runtime
NetWare. They want people to view the NetWare LAN as a plug-and-play device
for the computing resources of an entire company. NT will probably provide the
same, but at a later time. Someone else here mentioned that NT had the best
TCP/IP implementation he had seen. I haven't checked into this yet.

Timing and marketing is everything right now. If NT is delayed too long, it
will have trouble keeping up, but there is momentum   from MSFT money and
vendors who developed Windows applications.

Tom

#: 11792 S2/General Discussion
    08-Oct-92  11:37:57
Sb: #11582-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Bradshaw 70003,5145
To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702

An aside:  Am I the only one bothered by the fact that "W4W" translates to
both "Windows for Workgroups" and "Word for Windows"?  Can't MS even keep it's
acronyms straight? <G>

There are 3 Replies.

#: 11797 S2/General Discussion
    08-Oct-92  12:53:52
Sb: #11792-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: PhilD 71650,2154
To: Paul Bradshaw 70003,5145 (X)

Well, if the acronyms weren't vague now and then, what would happen to Man's
Quest for Uncertainty?

#: 11823 S2/General Discussion
    08-Oct-92  17:30:16
Sb: #11792-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340
To: Paul Bradshaw 70003,5145 (X)

Actually the acronym used at MS for Windows for Workgroups is WfW, not W4W. We
love to create acronyms so we always make them unique <grin>

-Dwight (MS)

#: 11863 S2/General Discussion
    09-Oct-92  06:54:54
Sb: #11792-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: John Oellrich 72611,1452
To: Paul Bradshaw 70003,5145 (X)

Paul,

Too late, I complained about it last week ;->

I am using WFWG for Windows for WorkGroups (I would also grok W4WG, but I
don't like typing it because it involves comples use of the shift key<g>).

John

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11866 S2/General Discussion
    09-Oct-92  06:59:34
Sb: #11863-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Bradshaw 70003,5145
To: John Oellrich 72611,1452

You're right... WFWG is much better.  Looks distinctively different than WfW,
and scans completely different.  And of course, groks completely different.
You should be put in charge of the Microsoft Acronym Development Department!
:-)

#: 11315 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  06:43:45
Sb: #10801-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

Guess we'd better wait and see what happens!

#: 11316 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  06:43:54
Sb: #10736-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267
To: phil hystad 73260,114

Yeah now I think of it a bit more, Intel have an advantage (as do Motorola,
and and Zilog, And MIPS) over DEC in that DEC is definitely a computer
manufacturer wherease the others are basically not heavily involved in this
end of the business.  SO when Intel build a new chip it goes to everyone (I
know, expec. IBM who own 10%) whereas with DEC they are sure to have some bias
towards their own lines.  You can just see it can you? The Alpha becomes a
raging success and all new windows machines are using Alphas. There's a six
month backlog of orders for processors.  Dec chip foundry get an order from us
(or IBM, or Dell, or Compaq - it doesn't much matter who) and one from their
own computer manufacturing plant.  Guess whose orders get filled first?  We as
IHVs have to be a little careful here!

#: 11443 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  21:47:07
Sb: #11316-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: phil hystad 73260,114
To: Andy Champ 100064,2267

Andy...


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yeah now I think of it a bit more, Intel have an advantage (as do Motorola,
and and Zilog, And MIPS) over DEC in that DEC is definitely a computer
manufacturer wherease the others are basically not heavily involved in this
end of the business.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

   I give up, why do I care who wins the computer chip games. I build
   software for all of them (on VMS, OSF/1, and eventually NT).  I do like
   the Alpha chip.  If you study the Intel architecture, you get sick.
   If you study the other risc machines you feel a little bit better.  But,
   take a close look at the Alpha, you will start agreeing that they did
   things right in many areas.

   They do put a challenge to compiler writers though, the Alpha has so
   many areas where optimization can be super enhanced or compromised that
   compilers will be particularly more difficult.  DEC has built a great
   compiler backend called GEM.  If you want to build a compiler for
   Alpha, all you need to do is build the front end, the backend is already
   done...as a former compiler writer myself, I really like this.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
SO when Intel build a new chip it goes to everyone (I
know, expec. IBM who own 10%) whereas with DEC they are sure to have some bias
towards their own lines.  You can just see it can you? The Alpha becomes a
raging success and all new windows machines are using Alphas. There's a six
month backlog of orders for processors.  Dec chip foundry get an order from us
(or IBM, or Dell, or Compaq - it doesn't much matter who) and one from their
own computer manufacturing plant.  Guess whose orders get filled first?  We as
IHVs have to be a little careful here!
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

   If the Alpha takes off and DEC screws up by providing a bottleneck
   in manufacturing then DEC screws up...they've done it before.  But,
   Intel does the same, they do not graciously grant manufacturing rights
   to others, often it is taken from them (AMD, Cypress).  DEC has licensed
   the chip to several others but so far, as far as I know, they have not
   sourced it out to others...I believe they should if they want to make
   more money.

#: 11444 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  21:47:19
Sb: #11316-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: phil hystad 73260,114
To: Andy Champ 100064,2267


Andy...(some follow up)

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yeah now I think of it a bit more, Intel have an advantage (as
do Motorola, and and Zilog, And MIPS) over DEC in that DEC is definitely a
computer manufacturer wherease the others are basically not heavily involved
in this end of the business. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

   MIPS!  How could you include MIPS with the others in your list.
   MIPS is basically a software house, most of their employees, at
   one time, were programmers.  They never manufactured their own
   MIPS chip, it was always done by some outside fab house, one of
   them in the Portland, Oregon area, there are others.

   MIPS wrote a lot of the software that they sold to other computer
   vendors who used their chips, they had their own version of UNIX
   and they specialized in compilers: C, FORTRAN, PASCAL, for their
   MIPS chip.

   MIPS did get into the systems business with a workstation and
   server line but it never really went anywhere.  Oh how I wish they
   would have taken off with that end of the business, You see, I bought
   lots of stock at the first IPO on MIPS, though I sold most when it
   bounced back to $22/share a while back, I lost some as well.  But,
   even at $22 a share, I would have been better off putting my money
   in a interest paying checking account.
   The MIPS chip though is nice...of the risc chips, I like the Alpha
   best, but I put MIPS right in there at second place.

#: 11317 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  06:44:00
Sb: #10820-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267
To: Paul Cassel 71250,563

NT is at a temporary diadvantage because OS/2 is out and NT isn't.  At least
not for real apps - too slow as yet, and not likely to be well supported.
however I think NT does some things better.  It's also got some new facilities
- such as SMP, and portability.  OS/2 3.0 should have these, but it's not out
yet.  SO if NT hits the streets in final before OS/2 3.0 that puts MS ahead
again.  I think NT will make it long term but I won't swear to it.  Oh well
tomorrow I go on an OS/2 support course (covers head to protect from
half-bricks) .......



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11336 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  09:41:45
Sb: #11317-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736
To: Andy Champ 100064,2267

Andy
 >covers head to protect from half-bricks

Don't think you have to worry. I know of one CIS forum that thinks this is a
bit rowdy, but I have to say that I have been involved in OS/2 v. (UNIX NT
Window, NeXT etc.) on CIS and ZNT for about a million years (well it seem
that long) and on various sides too and this group and discussion has had BY
FAR the lowest dis-information, mis-information and the most reasonable
discussion with attempts to see what assumptions each of us are making that
cause us to come to differenct conclusions EVER.

I would like to congratulate just about every one involved.

--Ben

#: 11883 S2/General Discussion
    09-Oct-92  08:11:19
Sb: #11317-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Andy Champ 100064,2267 (X)

NT will hold an edge even if OS/2 3 shipped at teh same time. It's app
portablity.  You can move from Win to Win32 or NT in a flash. OS/2's of any
flavors takes a ground up write.

As to my record of predictablity - I thought NeXT was the computer we'd all be
using by '92. <G>.

                                            Paul

#: 11318 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  06:44:08
Sb: #10956-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267
To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X)

Will, over here there were three video tape formats - Phillips Video 2000,
Beta, and VHS.  Video 2000 had no pre-recorded material, Beta had a little,
and VHS a lot.  2000 was 3rd out, Beta 2nd and VHS first.  Because of the film
libraries lots of people bought VHS systems and the other 2 got locked out -
never achieved critical mass.  Beta nearly made it, 2000 is dead as dead, and
went quickly.  Now there's Super VHS which offers passable picture quality -
better than PAL broadcast, and knocks spots off Never Twice Same Color - but
it's got VHS read/write compatibility.

Now the OS guys have learned from this.  No DOS & Windows support?  No chance.
So they've both got it.  OS/2 has got slagged for no Seamless Windows, and NT
is getting slagged for lateness.  Both get slagged for resource hungriness.
Which will it be?  what will the OS of 1999 be? Really depends on the Apps.
guys.  So OS/2 may well be ahead of NT at present - as it ships, there's no
real argument about this - BUT what matters is the critical mass of Apps.  You
need a 1-2-3 or a Visicalc on ONE environment only - which is unlikely,
nothing is that important anymore - or a mass of apps. primarily on one system
to cause the change.

The guys in this forum have some of the choice in this, as they are mostly
(unlike you and me) apps developers.  Enough of them go NT, and NT it is.
Enough go OS/2, and OS/2 it is. An even balance and we may get to choose on
merits of the systems!

My only advice to these guys is - before tying your flag to a mast, be sure
it's the right ship or you'll sink with it.
 (hey looks like I agree with you!) Andy.



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11337 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  09:41:49
Sb: #11318-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736
To: Andy Champ 100064,2267

Andy

Beta was first out here was it later there?

--Ben

#: 11424 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  19:51:22
Sb: #11337-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Graham Welland 70023,1267
To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X)

Beta was out first in the UK too.  I think that what tipped the balance was
the support of all of the Japanese manufacturers other than Sony & one other I
believe.

Graham

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11459 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  01:13:05
Sb: #11424-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736
To: Graham Welland 70023,1267 (X)

Graham
 >I think that what tipped the balance was the support of all of the
 >Japanese manufacturers other than Sony & one other

As I remember it RCA(really)/ JVC and Mitsubisia STARTED the VHS project
because Sony (who invented Beta and held the patents) refused to license
most of them (or kept the license costs too high).

I think the same thing will happen with NT and OS/2 in the multi-platforem
market (it has already happened to IBM with MCA you may have noticed)
and the one that ends up on the most platforms will be the one with the best
source code license (they will both have to beat UNIX here)

--Ben

#: 11615 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  00:32:25
Sb: #11424-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732
To: Graham Welland 70023,1267

ISTR that one of the major influences in the UK was that the video tape rental
shops refused to doublestock and voted with their feet towards the
just-leading VHS.

Jon

#: 11718 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  17:39:41
Sb: #11615-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Graham Welland 70023,1267
To: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732

>> ISTR that one of the major influences in the UK was that the video tape
rental shops refused to doublestock and voted with their feet towards the
just-leading VHS.<<

Once VHS became most popular, this factor hastened the abandonment of VHS.

Yet another case of the best technology not becoming the market leader.
(Windows vs OS/2????)

Graham

#: 11346 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  12:33:13
Sb: #10315-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Daniel Peterson 70363,2541
To: Robert Chronister 70363,246 (X)

Sure is great to be a martyr!  Funny thing, Dan P. accuses me of checking his
spelling & syntax while Will accusses me of not spelling properly.  This I
find really amusing!  Oh, well! On to better and more germaine issues!


Hey Bob whats this?
This does not put me on the same plane as that baby does it?

I look forward to your correctness!

Willy will bash you for spelling when he has nothing else bad or condecending
<--- spelling? help me out bob! to say.


Dan

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11349 S2/General Discussion
    05-Oct-92  12:56:47
Sb: #11346-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246
To: Daniel Peterson 70363,2541 (X)

Dan:

trust me, no comparisons intended nor implied.


bg>                          bob

#: 11552 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  14:37:46
Sb: #11539-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452
To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 (X)

Tom,

There is actually two UnixWares. One is optimized as a client OS on a Netware
network, the other as an application server on said same netowrk.

John

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11583 S2/General Discussion
    06-Oct-92  19:08:21
Sb: #11552-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702
To: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 (X)

Right you are about client and server versions of UnixWare. One requires 8MB
minimum and the other 12Mb minimum.

Tom

#: 11617 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  01:38:18
Sb: More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736
To: Mercer Harz 70431,150

Mercer
Sorry Sheryl tells me that 'Brief' is part of the spreadsheet group (go
figure).

--Ben

#: 11728 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  18:41:12
Sb: #11617-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150
To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X)

I'd go into immediate sensory overload and burnout trying to figure that one
out!  I'll just let it drop.  Must make sense to someone.

#: 11638 S2/General Discussion
    07-Oct-92  07:56:56
Sb: #10851-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Dean Schuh 76424,2455
To: Scott Edgar[COL Systems] 70053,105

No problem, my mistake.  I should've re-read my message before sending it...it
does sound like I've got the 'NT or BUST' blinders on.

I find it interesting that I've got departments in my organization that are
already talking about moving applications to NT...and none have even seen it
yet.  Talk about a good brainwashing..er marketing job my Mr. Gates.

#: 11845 S2/General Discussion
    09-Oct-92  03:07:35
Sb: #10696-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Tom A. Hodges 70550,2540
To: Scott Edgar[COL Systems] 70053,105 (X)

I'm not a regular on this forum, nor have I ever even seen NT, but I am a
product evaluator for a large company, and I can tell you this:

-Lotus current 123G for OS/2 is far behind Excel in
features/functionality/stability.
-Lotus cc:Mail OS/2 client is a LOUSY character-based version, where their
Windows version is EXCELLENT.
-WordPerfect OS/2 version is character based, and far behind their Windows
version (version 6) in features/functionality.
-Lotus is putting their REAL bucks into products that are now ONLY available
in Windows environment.
-Borland seems to be putting it's serious bucks into Windows products, not in
OS/2.
  While these companies pay great lip service to IBM, and OS/2 (probably to
keep IBM from getting upset - everyone seems to want the 64Billion dollar cash
cow on their team), their bean counters, and Boards of Directors tell them to
put their serious bucks where the REAL market is.....  It seems to me that
that market is WINDOWS.   Pick up a copy of Computer Shopper, PC Magazine, PC
World, etc.  How many companies are pre-loading Windows on their Systems?  How
many are pre-loading OS/2?  The USERS (who incidently make the FINAL
decisions) are getting VERY used to the Windows interface very fast.   Most of
them run it on their machines at home.  They Aren't going to want to change to
something that looks and feels as different as OS/2.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11868 S2/General Discussion
    09-Oct-92  07:36:47
Sb: #11845-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Chuck Ebbert 76306,1226
To: Tom A. Hodges 70550,2540

Tom, cc:Mail will have an OS/2 WPS-compatible client very soon.  The lead
developer is quite active in the OS2DF1 forum.  And Lotus has announced that
they are porting their SmartSuite to OS/2 (Ami Pro included!).  Where do you
get the idea that their products will ONLY be available in Windows
versions?????  From Microsoft?  And if everyone is using the Windows
interface, why did IBM just expand to *four* forums here?

#: 11884 S2/General Discussion
    09-Oct-92  08:13:36
Sb: #11539-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702

Yah, in truth, and keeping in mind that I'm sorta slanted against Novell, I
gotta say that what they say in their marketing  hype and what we find when we
really gotta use their stuff diverges significantly.  So Novell might make
nice sounds, but I'll await field experience before saying they have a good
product. But I also feel Novell is a compnay that will remain a computing
force for a loooooooooooong time.

                                   Paul

#: 11886 S2/General Discussion
    09-Oct-92  08:15:02
Sb: #11540-More bilge from Willy F.
Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563
To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702

I don't have inside knowledge, but do know MS isn't staffed with either
arrogant types or idiots so support for TCP and IPX will, IMHO, be there and
working well in V1.

                                           Paul




#: 11053 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  14:37:50
Sb: #10974-MS ser mouse
Fm: Jeff Imber 70732,2205
To: Paul J. Levesque 72621,3477 (X)

        Paul,  My video card has no mouse but...  I pulled the bus mouse card
and ..PRESTO  serial mouse!!!  (why didn't I do that before !)

One other question - NT says the EISA memory configuration is incorrect and
defaults to an ISA config.  I can't find any reference to memory configuration
in my EISA setup .Any Ideas????
Thanks again for your help
                                        Jeff


#: 11064 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  15:44:16
Sb: #10688-NT killed UNIX partition
Fm: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642
To: john f flanagan 71271,2277

John,

Thank you for the report. I'll make sure to forward it to our development
team. In the mean time, could you please post a detailed list of your current
hardware configuration (motherboard, hard drive controller, display, other
controllers, etc ...)

Thank you. Sam Karroum [MS]

#: 11074 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  17:14:49
Sb: #10705-NT with WD8003E/A
Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643
To: john f flanagan 71271,2277

John,

The WD8003EA should work with the updated WDLAN driver.  A part of the
WDLAN.TXT directions may have been unclear, however.  The first set of
modifications should be made under "wdlan01->parameters", and not under
"wdlan01".

Let me know if that wasn't the problem,
   -- Terence Hosken [MS]

#: 11075 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  17:14:55
Sb: #10780-Windows NT Problem
Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643
To: Tony Hansen 76570,2763 (X)

Tony,

If your hard drive controller is not on our hardware compatibility list, that
may explain the problem.  Note that the default interrupt for the Sound
Blaster is IRQ7 which may be in conflict with your lpt1 port.  If you had,
indeed removed everything but the hard drive controller, of course, this would
not be the only issue.

We do expect the beta to do a better job of hardware support, exactly how
much, of course, remains to be seen.

Regards,
   -- Terence Hosken [MS]

#: 11083 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  17:52:03
Sb: Loading Drivers
Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643
To: Chris Stuber (US Census) 76244,3321

Chris,

For this release, many changes can only be made in the system registry.
Support for the Sound Blaster, for example, should be automatically enabled,
though the defaults expected by Windows NT may not be appropriate for your
system.  To modify settings for this board, you would run "regedit" and look
under HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE->SYSTEM->CurrentControlSet->Services->Sndblst.  At
this level, the "Start" value determines whether the driver is enabled.  0x1
means the driver loads automatically.  0x4 means the driver does not load. If
IRQ, Port, or DMA settings need to be changed, look one level lower to the
Device key. If you are looking for some other supported board, simply use the
above information as a general guideline.  I hope this helps,
   -- Terence Hosken [MS]

#: 11209 S3/Windows NT Setup
    04-Oct-92  05:09:55
Sb: #10927-Trap 6 error on install
Fm: Neil Rosenberg 75300,3553
To: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642

Here's the scoop...

1. I did get NT loaded finally, had to abandon the internal SCSI hard disk.
Even if it's a supported SCSI controller, the only SCSI devices allowed (it
seems) are CDROMS.

2. FYI the FD860 is really an 850 in disguise.  The only difference is that it
has system-level power supply lines to provide DC power to a connected drive.
Logically, and ROM-wise it's identical to an 850.

This was a difficult, time-consuming task.  Expensive too, considering all of
the hardware I had to buy-test-reject before I finally got something to work.

Q: Is this true: NT will not let you install to a bootable SCSI drive?

Thanks.

There are 2 Replies.

#: 11214 S3/Windows NT Setup
    04-Oct-92  08:53:48
Sb: #11209-Trap 6 error on install
Fm: Tom Bragg 71101,3060
To: Neil Rosenberg 75300,3553

Neil,

>> is this true, that NT won't let you install to a bootable SCSI

No.

I (among others, I'm sure) installed it to one.  In fact, I have SCSI tape
(Archive 150), disk (Maxtor 8760S), and CD ROM (CD Tech Toshiba Porta-drive).
The controller is Adaptec 1542.

FWIW.

-Tom.


#: 11244 S3/Windows NT Setup
    04-Oct-92  11:07:56
Sb: #11209-Trap 6 error on install
Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246
To: Neil Rosenberg 75300,3553

Neil:

Don't understand your message.  I have 2 SCSI drives on an Adaptec 1542b and
NT recognizes both of them.  Numerous folks here have put NT on a bootable
SCSI drive.

                               bob

#: 11101 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  19:25:11
Sb: Win NT / mouse
Fm: - Visitor 71175,2632
To: Tech support

I have entered the seriously frustrated zone with the installation process for
Windows NT. I think I am going to do my Jimi Hendrix with the thing, take it
into the yard, douse it with lighter fluid and set it on fire. It would sure
feel great! I have had the preliminary release of NT for the past month and
have not been able to get the mouse to work. I have asked for assistance three
times and every time I was told the mouse was at fault ( my mouse was not a
microsoft mouse but was claimed 100% compatibility ). I just bought a
Microsoft serial mouse and it doesn't work either, just what I needed a third
mouse! I have to use the dos2nt batch file, my CD-ROM isn't SCSI and dos2nt
doesn't install the mouse driver properly. How can I get the thing to
recognize my mouse. Using Windows without a mouse is like eating with one
chopstick. I would like to get some technical support, I need to know how the
installation process works with NT and how to force the mouse driver to be
loaded, quickly if possible. I have wasted over one months worth of
development time.

Greg Smith

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11207 S3/Windows NT Setup
    04-Oct-92  03:45:15
Sb: #11101-Win NT / mouse
Fm: paul mariotti 100064,3331
To: - Visitor 71175,2632 (X)

Is your mouse on COM1? I had my (fully) Microsoft mouse on COM2 when I tried
to install NT and it did not work. A week later, having tried the lighter
fluid bit, I removed my COM3/COM4 IO card, moved the mouse to COM1 and now
everything works fine Paul Mariotti

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11272 S3/Windows NT Setup
    04-Oct-92  19:47:08
Sb: #11207-Win NT / mouse
Fm: Greg Smith 71175,2632
To: paul mariotti 100064,3331

I finally got the mouse to work and am impressed with Win NT so far. The
problem was my bus mouse was left in the bus and NT didn't ignore it when I
told it explicitly to ignore the bus mouse and use the mouse on the serial
port. I got my Genius mouse to work so I didn't need the Microsoft mouse after
all. Thanks to everyone, I appreciate the help Greg

#: 11026 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  10:45:00
Sb: #10990-WIN NT Install Problem
Fm: Alex Howard 73310,2237
To: Robert Chronister 70363,246 (X)

Moe would say "I'll mordalize ya!"

-a.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11097 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  18:46:35
Sb: #11026-WIN NT Install Problem
Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246
To: Alex Howard 73310,2237 (X)

RE:

And be proud saying it to boot no doubt.  <bg>.

                               bob

#: 11116 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  20:52:26
Sb: #10915-WIN NT Install Problem
Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403
To: Alex Howard 73310,2237 (X)

I think it may be the male version of PMS.<g>

Darren

#: 11286 S3/Windows NT Setup
    04-Oct-92  22:36:16
Sb: #10915-WIN NT Install Problem
Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403
To: Alex Howard 73310,2237 (X)

I think it may be the male version of PMS.<g>

Darren

#: 11050 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  13:33:14
Sb: NT partitions
Fm: Paul Dougherty 72750,3452
To: all

Where can NT live on disk?  I have an "extended DOS partition"
that itself is broken into several drives (D,E,F).  Can NT
be installed in E, a sub-drive in the extended partition, or must
NT live on an entire partition of its own?
Thanks.
---- Paul

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11295 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  04:10:53
Sb: #11050-NT partitions
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Paul Dougherty 72750,3452

Paul,

<<Where can NT live on disk?  I have an "extended DOS partition" that itself
is broken into several drives (D,E,F).  Can NT be installed in E, a sub-drive
in the extended partition, or must NT live on an entire partition of its
own?>>

Nt can be installed on any partition. You should have at least 100 Mb free on
the partition you want to install the PDK on however. By default NT will
install itself into a subdirectory called WINNT. You could`change this if you
wanted, but it might make support for your configuration a bit more difficult.
Being non-standard, etc.

Art

#: 11103 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  19:30:49
Sb: #10928-Win NT Install/ mouse
Fm: - Visitor 71175,2632
To: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 (X)

I have just bought my third mouse, this one is a Microsoft serial mouse and it
didn't work either. I did a complete reformat and install with the mouse on
Com 1 ( Irq 4, the only Irq 4 on the bus ) and surprise, it did not work. My
bus mouse is on Irq 5, there are no other Irq 5 devices and the mouse works
fine under OS/2 and windows. An Irq bus war would jam it under those systems,
it works fine. I have reverified all the hardware. I have a CD-ROM on Irq 2,
nothing on Irq 3, Com 1 on Irq 4 the bus mouse on Irq 5, the LPT1 on Irq 7. No
luck so far. Greg Smith

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11137 S3/Windows NT Setup
    03-Oct-92  07:59:25
Sb: #11103-Win NT Install/ mouse
Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246
To: - Visitor 71175,2632 (X)

Greg:

As a follow up to my previous reply, what happens if you disable the mouse
mouse (throw the old jumper so to speak)?  NT is very finicky about its
environment.  Things that we took for granted are no longer valid to NT. With
the improved security, there has to be increased precision in system
definition (believe me I have learned the hard way <bg>).

                               bob



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11156 S3/Windows NT Setup
    03-Oct-92  11:08:48
Sb: #11137-Win NT Install/ mouse
Fm: Greg Smith 71175,2632
To: Robert Chronister 70363,246 (X)

I'm not sure I understand your question but if I remove the mouse completely
there still is a mouse pointer displayed. If I go into the control panel the
thing tells me there is no mouse device installed and to use the setup
program. The setup program merrily sets up a mouse but nothing happens when
the mouse is re-installed and the system power cycled. I can't see that a
mouse can be much of a security threat, in the worst case nothing happens or
else the mouse jumps around the screen strangely. They will have to get rid of
the dependancy on microsoft compatibility, I was really ticked when I had to
buy the Microsoft mouse and it not working added insult to pocket book injury.
Any suggestions would be appreciated. I am convinced the mouse driver isn't
being installed properly and that there is nothing wrong with my hardware.
Greg

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11162 S3/Windows NT Setup
    03-Oct-92  13:05:56
Sb: #11156-Win NT Install/ mouse
Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246
To: Greg Smith 71175,2632 (X)

Greg:

When I suggested removing the mouse, I was referring to the bus mouse.  NT
works best with MS serial mouse.  I am certain that the beta release will
support more mice than MS.  As to security, it has to be everywhere hence, all
hardware becomes significant.

                               bob

#: 11353 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  13:07:16
Sb: #11103-Win NT Install/ mouse
Fm: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642
To: - Visitor 71175,2632

greg,

I almost sure the presence of the bus mouse is the source of trouble.

Windows NT, actually the same algorithm applies to Windows too, queries the
presence of a mouse in the following order: bus, com1, com2. As you can see,
if there is a bus mouse in the machine, Windows NT will find that one first
(whether a mouse is connected or not), and thus terminate the search for a
mouse.

try the following, if possible, remove the bus card from the machine and see
whether Windows NT can find the serial mouse.

Hope this helps.

Sam Karroum [MS]

#: 11110 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  20:48:38
Sb: #10982-NT
Fm: - Visitor 76620,3675
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

I thought that DOS2NT helped bypass the problem with non-supported hardware?
Did that just get around non-supported CD-ROM drives?

Thanks, Jason

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11186 S3/Windows NT Setup
    03-Oct-92  17:16:20
Sb: #11110-NT
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: - Visitor 76620,3675 (X)

Jason,

<<Did that just get around non-supported CD-ROM drives?>>

Yep. that's all DOS2NT does. It's a means of installing NT from a CD-ROM drive
over a DOS compatible network, or DOS itself. You still need to have a
supported disk controller, video, motherboard, etc. if you want to be able to
boot and use NT.

Your best bet is to check the hardware compatability list that was shipped
with the CD, or download the latest version from lib 1. Maybe you can replace
your unsupported controller with one from the list.

Art

#: 11354 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  13:09:10
Sb: #11110-NT
Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643
To: - Visitor 76620,3675

The DOS2NT proceedure is used to bypass the need for [the setup portion of]
Windows NT to be able to recognize your CD-ROM drive and/or drive controller.
However, if setup has problems, odds are very good that the rest of Windows NT
will have problems.  If the drive controller is the problem and also controls
your hard drive, then odds are very good that this release of Windows NT will
not work on your hardware regardless of the installation meathod. Regards,
   -- Terence Hosken

#: 11369 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  13:56:45
Sb: #10654-Waiting...
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Peter Dennett 76470,540

Peter,

What is the error that you are getting when trying to install. What is the
SCSI adapter card you are using as well as the Network card, machine, HD's and
CD player.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11371 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  13:56:57
Sb: #10425-NCR 3450 w/NT
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: - Visitor 70720,602


It almost sounds like there is a video problem.  What type of video is in this
machine.  Do you have an external video board.

Let me know, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11372 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  13:57:02
Sb: NT Hangs w/ No Error Msg
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Dan Brownlee 72461,1321

Dan,

What SCSI adapter card are you using?

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11373 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  13:57:11
Sb: NT Installation crashing
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Doug Byrd 71043,725

Doug,

What SCSI card are you using?  What NIC card are you using? Is there any other
card in the system?

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11374 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  13:57:18
Sb: CopySource HD / CD
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Guenther Banholzer 100031,2473

Guenther,

This setup proceedure is unsupported by MS.  DOS2NT is the supported
installation method.

I remember another tread of this type from BoB Chanon 72727,2177. You may want
to contact him.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11375 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  13:57:25
Sb: Can't copy ntdetect.com
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Joe DeWitte 73667,325

Joe,

It sounds like the 845 driver masks the problem to a certain extent, but not
completly (ie.TMC 860)??? Have you tried installing on a drive other than the
1.3GB (maybe something smaller)?

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11377 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  13:57:41
Sb: MoreHELP: THE_DEC_GUY
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Tom Reynolds 72320,2243

Tom, How much memory is in this machine? What is the hardware configuration
with IRQ and IO addresses (shared memory addresses if there are any)?

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11380 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  13:58:09
Sb: WinNT install prob
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: - Visitor 76424,3161


What SCSI card is in the PS2?  Is it on the HCL? If not, we have found the
problem.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11381 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  13:58:15
Sb: Windows NT installation
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Sean Leary 76366,3640

Sean,

There has been a few threads about how to get flexboot and multiboot to work
together.  However, none are supported by MS today.  Try putting NTOSKRNL.exe
on the boot partition and see if it is recognized.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11378 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  13:57:48
Sb: WD1009 ESDI Controller
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Louis Bouchard 72301,3565

Louis,

How many cylndrs are on the HD.  If it is above 1024 we have found the
problem.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11389 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  15:01:02
Sb: #11378-WD1009 ESDI Controller
Fm: Alex Howard 73310,2237
To: na 71075,3225 (X)

Scott,

How 'bout if there are > 1024 physical cylinders, but the ESDI controller is
doing a translation, so that it tells the system there are < 1024 cylinders?
Does this make any difference?

Thanks,

-a.

#: 11391 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  15:19:27
Sb: NT on Epson 386/25+
Fm: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642
To: Kent Olsen 72360,3035 (X)

Kent,

What else is in the machine (peripherals, I/O cards, etc...) and their
settings?

It seems like there is an IRQ or a memory conflict somewhere.

Sam Karroum [MS]

#: 11392 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  15:19:35
Sb: Mouse install
Fm: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642
To: Mark Vlach 70044,2733

Mark,

In the Preliminary release of Windows NT, only mice that are 100% compatible
with Microsoft mouse are supported. However, before blaming it all on the
mouse, try looking for the following:

  1. IRQ conflict between the mouse and some other IRQ driven hardware.
  2. Is there a bus-mouse card in the machine? If one exists, make sure to
remove the card if you're using a serial mouse.
  3. If COM2 is available try using it.

Hope this helps. Sam Karroum [MS]

#: 11087 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  18:00:18
Sb: Addition. Device Drivers
Fm: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52
To: Darrell McCombs 70404,3722

Oops!  I'm not the one to ask about when the next release is due to ship.  I
sure would like to know that myself, though!

#: 11393 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  15:21:26
Sb: Addition. Device Drivers
Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643
To: Darrell McCombs 70404,3722

Darrell,

The second release of the SDK will be ready before the end of October and will
be sent directly to all registered owners of the first release.  (We've just
mailed a letter to all registered owners for address confirmation.  If you
don't receive the letter in the next two weeks, please call the Microsoft
Developer Services Team at 800-227-4679.)

There is further related information in library 1 in the file: beta.txt.

Regards,

  -- Terence Hosken [MS]

#: 11061 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  15:39:33
Sb: #10978-Loading NT
Fm: Issie Chaimovitch 70621,3344
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

Hi Art, me again.

I phoned ATI this week (local call :->) and was told that there would be an
upgrade program for owner of the old card.  Also the new card is not even
shipping yet.  (next few weeks).  Since you have a Vantage (ultra - VRAM) you
should qualify for the upgrade program as well.

Speak to you later

Issie

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11078 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  17:15:44
Sb: #11061-Loading NT
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Issie Chaimovitch 70621,3344 (X)

Issie,

<<Since you have a Vantage (ultra - VRAM) you should qualify for the upgrade
program as well.>>

That's really good to hear. Please let me know (if/when you find out) when the
upgrade is available. I'll be waiting eargerly. <g>

Art

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11144 S3/Windows NT Setup
    03-Oct-92  08:44:54
Sb: #11078-Loading NT
Fm: Issie Chaimovitch 70621,3344
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

Art, I was told the upgrades would not start until the end of November or
early December.  I'll let you know if I hear anything

Issie

#: 11395 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  15:24:44
Sb: Loading NT
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Steve Cramp - C/Systems 70471,137

Steve,

Sorry for the late response.  I have been out for quite awhile. Start Values
are used to determine what gets loaded when.  For example start values of 00
get loaded first (NTLDR) and start values of 01 are loaded after the memory
check, and start values of 02 are loaded with the Windows sub system, and
start values of 03 are services that can be loaded by the user.  And start
values of 04 are not loaded at all... Hope this help.  Note this is as of the
PDC release and not set in stone.  Do not change these values.

Regards, Scott Suhy[MS]

#: 11396 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  15:24:58
Sb: Fatal error 0x0000006b
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Duffy Mazan 72177,3652

Duffy, The PS/2 90 is on the list, however I am not sure if the SCSI adapter
that is in the machine is on the list. The 6b error (phase 1 process
initialization failed) will occur if the Hardware is not recognized or there
is a conflict--depending on the adapter. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11121 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  23:04:02
Sb: Security Init. Failure
Fm: Bill Tierney 70741,3041
To: ALL

Well, apparently the "Attempt to acquire low level mutix" error was a fluke.
My installation is now failing, quite regularly, before I even get to that
part.  The message I now get appears immediately after I enter my user name
and password (and password verification).  The message is in the form of a
dialog box stating:
          --------------------------------------------------------
          |              Non Critical Error                       |
          |                                                       |
          |     An error has occurred.                            |
          |                                                       |
          |     External library procedure SetAccountDomainSid    |
          |     reported the following error:                     |
          |                                                       |
          |     Error opening Local Security Policy               |
          |-------------------------------------------------------|
          |     Ignore          Retry          Cancel             |
          |-------------------------------------------------------|

The Retry option just return the same error, the Ignore option produces the
following message:
          --------------------------------------------------------
          | Setup failed to initialize security on your computer.|
          | Cannot proceed with install!                         |
          --------------------------------------------------------

My machine is a Northgate 386-33 (8meg, I know), an Adaptec 1542b SCSI host
adapter (200mb Maxtor SCSI hd), and Toshiba TXM-3301 CD-ROM.

Bill Tierney

#: 11352 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  13:07:08
Sb: #11121-Security Init. Failure
Fm: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642
To: Bill Tierney 70741,3041 (X)

Bill,

Defining a user at SETUP time is a convenient, but not a required step. Try
the following scenarios to see if that resolves the problem.

  1. Enter a user name but _nothing_ else. You can always log later and define
a password.
  2. Don't create a user during SETUP. In other words, leave all fields blank.
You can log on as "administrator" later and create a user account.

Please let me know how this one goes.

Sam Karroum [MS}




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11404 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  17:57:01
Sb: #11352-Security Init. Failure
Fm: Bill Tierney 70741,3041
To: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 (X)

Acutally, I was able to bypass the security initialization failure as you
mentioned.

I am now faced with the following problem.  Everything goes great right up
until NT is about to create the Groups, and I get the following message:

       *** FATAL SYSTEM ERROR: 0x00000000D

       *** Attempt to acquire lower level mutix.

I have posted this as a seperate message prior to this reply.

Bill Tierney

#: 11163 S3/Windows NT Setup
    03-Oct-92  13:27:27
Sb: #10879-setup problem
Fm: tom lesniewski 73276,41
To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 (X)

I have tried to logon on as "administrator" as well as my user name I set up I
did not modify registry.ini "initial command" section.  my machine is a AST
Premium II 386/33 with 12 Meg of memory I have tried a reinstall but still NO
JOY. Any help would be appreciated

#: 11407 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  18:18:06
Sb: #11163-setup problem
Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643
To: tom lesniewski 73276,41 (X)

Tom,

I have seen this happen before.  Unfortunately, I have not been able to
duplicate the problem... a reinstallation has always fixed things up.  The
only things I can think of right now are:

1. You may be changing something in the registry.ini that you should not. 2.
This may be a manifestation of some hardware incompatibility.  (Your base
machine is on our list, but you haven't mentioned details like drive
controllers, or add-on boards that might cause some form of conflict.)

If there is any more information you can provide, it may be helpful.
Meanwhile, I'll continue to look into possible causes.

Regards,
   -- Terence Hosken [MS]

#: 11414 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  19:47:38
Sb: FD1800 driver anamoly
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: - Visitor 76114,264


You need to copy the fd1800.sys file to the winnt\system\drivers directory on
the HD after you do the DOS2NT batch file that copies all of the files to the
HD.

Regard, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11415 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  19:47:43
Sb: NT Setup Problem
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Daniel Appleman 70303,2252

Daniel,

Send it to me (scott suhy) on this forum as a message.

Thanks, Scott Suhy[MS]

#: 11096 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  18:41:28
Sb: Mutix?
Fm: Bill Tierney 70741,3041
To: ALL

OK, here's the deal.

My first attempt at installing NT resulted in the TRAP 0000000E Page Fault.
This was resolved by following the instructions to "diskcopy" the 5 1/4 inch
disk to the 3 1/2 (doing the CMOS stuff).

The next attempt seem to go pretty well, to a point.

While NT was copying all of the fonts, dlls, and everything else during the
graphics setup (after I answered all the user and password questions) I
received a STOP dialog box containing the following:

   |-----------------------------------------------------------------------
   |    lsass.exe - Application Error                                     |
   |    The instruction at "0x00000000" referenced memory at "0x00000000".|
   |    The memory could not be "read".                                   |
   |----------------------------------------------------------------------|

The strange thing was, while the dialog was displayed, the copying was still
happening behind it.  I click the ok button, and the copying continued. When
it reached 100%, I got the following message:

            *** FATAL SYSTEM ERROR: 0x00000000d
            *** Attempt to acquire low level mutix.

I have a northgate 386-33 with 8 meg memory (I know, more on the way), an
Adaptec 1542b SCSI controller (200mb SCSI Maxtor HD, and a Toshiba TMX-3301
CD-ROM.                     Any ideas?

Bill Tierney

#: 11418 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  19:48:06
Sb: #11096-Mutix?
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Bill Tierney 70741,3041

Bill,

This is very unusual. lsass is the local security authority subsystem.

Let me know if additional memory solves your problem.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11095 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  18:22:15
Sb: NT Install Failure
Fm: paul reiner 71411,113
To: sysop (X)

I have an AST 486/33TE with an ADAPTEC 1740 controller / seagate 1.3 gig scsi
drive. I also have a headland tech (v7) svga card and a nec scsi cdrom, and a
scsi bernoulli.

The NT boot disk boots ok and proceeds to recognize my adaptec controller and
prompts me for express or custom, no matter what I choose, I get the error
message, cannot recognize hard drive(s). Check cables...

My drive is > 1024 cylinders and the controller is in "enhanced" mode.

HELP!!!!.   This is no idle plea for assistance.

I can find no obvious reasons for failure and I refuse to believe that >1024
cyls arent supported.  This topic is as old as the Windows
 OS/2 debate.

Would some kind hearted, overworked, yet severely underpaid demi-god swoop
down and provide DETAILED reasons for this insanity and provide a solution
(please no more hacks... Ive already got OS/2 2)

#: 11419 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  19:48:13
Sb: #11095-NT Install Failure
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: paul reiner 71411,113

Paul,

Try the controller in standard mode and see if you get anywhere.

The 1024 limit goes as follows:

Some controller cards get around this by implementing a translation scheme in
the onboard controller BIOS. Windows NT (and other protected mode OS's) must
duplicate the code found in these BIOS chips inorder to duplicate this
behavior. Unfortunately, there are many ways of performing this translation
and thus we must incorporate all of these schemes in our standard AT disk
driver.  As you have probably guessed by now, we have not included such
support for all known translation schemes.

Some controllers implement this translation in hardware thus it is totally
transparent to the system allowing the standard driver will work unchanged.
Consult your controller's documentation to see if such translation is
performed by the BIOS or the hardware.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11009 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  09:46:34
Sb: DELL DGX
Fm: David J. Plunkett 71163,2122
To: ALL

I've got a DELL 486D/66, a 66Mhz 486 with a Super VGA card. I've installed the
DELL 256 color windows display driver and setup tells me I'm using "DELL DGX
1280x1024, 256 colors". However, I don't believe I'm running in hi-rez mode,
and windows still reports only 16 colors available.

I've checked that the two files \winnt\system\drivers\dell_dgx.sys and
\winnt\system\dell_dgx.dll exist.

What's wrong?

Thanks,
dave

#: 11420 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  19:48:25
Sb: #11009-DELL DGX
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: David J. Plunkett 71163,2122 (X)

David,

This is what we know, boot from DOS and try to disable the drivers and see if
you see a difference.

For a Dell machine with the DELL DGX frame buffer, the board will be
automatically detected. The drivers used for this device are
\winnt\system\drivers\dell_dgx.sys and \winnt\system\dell_dgx.dll. To disable
the dell_dgx driver directly from Windows NT or MS-DOS, rename dell_dgx.sys to
dell_dgx.old.  The standard VGA driver will then be used.

Known Bugs: * When going to fullscreen and coming back, the mouse pointer is a
big black "blob" until the pointer crosses over a window boundary (which cause
windows to repaint the cursor). This is because the pointer is not
reinitialized properly coming back from fullscreen.  The cursor may also be a
large white square instead of an underline cursor (for similar reasons).

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11390 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  15:18:20
Sb: Setup Toolkit for NT
Fm: John Kercheval 70742,3147
To: All


Will the NT version of the Setup Toolkit be ready for the SDK release due in
October?

What is the most direct route to discuss the setup toolkit with its
development staff (not evangelists or marketing folks)?

How extensively does the NT registration database differ from the Windows 3.1
for DOS registration database?


Questions, questions...

                               jbk




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11421 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  19:48:35
Sb: #11390-Setup Toolkit for NT
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: John Kercheval 70742,3147 (X)

John,

Repost your question to MSWIN32.  They will help you with development
concerns.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11366 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  13:37:39
Sb: AHA-1510, ESDI, co-exist
Fm: Lawrence T. Hardiman 74766,1304
To: all


Before getting a CD-ROM, I wanted to be sure it would be compatible with
WinNT. The NEC 84 drive is compatible with WinNT. That's the good news.

The bad news is that I *think* I may have a problem with my base
configuration.  The machine is a generic 486/33 clone with an ESDI controller,
Maxstor ESDI drive, 2 floppy, Colorado 120 tape, ... What I am told is that
SCSI and ESDI do not mix; that one can't have an ESDI controller and a SCSI
controller in the same box.

But there is hope! I was also told that the Adaptec AHA-1510 SCSI controller
is made specifically for mixed ESDI and SCSI environments; that it is intended
specifically for the CD-ROM in an otherwise ESDI machine.

The *real* bad news is that the AHA-1510 controller is not listed in the
compatibility lists I have seen.

What's the scoop, please.




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11422 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  19:48:42
Sb: #11366-AHA-1510, ESDI, co-exist
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Lawrence T. Hardiman 74766,1304

Lawrence,

You are correct. The 1510 is not on the current list.  It will not work with
NT.  Try one of the following:

Adaptec: AHA-1540b AHA-1542b AHA-1640 AHA-1740 Future Domain: TMC-845 TMC-850,
TMC-850M(ER) MCS-700 (7) TMC-1660 (8) TMC-1680 (9) TMC-7000EX IBM: IBM SCSI
Host Adapter (10) Maynard: 16 Bit SCSI Adapter (11) NCR: NCR 53C700

I have not heard of a problem with SCSI and ESDI in the same box. I have one
here in front of me and it is working fine.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11099 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  18:56:15
Sb: #10979-flexboot - DOS not valid
Fm: David Hayden 70444,30
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

The bootsec.dos was bad. The dos2nt.bat file does some strange things with it,
so I just deleleted the sec files and copied out part of dos2nt.bat to force
the sectors, worked like a charm. I think it safest if you see the bat file go
into debug twice. It didn't do that until I erased the saved sectors... Thanks
for the reply anyway.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11185 S3/Windows NT Setup
    03-Oct-92  17:12:10
Sb: #11099-flexboot - DOS not valid
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: David Hayden 70444,30

David,

Glad to hear that you worked things out. One thing to bear in mind if you need
to reinstall NT again later. All of the NT files and directories should be
deleted before reinstalling. This includes the WINNT, MSTOOLS, and the boot
files (NTLDR, bootsec.dos, *.nt, etc).

Art

#: 11430 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  20:28:31
Sb: #11185-flexboot - DOS not valid
Fm: David Hayden 70444,30
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

'fraid I learned that the hard way. Thanks as always...

#: 11370 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  13:56:52
Sb: 6B and 1E Errors
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Tom Gentry 76507,3033 (X)

Tom,

You are submitting a private message to the WINNT alias. I can help you if you
desire, however you must make the message readable.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11468 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  05:22:13
Sb: #11370-6B and 1E Errors
Fm: Tom Gentry 76507,3033
To: na 71075,3225 (X)

Scott, I'm not sure what you mean by private.  I'll retry.  Thanks.
Tom G.

#: 11469 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  05:25:01
Sb: 6B and 1E Errors
Fm: Tom Gentry 76507,3033
To: Jay Vernon 71075,640 (X)

Jay, I'm back in the country now and I have written a narrative of my attempts
to install WinNT on my AST 486/33 EISA Tower (and EISA non-Tower).  It is
fairly lengthy.  If it is OK, I can fax it to you.  If I need to send via the
Forum let me know and I will cut it back a bit.  Let me know the fax number if
that's OK.  Thanks for your help.
Tom

#: 11470 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  05:25:22
Sb: 6B and 1E Errors
Fm: Tom Gentry 76507,3033
To: Jay Vernon 71075,640 (X)

Jay, I'm back in the country now and I have written a narrative of my attempts
to install WinNT on my AST 486/33 EISA Tower (and EISA non-Tower).  It is
fairly lengthy.  If it is OK, I can fax it to you.  If I need to send via the
Forum let me know and I will cut it back a bit.  Let me know the fax number if
that's OK.  Thanks for your help.
Tom

#: 11085 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  17:52:14
Sb: #10185-NT ESDI Install
Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643
To: derek wade 70604,3002 (X)

Derek,

No, Windows NT does not support your Ultrastore controller at this time, and
yes, there is a problem with more than 1024 cylendars that are not being
mapped [by a supported controller].  It appears to me that you won't be able
to use your current configuration with the current release.  Sorry to be the
bearer of bad news.  The fact that the CD-ROM is not visible is not a problem
unless you want to read additional files from the CD-ROM.  In that event, the
work-around (assuming everything else were working) would be to boot DOS to
copy files.

Regards,
  -- Terence Hosken [MS]

#: 11386 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  14:51:05
Sb: #11085-NT ESDI Install
Fm: Alex Howard 73310,2237
To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 (X)

Terrence,

Forgive my dumb fingers.  My ESDI controller (WD1007V-SE2) is using the
translate facility to tell the system it's _less than_ 1024 cylinders, not
more than 1024.

Please check with Tom Hazel, Todd Albertson, et al, as I've uploaded a 54 page
MSD report and a 481K Registry.txt report so that the developers can figure
out what's wrong with my system.  So far, after 2 months (or more), nobody
knows <g>.

-a.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11475 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  07:20:44
Sb: #11386-NT ESDI Install
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Alex Howard 73310,2237

Alex,

<<So far, after 2 months (or more), nobody knows <g>.>>

So how's the check for an I/O port conflict or overlap looking?

Art

#: 11387 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  14:53:02
Sb: #11085-NT ESDI Install
Fm: Alex Howard 73310,2237
To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 (X)

Terrence,

BTW, it's not so much that NT does _not_ see my CD ROM, it shows up as a CD
icon in NT's FileMan, and plays audio CDs in the NT CD Player, but even though
FileMan sees and shows the CD, it cannot read data.  All it does do is ask if
I want to format the media in drive "F:" (the CD).

Curious, no?

-a.

#: 11086 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  17:52:22
Sb: #10243-NT ESDI Install
Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643
To: Alex Howard 73310,2237 (X)

Alex,

The CD-ROM and hard drives are not necessarily directly interrelated, no.
However, if the same controller were being used for both, that would be a
common denominator.  Having an unsupported CD-ROM or controller for the CD-ROM
will prevent you from doing the graphical install as well as from being able
to access the CD-ROM after a DOS2NT setup.  I didn't mean to imply that a
separate problem with a separate hard drive controller would hinder access to
a supported CD-ROM configuration.

I hope that clarifies things a bit,
   -- Terence Hosken [MS]



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11139 S3/Windows NT Setup
    03-Oct-92  08:37:45
Sb: #11086-NT ESDI Install
Fm: Alex Howard 73310,2237
To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 (X)

Terence,

It does clarify things ... a bit <g>.  But my ESDI HD controller and the HD
are using a translation routine to tell the system it's > 1024 cylinders.
Even Norton's Calibrate says so.  That should eliminate the > 1224 cylinders
(possible) problem, no?  And the CD Tech Porta Drive with FD TM850 SCSI
controller are, after all, not only supported, but tacitly recommended by MS,
as per the coupons sent to all, both after doing the Win 3.1 and SDK/DDK
betas, and with the CD for NT.

So all conditions are met properly, and still no success.  I know I am not the
only one with this particular problem, and there are going to be more when the
beta comes out later this month.  I just wanted to solve it for me, MS, and
the others who come after me.

Todd Albertson and I worked together one Friday evening and got it working.
Then, like a fool, I backed up the NT setup to tape, wiped it from my E:
partition, and tried the Graphical install, since I then had NT "seeing" data
on the CD.  That didn't work.  I felt confident that bringing NT back from
tape would allow data reading, but that was not the case.  It no longer
worked.  That baffled me even more, as it did Todd.

Nobody seems to know what the problem is.  But I did hope that sending the MSD
report (54 pages) and the Registry text file (481K) up to you all would
provide some insight.

Ah well.  Thanks anyway for your interest and help.  I'll just have to wait
and see.

-a.

#: 11217 S3/Windows NT Setup
    04-Oct-92  09:19:25
Sb: Fail to logon
Fm: Thomas Huetter 100015,3554
To: SYSOP (X)

Hi, folks!

I received the SDK CD about 2 weeks ago, installed the whole bundle, and
everything seemed to work OK. Had to do the DOS2NT though, cause my CD-ROM
drive is not the SCSI kind if thing.

Today, however, I ran into the following problem: Booting up NT, I get to the
logon screen, enter my user name and my password. The system then gives me the
old hour-glass for about 20 seconds and comes up with a "Logon Message: Unable
to log you on for some reason. Please consult your administrator." Same thing
when trying to logon as administrator.

Doing a CHKDSK /F on the drive where NT resides, it said:
   "D:\WINNT\SYSTEM\CONFIG\SECURITY.LOG
    Assignment error, corrected file size".
    (Freely translated from German) Still no go with the NT logon! The only
thing I changed since yesterday was to install a QIC-80 streamer drive. But
that was a DOS-only install, using the floppy connection, no software drivers,
no change in any settings. I don't remember any system crashes that could have
caused the file corruption. (Though this might have happened <G>).

For the rest of my config: 486/33-clone with 16 Meg and AMI-BIOS, 200 Meg C: +
120 Meg D: (both IDE), both floppies, ET4000, Mitsumi CD-ROM with its own
controller, the tape drive is a Colorado 120/250 Meg hooked onto the
IDE-HD/FDController.

Any hints or ideas would be really appreciated. Thanks!

Thomas

#: 11487 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  07:52:34
Sb: #11217-Fail to logon
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Thomas Huetter 100015,3554

Thomas,

This c:\nt\system\config is where your registry lives. It sounds like yours is
corrupted.  You should reinstall. In future releases there will be an easy way
for an administrator to fix this.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11132 S3/Windows NT Setup
    03-Oct-92  06:42:34
Sb: UltraStor 14F
Fm: Gerald N. Miller 70302,1335
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

Great, thanks for the help.

GM

#: 11409 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  19:29:41
Sb: #10984-UltraStor 14F
Fm: C Straghalis [UltraStor] 71005,1655
To: Gerald N. Miller 70302,1335

Gerald,


       The 14F driver will be available on the next, "true beta" release
(slated for later this month, I hear).

Regards,

Chris



There are 2 Replies.

#: 11433 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  20:45:51
Sb: #11409-UltraStor 14F
Fm: Chuck MCCorvey 76050,350
To: C Straghalis [UltraStor] 71005,1655

Will there be a driver for the UltraStor 12F as well?  Also, will it support
the 63-sector mapping option so that I can use all of my >1024 cylinder drive
in BOTH DOS and NT?

Chuck

#: 11493 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  08:09:03
Sb: #11409-UltraStor 14F
Fm: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52
To: C Straghalis [UltraStor] 71005,1655

Chris -

Two requests: any idea on whether this will enable use of a DAT unit
(specifically, the Maynard/Archive/Python 2gig) with the 14F/NT?

Also, how can I get some info on the 14F, and which national distributors
stock it?  The ones I deal with most don't carry it.  My fax # is
[phone], or email me here.

Thank you muchly.  (grammatical faux pas noted)

#: 11253 S3/Windows NT Setup
    04-Oct-92  12:09:50
Sb: Adaptec 152X support????
Fm: Rod Montrose [Proj Tech] 73337,1324
To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643

I didn't see the Adaptec 152X SCSI controllers on the NT supported list.
Will they be? Or should I go out and buy a new controller?

#: 11423 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  19:48:49
Sb: #11253-Adaptec 152X support????
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Rod Montrose [Proj Tech] 73337,1324 (X)

Rod,

You may want to call Adaptec.  They have an excellent support staff and should
be able to answer the question.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11428 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  20:21:27
Sb: #11423-Adaptec 152X support????
Fm: Rod Montrose [Proj Tech] 73337,1324
To: na 71075,3225 (X)

While Adaptec has an excellent support staff (when you can reach them)
I was hoping Microsoft would know more about supported hardware with
NT than Adaptec would.
Is there a list of hardware that will be supported in the upcoming
release??
If I am going to develop using NT I want to know if I need to get
a new SCSI card or not.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11473 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  05:46:04
Sb: #11428-Adaptec 152X support????
Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246
To: Rod Montrose [Proj Tech] 73337,1324

Having discussed SCSI boards with numerous folks at MS and at Adaptec, will
only say that the Apaptec folks are working in conjunction with the MS folks
to continue developing strong SCSI support for windows, Dos & NT. (don't know
about OS2).  I have had not a single bit of trouble getting NT to recognize
drivers, cd-roms, tape backups etc.  Other systems work well but I am very
pleased with the Adaptec.  Just a point of view!

                               bob

#: 11556 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  14:57:29
Sb: #11515-Adaptec 152X support????
Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246
To: Rod Montrose [Proj Tech] 73337,1324

Rod:

Am using the 1542B.  have 2 harddrives, a tape backup, a cd-rom & a bernoulli
removeable on it.  Works well even given the fact that i have 2 IDE harddrives
as well. <BG>.

                               bob

#: 11559 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  15:36:35
Sb: #10884-Install wont work
Fm: Jochen Ruhland 100023,3147
To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 (X)

Hey, now it works...
There was a wrong jumper on the Adaptec Board, dealing with IRQ's.
Now that it is correct, the normal Setup with Disk&CD works fine.

Interesting that NT seems to work partialy with the CD-ROM, breaking
down in the middle of the Setup.

#: 11570 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  18:12:20
Sb: FD TMC-1680 & NT
Fm: Steve Dirickson 70313,3252
To: All

I would like to hear from ANYONE that has successfully installed NT on a
system with a Future Domain TMC-1680 SCSI adapter driving a SCSI hard drive
and a SCSI CD-ROM drive.  This combination is advertised to work, but so far I
(and several others) have had no success.

If you have *exactly* this configuration working, I would love to receive (by
EMail preferably, to minimize noise) your system configuration: Address, IRQ,
etc. settings for the TMC-1680, Hard drive manufacturer/model and SCSI target
ID, CD-ROM manufacturer/model & SCSI target ID, plus CPU type, BIOS
manufacturer & date, & VLSI chipset manufacturer.

Thanks.

#: 11572 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  18:13:56
Sb: #10926-Windows NT
Fm: Jon Turner 70651,437
To: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 (X)

Thanks, I will do it.

#: 11397 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  15:32:43
Sb: NCR 3450 and NT Install
Fm: Jim Burks 73627,753
To:  70720,602

Robert,

Were you able to get NT to load directly from the CD using the floppy boot
diskette included with the NT prerelease or did you have to use the
DOSTONT.BAT file?

My NCR 3450 (the special package) cannot find any CD-Rom attached using the
boot diskette, and I don't have anything else with a CD-Rom driver compatible
with the NCR (that I know of).

Jim Burks Promus Memphis, TN 901-748-7954 or 800-NET-OPS4

#: 11574 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  18:17:32
Sb: #11500-NCR 3450 and NT Install
Fm: Irven Davies [CompuSys] 73500,2746
To: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 (X)

I also have a NCR 3450 system where the floppy install disk will not find the
SCSI controller even though it is listed in the MCA setup as a 53C700.  AS
Microsoft had NT operating on NCR 3450 at the PDK I assume the correct
drivers exist somewhere ?

ILD


#: 11446 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  22:12:13
Sb: Error 0x69 on 1st boot
Fm: DeVon C Jarvis 71501,2450
To: All

I am having this same problem. I have a Zeos 386/33 with Future Domain
TMC-1680 & Fujitsu 2624FA (520MB) drive, and a Toshiba 3301 CD drive. I
couldn't use the normal setup. Had to use DOS2NT. Now I get the 0x69 and the
message 'Phase 1 I/O Init failed'. I have the controller set to all defaults
(IRQ 5, CA00 bios address, 140-14f I/O address. Any answers?? Thankx in
advance...

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11480 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  07:42:27
Sb: #11446-Error 0x69 on 1st boot
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: DeVon C Jarvis 71501,2450

DeVon,

<<Now I get the 0x69 and the message 'Phase 1 I/O Init failed'.>>

There error means that there was a "failure to communicate" with your hard
drive and or controller. I took a quick look at the hardware compatability
list. The 1680 is listed, but mentions that a new driver is needed. I'd
suggest you look in lib 2 for the FD1800.ZIP (I think that's the file with all
the FD drivers) and see if an updated driver will help you out.

Art

#: 11578 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  18:37:08
Sb: #11480-Error 0x69 on 1st boot
Fm: DeVon C Jarvis 71501,2450
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

Thanks for the info. I got the file and I'll let you know how it goes!

#: 11151 S3/Windows NT Setup
    03-Oct-92  10:21:04
Sb: Win NT Sys Requirements
Fm: Norman T Cooper 76600,606
To: Sysop (X)

I'm in the process of upgrading my hard drive and want to allow
enough disk space for installing Windows NT when it becomes
available. Could you tell me the system requirements for
Windows NT, and when you might expect to have it on the market?

Thanks...Norman

#: 11416 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  19:47:52
Sb: #11151-Win NT Sys Requirements
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Norman T Cooper 76600,606 (X)

Norman,

First quarter '93.

Make sure that your machine is on the supported list. Make real sure that your
SCSI card is on the supported list. Try not to get a drive with more than 1024
cylndrs. Make real sure that your network card is on the supported list. It is
best to have more than 12 meg of memory for the early release.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11441 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  21:16:26
Sb: #11416-Win NT Sys Requirements
Fm: Norman T Cooper 76600,606
To: na 71075,3225 (X)

Scott,

Appreciate your reply on Widows NT System Requirements. Still need to know the
amount of hard disk space needed to install.

Thanks...Norman

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11477 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  07:30:03
Sb: #11441-Win NT Sys Requirements
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Norman T Cooper 76600,606

Norman,

<<Appreciate your reply on Widows NT System Requirements. Still need to know
the amount of hard disk space needed to install.>>

You should have at least 100 Mb of free space if you want to install NT and
the SDK. if you expect to build all of the sample programs and develop your
own applications look to use about a 200 Mb partition just for NT. The NT
paging file will dynamically grow in size. If you run out of disk space the
system may experiance performance problems.

Art

#: 11625 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  06:33:19
Sb: #11477-Win NT Sys Requirements
Fm: Norman T Cooper 76600,606
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

Arthur,

Thanks for the info on Windows NT. I'm looking forward to it being released.

                ...Norman

#: 11626 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  06:33:33
Sb: #11507-Win NT Sys Requirements
Fm: Norman T Cooper 76600,606
To: na 71075,3225 (X)

Scott,

Thanks for the info on Windows NT. I'm looking forward to its release,

        ...Norman

#: 11589 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  21:03:21
Sb: in-2000
Fm: richard wadsworth 76447,1673
To: all

when are in-2000 cards going to be supported



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11631 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  06:56:19
Sb: #11589-in-2000
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: richard wadsworth 76447,1673

Richard,

A new HCL will be out shortly. Until then read the following:

Device Driver Requests:

Our standard means of releasing drivers is with our CD releases.  We also
upload fixed, updated, and new drivers to Forum: WinNT, Lib 2.  We are
currently making every attempt to keep this library updated with drivers as
they become available.  If you have hardware that is not currently supported ,
or does not have a driver posted in WinNT, Lib 2; please make a device driver
request by filling out the hwfeed.txt form and mail it to us at
>internet:[e-mail].  Please be aware that because of our support
demands right now, this is a one way alias; we are not likely to respond
directly to you to confirm that we have received your request.

The hardware compatibility list can be found in MSWIN32, Lib 17. 0692hw.txt.

Hwfeed.txt can be found in MSWIN32, Lib 17; or WINNT, Lib 1.

In order to send mail to the address mentioned via CompuServe, you have to:

 * Leave the forum.
 * At any "!" prompt, enter GO MAIL.
 * Mail your request to:
 ">internet:[e-mail]"

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11440 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  21:09:11
Sb: Fatal System Error 0x069
Fm: Tron Black 70054,1007
To: ALL

I have a 486 33Mhz computer with a SCSI drive on an IN2000 controller.  I
installed using the DOS2NT.  I followed the instructions in the .TXT file.
When I boot, I get a Fatal System Error 0x00000069.  Then it says Phase 1 I/O
Initialization Error.  I have pulled all of the cards except the drive
controller.

Any ideas?


There are 2 Replies.

#: 11479 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  07:38:17
Sb: #11440-Fatal System Error 0x069
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Tron Black 70054,1007

Tron,

<<Then it says Phase 1 I/O Initialization Error.>>

I hate to be the one to break the bad news to you, but the IN2000 SCSI card is
not supporved by NT. The 0x69 error is a error msg telling you that NT is
unable to access your hard disk drive controller. In this case the IN2000.

There is a file in lib 1 called 0992HW.TXT which lists the currently supported
hardware. You might want to take a look and see if you can swap or buy a
replacement SCSI disk controller.

Art

#: 11484 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  07:52:17
Sb: #11440-Fatal System Error 0x069
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Tron Black 70054,1007

Tron,

You must use a SCSI controller that is on the Hardware Compatibility list.  If
you do not have one then you are limited to the DOS2NT installation.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11562 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  16:00:33
Sb: #11484-Fatal System Error 0x069
Fm: Waterford Inst. 76244,1557
To: na 71075,3225 (X)

I have installed Windows NT using DOS2NT.  It seems to be accessing my drive
up until the point that I receive a Fatal System Error 0x00000069.  Does this
mean I cannot run NT until the controller is supported.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11632 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  06:56:26
Sb: #11562-Fatal System Error 0x069
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Waterford Inst. 76244,1557

Waterford,

Yes, this is true. If there is no driver written, it will not work.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11452 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  23:13:57
Sb: Swap volume
Fm: James Mansion 100020,1650
To: All

Probably been said before but:

For my first install with DOS2NT I set up a 30Mb partition to hold the swap
file, which I made nearly that big.  When I came to re-install (having copied
the 5.25" to 3.5" etc) I found that I could not direct it to overwrite the
existing swap file, and (most annoyingly) there isn't a nice friendly 'change
swap location' option in the admin tools (or is there?  I haven't found one).

James



There are 2 Replies.

#: 11482 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  07:48:53
Sb: #11452-Swap volume
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: James Mansion 100020,1650

James,

<<For my first install with DOS2NT I set up a 30Mb partition to hold the swap
file, which I made nearly that big.  When I came to re-install (having copied
the 5.25" to 3.5" etc) I found that I could not direct it to overwrite the
existing swap file, and (most annoyingly) there isn't a nice friendly 'change
swap location' option in the admin tools (or is there?  I haven't found
one).>>

First things first... limiting the paging file growthPby placing it in a small
partition is not a good idea. The paging file grows dynamically. If you limit
the size it can grow too you may experiance perormance problems and possible
(not likly, but possible) system hangs.

Secondly during the DOS2NT install you are supposed to copy a system.drive
letter in the winnt\system\config directory to indicate your preference for
the paging file location. The paging file is a minimum of 20 Mb in size. If
you are not using that particular version of the file just delete it. NT will
recreate it where ever you told it to be placed. The DOS2NT also uses a
temporary paging.sys file in C:\ of 10 Mb. After the install you can delete
this file.

Third, there is an entry in the registry which contains the location of the
swap file. If you cange it and then rewtart the system the paging file will be
created there.PYou can then manually delete the old file.

Art

#: 11558 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  15:18:29
Sb: #11482-Swap volume
Fm: James Mansion 100020,1650
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

OK:  I hadn't found the registry or the control panel thing!  I'll fiddle with
that.

Re size: 30MB is quite enough - the manual says to use 20 and the machine has
16Mb physical.  I don't want to suffer from accidents with the swapper running
away with itself.  Too many years OS/2 experience I guess.

I did do the DOS2NT thing.  The problem was with the second install I wanted
to carry on using the same file - but NT noticed that there was not enough
space on the volume.  It did NOT notice that this was caused by a file that it
would be creating for the swap file anyway, which is what I am complaining
about.  Overwriting the existing file or 'just going ahead anyway' is not an
option in the standard install.

James




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11633 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  06:58:00
Sb: #11558-Swap volume
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: James Mansion 100020,1650

Ray,

<<Re size: 30MB is quite enough - the manual says to use 20 and the machine
has 16Mb physical.  I don't want to suffer from accidents with the swapper
running away with itself.  Too many years OS/2 experience I guess.>>

The current maximum for the paging file in this release is 50 Mb so it will nt
run away on you. Not yet anayway. But this release *really* does need a pretty
hefty paging file size. The 20 Mb is the minimum needed if you expect to boot
NT.

<<I did do the DOS2NT thing.  The problem was with the second install I wanted
to carry on using the same file - but NT noticed that there was not enough
space on the volume.>>

I see what you are saying. But it has been noted before that if you reinstall
NT you should delete *all* of the previous SDK. This includes the directorys
and NT boot files as well as the paging file.

Art

#: 11483 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  07:52:12
Sb: #11452-Swap volume
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: James Mansion 100020,1650

James,

Have you tried the Control Panel | System | Virtual Memory option?

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11330 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  08:02:14
Sb: NCR 3450 installation
Fm: Jim Burks 73627,753
To: sysop

We have an NCR 3450 (dual 486/50DX processors) with 32MB memory, specially
configured by NCR for Windows NT (including SCSI CD-ROM drive).

The problem is that the Windows NT installation diskette cannot find the
CD-Rom drive.

I saw NT running on a 3450 at the Windows NT conference in the Microsoft
booth.

Any ideas on how to get NT loaded on one.

#: 11486 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  07:52:29
Sb: #11330-NCR 3450 installation
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Jim Burks 73627,753

Jim,

What SCSI adapter are you using? What error message are you seeing?

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11557 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  15:17:31
Sb: #11486-NCR 3450 installation
Fm: Jim Burks 73627,753
To: na 71075,3225 (X)

The SCSI adapter is an NCR c710.

The error message is something to the effect of "No CD-ROM found". This comes
from the boot diskette shipped with the MS NT CD-ROM.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11644 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  08:39:27
Sb: #11557-NCR 3450 installation
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Jim Burks 73627,753

Jim,

The only NCR disk controller currently supported is the NCR53C700.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11560 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  15:36:39
Sb: German Keyboard
Fm: Jochen Ruhland 100023,3147
To: all

Some strange behavior with NT in Germany.
Installed NT via DOS2NT (when ther'll be SB-PRO CD-RON in NT???),
used Control to change to German Keyboard.
Launched a MS-DOS Prompt from the Main Group.
Now I got a 'Z' between the 'T' and the 'U', but I got no German Umlauts
(Ae, Oe, Ue) and (probably more annoying) no '\' nor '{'.
Maybe someone hasn't finished his homework, doing only half the job?
Comments requested
Jochen Ruhland


There are 2 Replies.

#: 11628 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  06:42:22
Sb: #11560-German Keyboard
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Jochen Ruhland 100023,3147

Jochen,

Remember that the version released at the Win32 PDC in San Francisco is not an
international version;  that is there is no support for international devices
such as keyboards, etc.  Unicode is in there, although there is not a Unicode
font in the package yet.

I do not see any support listed for German keyboards in this release. As a
result the problems you are experiencing can be expected, and they should go
away as we add support for more keyboards.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11650 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  09:12:32
Sb: #11560-German Keyboard
Fm: Carl W. Brown 71250,1322
To: Jochen Ruhland 100023,3147

Jochen,

Only the US keyboards are supported at this time.  Other keyboards are
unpredictable.

Carl

#: 11076 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  17:15:02
Sb: Mouse Problems
Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643
To: Robert Beaubien 76662,2501

Robert,

Since Jay isn't about just now and I can't find any reference to your root
problem, could you reply with more details as to what this note is about? I'd
like to help, but I'm not sure from this note what the problem is. On the
possibility that it is a non-functional mouse, I'd suggest trying other irq
settings (possibly removing other, conflicting, hardware as a test.) Note that
only 100% microsoft compatible mice are supported with this release.

Once again, if there is anything else we can do for you, please give us some
more details,
    -- Terence Hosken [MS]

#: 11611 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  23:42:23
Sb: #11076-Mouse Problems
Fm: Robert Beaubien 76662,2501
To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 (X)

The problem is that my MICROSOFT Bus mouse won't work under NT when I use the
Bus mouse port on my STB PowerGraph Combo board.  It works fine under Win 3.1
but not under NT.  If I put in my original bus mouse port and disable the one
on the STB card, that works, but that is not what I want to do.  I need that
other slot.  The IRQ's are set up as follows: IRQ2= Bus Mouse IRQ3= Com2 IRQ4=
Com1 IRQ5= NE2000 compatible network card IRQ6= Floppy drives IRQ7= LPT1
IRQ11=Adaptec AHA-1542b SCSI controller

I am running a 486/33 motherboard with 256k of Cache made by QDI Corp.  I have
a Maxtor X4380s 340MB SCSI harddrive partitioned as C:=200Mb and d:=115Mb. Any
help would be appreciated.

Robert Beaubien

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11651 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  09:12:47
Sb: #11611-Mouse Problems
Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643
To: Robert Beaubien 76662,2501

Robert,

I see.  I'm afraid you are not going to like my answer.  The use of a
Microsoft inport mouse without the Microsoft inport card is not a supported
configuration.  It is the combination of the two elements that makes it work,
and if the combo-board is not 100.0% compatible, Windows NT may not function
correctly with it.  Since your configuration does work with the Microsoft
board, it seems there is a difference between it and your combo-board.  Before
giving up I would double check to see that there are no configuration options
for your STB board that might make a difference.

Regards,
   -- Terence Hosken [MS]

#: 11672 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  11:26:23
Sb: PS/2 NT Install Fails
Fm: Mike Snowden 100021,3015
To: Jay Vernon [Microsoft] 71075,640 (X)

I could just be spreading some FUD here, but I heard somewhere that if you
have an original version ps/2 80 motherboard,IBM gives you a free
upgrade if you want to do OS/2 - something about a duff switch in/out
of protected mode (?).  May be worth a check - especially since we
have 2 such boxes here!

#: 11685 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  13:23:15
Sb: Mess# 11487: Setup Prob
Fm: Thomas Huetter 100015,3554
To: Scott B. Suhy 71075,3225 (X)

Hello, Scott!

Well, I should have guessed it's time for a reinstall... everything went too
smooth to be true right from the start. But then again: what's ONE more
install, compared to the troubles other people have to go through. Still I'm
looking forward to the next release (hopefully coming soon also over here in
Germany).

By the way, I remember a few messages some time ago concerning support for the
Mitsumi CRMC CD-ROM. Would you put me on the list for that too, please. It IS
cheap (around my place also), still does a fine job! (I already mailed a
HWFEED, but am not sure what happens to all those wishes the kids send to MS.)

Anyway, thanx for your response and see you later,

Thomas

#: 11340 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  11:06:14
Sb: Adaptec 1740/Toshiba CD
Fm: Jeff Roberts 71501,2750
To: ALL

I'm trying to run the WinNT install, and the character-based setup is not
seeing the CD-ROM.  The adapter is an Adaptec 1740 with BIOS version 1.34. I
believe the drive is a Toshiba XM330.  During the install, the system says
"Scanning for Adaptec 174x", followed by "Found Adaptec 174x" in the middle of
the screen - it must know _something_ is out there!  Right after that, I get
the screen saying it can't find the CD-ROM.  The CD can be seen both under DOS
5 and OS2 1.3.  Any clues!!!!

(PS Yes, the CD is in and the drive is on!!! <g>)

#: 11403 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  17:54:02
Sb: #11340-Adaptec 1740/Toshiba CD
Fm: Clarke 75470,1676
To: Jeff Roberts 71501,2750 (X)

Jeff, what mode is the 1740 in? If it's in enhanced, I think some of the
suggestions I have heard hear are: Make sure sync neg. is off, as well as
disconnect.

You might try running the card in standard mode as well.

-Clarke


There are 2 Replies.

#: 11448 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  22:24:15
Sb: #11403-Adaptec 1740/Toshiba CD
Fm: Tim Smith 70313,1326
To: Clarke 75470,1676

Clarke,

      You mean to tell me that the toshiba XM3301, a SCSI-2 device, cannot
      handle sync neg??   If this is true then the drive is NOT SCSI-2 !!
      since it is a requirment.  I was planning on getting one of these
      drives since is was SCSI-2 as opposed to getting the NEC74 which
      was not.  Now I don't know..   Is the CD Tech Porta-drive any good?


                                            tim

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11494 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  08:11:14
Sb: #11448-Adaptec 1740/Toshiba CD
Fm: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52
To: Tim Smith 70313,1326

PMJI, but the CD Tech PortaDrive is an XM3301E, so it's the same thing.

#: 11618 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  03:37:59
Sb: #11448-Adaptec 1740/Toshiba CD
Fm: Clarke 75470,1676
To: Tim Smith 70313,1326

Tim, i've lost the beginning of the thread, but the XM-3201 and the TXM-3301
are tested devices. The IN2000 is not on the supported hardware list yet.

The debug script is trying to write a new master boot program. If it's
getting a write protected error, the only thing I can think of would be Virus
protection software?  Anybody else have any ideas on this?



#: 11687 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  13:43:35
Sb: #11448-Adaptec 1740/Toshiba CD
Fm: Clarke 75470,1676
To: Tim Smith 70313,1326 (X)

Tim, my SONY CDU541 is a SCSI-2 CD-ROM and it does not support sync neg. A
CD-ROM drive does'nt have a fast enough transfer rate to need sync transfer.
Only hard drives and tape drives have supported sync transfer so far that I
have seen.

-Clarke

#: 11474 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  06:59:25
Sb: #11403-Adaptec 1740/Toshiba CD
Fm: Jeff Roberts 71501,2750
To: Clarke 75470,1676

Woops!, Sorry - misleading information.  Took a closer look at the system. The
Toshiba Drive has an Adaptec BIOS, but the SCSI card in an LS2000. Doesn't
look like it's supported.  I tried the manual installation, DOS2NT (or
whatever it's called), and got a write failure when it was running the DEBUG
script.  Anyone have a clue on this???!!!

Thanks for the reply, Clarke.

#: 11406 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  18:03:43
Sb: #11340-Adaptec 1740/Toshiba CD
Fm: Clarke 75470,1676
To: Jeff Roberts 71501,2750 (X)

Jeff, what mode is the 1740 in? If it's in enhanced, I think some of the
suggestions I have heard hear are: Make sure sync neg. is off, as well as
disconnect.

You might try running the card in standard mode as well.

-Clarke


#: 11627 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  06:40:27
Sb: #11516-Adaptec 1740/Toshiba CD
Fm: paul mariotti 100064,3331
To: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 (X)

I had the same problem during NT installation; the problem went away when I
reinstalled DOS 5.0 on the boot disk (using SYS.COM) and erased the dual boot
files left by the graphic install program. It seems that DOS2NT thinks it is
changing a standard DOS start volume and not one that has already been changed
by setup. Try it, it should work. Paul Mariotti (CSC Europe)

#: 11695 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  14:10:52
Sb: rpc/dce compliance
Fm: aslam 70213,45
To: aslam

While browsing through the WindowsNT developers guide, I read about the rpc
technology based on OSF standards and being DCE compliant. However, I noticed
that the function names are not identical i.e. DCE rpc calls and NT rpc calls
providing similiar services have different function names. This, of course,
raises issues of ease of portability, transparency etc.

Am I missing something ?

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11721 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  17:52:02
Sb: #11695-rpc/dce compliance
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: aslam 70213,45

Aslam,

Repost your concern to the MSWIN32 forum.  WINNT is for usability issues.
MSWIN32 is for coding issues.

Thanks, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11425 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  20:00:07
Sb: TMC-850M setup problem.
Fm: REX DIETERLE 72261,3470
To: SYSOP (X)

A problem installing NT in graphics mode. I have a Denon DRD-253 which I
purchased from Microsoft 3 years ago. I upgraded from the tmc-840 SCSI card
which it came with to a TMC-850M which was listed as supported. However when
loading the graphics setup the card is recognized but gives a -Read Request
Failed ARC Status 8 Svb Status 0084 error when it tries to read from the
drive. The drive reads fine from DOS with the Ver 2.2 drivers supplied with
the board. Hope there is a solution to the problem.

#: 11658 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  09:32:19
Sb: #11425-TMC-850M setup problem.
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: REX DIETERLE 72261,3470 (X)

Rex,

That card has jumpers W1, W2 and W3 to configure shared memory addressing.
Could you be conflicting with another card in your system (ie. network or
Video)?

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11731 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  18:58:09
Sb: #11658-TMC-850M setup problem.
Fm: REX DIETERLE 72261,3470
To: na 71075,3225 (X)

Scott

Thanks I will try a new address. I appreciate the help.

Rex

#: 11736 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  19:47:15
Sb: #10919-WIN32NT for cowards
Fm: Tim Jones 70750,701
To: Robert Ira Lewy M.D. 76057,3307

Hi Dr. Lewy,

You can actually install Win32s/NT in CONJUNCTION WITH your existing DOS
5.0/Windows 3.1 installation as long as you have the free space available on
the disk.  I gave NT 12 MBytes of swap space and still had plenty of room on
my 250 MByte drive after the install was complete.  Just follow the
installation instructions for the graphical install (boot the floppy) and
select your C: partition (PRIMARY DOS) as the destination partition (the
install does not harm your existing system and will let you choose between DOS
(previously installed OS) and NT/Win32s at the next boot).

BTW - WinANSI works under NT if you remember to copy VBRUN100.DLL to the
\WINNT\SYSTEM directory.  Just don't try to view the file as the ANSI support
in the MS-DOS shell isn't 100% yet.

Also, could you please E-Mail me your address so I can forward out a
registered copy of the new 1.8 release?  We lost a harddrive during the storms
that followed Andrew and I can recover my registration database on the
temporary low capacity hard drive.

Tim Jones

#: 11555 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  14:51:46
Sb: #11537-Another Fatal Sys Err 69
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Eric Kitchen 70662,3433 (X)

Eric,

You will not be able to use this controller at this point in time.  Windows NT
requires a driver to communicate with the Controller just as OS/2 does.  To
insure that the controller is supported in the future please take the
following action:


At this time, we are not prepared to comment on the availability of support
for the devices you mention. When support is ready, we will post information
on this forum.  During this prerelease program, distribution of new device
drivers will be via official CD-ROM releases of Windows NT and the Win32 SDK.
We may opt to upload new device drivers to Lib 2 of the WINNT forum but this
does not imply a total commitment on our part.

Microsoft has established an internet alias to submit support requests for
devices not found on the Windows NT Hardware Compatibility List.  Please
download the file HWFEED.TXT from Lib 1 in the WINNT forum or LIB 17 of the
MSWIN32 forum.  Complete the information as requested and send it to
"[e-mail]".  Due to our current support demains, this is a one
way alias only.



In order to send mail to the address mentioned via CompuServe, you have to:

 * Leave the forum.
 * At any "!" prompt, enter GO MAIL.
 * Mail your request to:
 ">internet:[e-mail]"

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11753 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  04:48:22
Sb: #11537-Another Fatal Sys Err 69
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Eric Kitchen 70662,3433 (X)

Eric,

<<I have a PSI Hyperstore easyCACHE PRO version 1.52 with 16Mb of onboard
cache. I don't think that i'll trash it just yet considering what I paid for
it.>>

I have an EasyCache IDE controller w/4Mb cache. It will only work under NT and
OS/2 in ISA WD1003 compatability mode. As far as I know all of the PSI
controller use a driver. This driver is installed not for DOS but for the CPU
on the disk controller card. (SIOS & HSOS [???]).

Why don't you see if PSI has anything to say. I thought their BBS had a
message staing that they would be supporting NT. But they did not say for
which controllers. The BBS number is 9-1-214-954-1856. (opps. drop the 9, I
needed that to dial an outside line).

Art

#: 11158 S3/Windows NT Setup
    03-Oct-92  12:29:29
Sb: #10933-Fatal Error after Setup
Fm: David Rorabaugh (LTS) 76376,3423
To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 (X)

I'll check the setup on the SCSI, I know that it is properly terminated, and
that the SCSI ID is set to 7, not 0 or 1.  Should this be changed to 2 to be
sequential, or does that matter?

The reason I asked about the next release was that there was a 0892hw.txt
posted, but I never got the 0892 shipment, I'm running the 0792 shipment.
Things seem to be slipping a bit, and the updates aren't coming as fast as I
had expected.  Being that we're into 1092, do you think we could see the
0992hw.txt file now?  That might answer some questions as to what would be
supported in the next release, whenever that happens (this month, I hope?).

The big thing I was questioning was the Western Digital cards being included
but not the SMC flavours, since SMC bought WD's network card line and most of
these are only incremental changes.  That's why I was surprised that I
couldn't successfully run the SMC card with the WD drivers, and asked about
updates.

#: 11394 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  15:21:32
Sb: #11158-Fatal Error after Setup
Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643
To: David Rorabaugh (LTS) 76376,3423

David,

There is a 0992hw.txt in library 1.  So far as I know this is NOT the final
word for the beta due out by the end of October.

A SCSI ID of 7 should be fine.  Did you have a chance to check the registry
entries I mentioned?

If it appears that some piece of hardware is not yet supported and you want it
to be, the best thing you can do right now is send in an hwfeed.txt (available
in library 1).

Regards,
   -- Terence Hosken [MS]

#: 11756 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  05:43:16
Sb: #11394-Fatal Error after Setup
Fm: David Rorabaugh (LTS) 76376,3423
To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 (X)

No, I haven't had a chance to dig into the registry entries, but now I guess I
have to.

I did find an interesting set of symptoms.  When I brought the system back up
in NT today, I found that I had SEVEN different CD-ROM drives shown, but that
none of them would display a directory of the disc (read fault).  I changed
the SCSI ID from 7 to 2, and restarted, and then only one came up, and I could
read from that.  For file access, changing the SCSI ID solved the problem.
However, the CD Player recognizes the drive, but won't play the audio CD.  It
recognizes the tracks, but it doesn't seem to have any control (every function
is either non-op or produces an error message.  I don't have any CD-audio
drivers loaded -- is this normal behaviour?

#: 11561 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  15:53:59
Sb: Win16 sys:No response
Fm: Gary J. Walker 100020,1104
To: I've had NT installed

  I've had NT installed for 3 weeks. A week  ago, for possibly the first time,
I tried to run a Windows 3.x application - Write. However, nothing actually
started up. Disk thrashing for 10-15 seconds, then nothing. Much the same if I
try to start a Win16 app (ie. ANY - not just Write) from an icon in a program
group, in file manager, or even from the command line in an NT cli box.
Putting wowexe in the startup group doesn't do anything either.

The one indication I have had is if I try clicking an a Windows 3.x app from
an icon in a program group for a second or third time - I get a STOP box
saying that the Win16 Subsystem is failing to respond - with buttons to Retry
or to Cancel. Retry brings up the same box after a few further seconds of disk
thrashing.

The few NT applications that come with the cd work fine: so do dos
applications. Quite robust really.

One problem I had on installation was the need to go into the Registry Editor
to set up a swap file on my D: partition - no space on C: . This worked fine.

I see there are entries in the Registry for Win16 and 'wow' setups. Is it
likely that I need to make a change here? Can I pick up individual files from
the cd? ie. I'd rather not try a reinstall yet!

Any help appreciated.

I asked this 3 days ago in winnt/S4,  but no response, so I'm hoping this is a
more correct forum topic.

Gary

#: 11657 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  09:32:14
Sb: #11561-Win16 sys:No response
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Gary J. Walker 100020,1104 (X)

Gary,

Are your path's correct in your config.nt and autoexec.nt? Append them and let
me take a look at them.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]




There are 2 Replies.

#: 11681 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  13:10:17
Sb: #11657-Win16 sys:No response
Fm: Gary J. Walker 100020,1104
To: na 71075,3225 (X)

 Scott,

Thanks for the reply.


As requested,



        autoexec.nt :

        config.nt :device=D:\winnt\system\keyboard.sys device=D:\winnt\system\mouse.sys
device=D:\winnt\system\emm.sys files=128 shell=D:\winnt\system\command.com /p
D:\winnt\system



Mmmmm, so maybe I need a path statement?

        Regards,
                Gary

#: 11683 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  13:20:11
Sb: #11657-Win16 sys:No response
Fm: Gary J. Walker 100020,1104
To: na 71075,3225 (X)


Scott,

Apologies for the formatting of that last message! It looked good before I
uploaded it anyway...

Repeat...



autoexec.nt:


config.nt:
device=D:\winnt\system\himem.sys

device=D:\winnt\system\keyboard.sys

device=D:\winnt\system\mouse.sys

device=D:\winnt\system\emm.sys

files=128

shell=D:\winnt\system\command.com /p D:\winnt\system


Regards,
        Gary



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11759 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  06:29:21
Sb: #11683-Win16 sys:No response
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Gary J. Walker 100020,1104

Gary,

Put this in your Autoexec.NT

C:\winnt\system\redir c:\winnt\system\dosx

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11088 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  18:02:46
Sb: #10981-TMC7000EX problems
Fm: Ray Stevens 76420,3330
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

I have the CDR-84 in the middle of the SCSI chain so termination shouldn't be
a problem. I'd like to hear from MS to see if they have any ideas. They have
supposedly tested out the controller hopefully they will have a hint...

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11183 S3/Windows NT Setup
    03-Oct-92  17:07:53
Sb: #11088-TMC7000EX problems
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Ray Stevens 76420,3330 (X)

Ray,

<<I have the CDR-84 in the middle of the SCSI chain so termination shouldn't
be a problem.>>

I'm no SCSI expert, but as I understand it the SCSI controller has it's own
device ID and termination. The other end of the SCSI bus (each periphrial) has
to have it's own ID and the final device must be terminated as well.

Some OS's will work with improperly terminated SCSI devices, some will not. NT
is very picky about this particular aspect.

Art

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11197 S3/Windows NT Setup
    03-Oct-92  20:51:40
Sb: #11183-TMC7000EX problems
Fm: Ray Stevens 76420,3330
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

The SCSI bus (the cable) needs to be terminated on each end. This is usually
done via the first and last devices on the bus. The other devices on the bus
must be un-terminated.

The problemm I'm having with the CDR-84 is something else, and I'm not sure
what the heck it is. Some sort of incompatability between the CD-ROM drive and
the controller. The system never even completes the initializaion of the
controller on bootup. This indicates a hardware problem.

I'm hoping the MS has come across this problem and knows how to fix it as both
NEC and Future Domain are so busy pointing fingers and each other and don't
care to really try to help.

I appriciate your response tho...it's more than I have been able to get from
MS...

There are 2 Replies.

#: 11245 S3/Windows NT Setup
    04-Oct-92  11:08:01
Sb: #11197-TMC7000EX problems
Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246
To: Ray Stevens 76420,3330 (X)

Ray:

If I remember this cd, it has a termination problem.  I would put it last in
the chain & terminate it the special NEC device that you can get.  Turns out
that there are both active & passive termination devices.  Sometimes they do
not work well together.

                               bob



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11266 S3/Windows NT Setup
    04-Oct-92  19:00:28
Sb: #11245-TMC7000EX problems
Fm: Ray Stevens 76420,3330
To: Robert Chronister 70363,246 (X)

Hmmmm...I guess I'll give NEC another callback and get the terminator I just
don't understand the drive setup worked OK on the old TMC1670 controller. The
7000EX must be very picky...

Thanks...\

#: 11291 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  03:20:49
Sb: #11197-TMC7000EX problems
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Ray Stevens 76420,3330

Ray,

<<The system never even completes the initializaion of the controller on
bootup. This indicates a hardware problem.>>

Improper termination can also exhibt this type of behavior. Particularly since
you mentioned that this same setup works under DOS. NT is very picky about
proper termination of SCSI devices. The NEC-84 seems to be a bit quirky with
reward to termination.

If you have not already looked in section 8 & 10 for other NEC-84 threads I'd
suggest you do so. Might be able to pick up a bit of supporting evidence
there.

<<I appriciate your response tho...it's more than I have been able to get from
MS...>>

I'm sure someone from MS will be getting back to you shortly. Their system of
support requires a lot of logging info. Each request is entered into a
database, and the request is process from there. They also only work 8 hours a
day, seven days a week. I and others here do not follow this same scheme. But
then again this peer level of support is being provided because we all know
how frustrating it can be. <g>

Art

#: 11347 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  12:36:35
Sb: #11291-TMC7000EX problems
Fm: Ray Stevens 76420,3330
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

Just when you think you kwon something.....<g>. I had looked into the other
message bases and pulled the message archives and looked through them as well.
I checked to see if it was having problems with the sync negotiation routine
like on the adaptec, so I locked the 7000 into async mode with no effect. I
have requested (for the second time) one of the inline terminator connectors
from NEC and when it arrives I'll try using it and moving the CD-ROM to the
end of the bus, maybe that'll work. Who knows, by the time NEC gets off their
thumbs and ships the thing, the next pre-release disk will be out and the
Trantor controller that comes with the CDR-84 will be supported making the
entire subject a moot point. <g>

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11466 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  03:20:08
Sb: #11347-TMC7000EX problems
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Ray Stevens 76420,3330

Ray,

<<Who knows, by the time NEC gets off their thumbs and ships the thing, the
next pre-release disk will be out and the Trantor controller that comes with
the CDR-84 will be supported making the entire subject a moot point. <g>>>

Well it seems that Trantor is here and solving problems already. Mark has his
up and running. Maybe I'll get mine working today, now that I know what the
problems is (for`me at least). I need an IRQ jumper set. Atleast that's what
Trantor says.

Art

#: 11580 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  19:02:58
Sb: #11525-TMC7000EX problems
Fm: Ray Stevens 76420,3330
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

I read the message in 10 after I left that one for you. I tried to log on to
the BBS and can't manage to get a clean line. I sure wish someone would upload
the drivers to CI$ so i'll try leaving a message for the Trantor rep in 10.
Thanks for all the help...

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11649 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  09:02:19
Sb: #11580-TMC7000EX problems
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Ray Stevens 76420,3330

Ray,

<<I sure wish someone would upload the drivers to CI$ so i'll try leaving a
message for the Trantor rep in 10.>>

If it's okay with Trantor I'll upload them. I'll see if I can get permission
from them to upload them.

Art

PS: I do have it working on IRQ5, tomorrow I'll try IRQ7.

#: 11659 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  09:46:39
Sb: #11649-TMC7000EX problems
Fm: Ray Stevens 76420,3330
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

Great! Have you tried a graphical install or do you know if it will work?

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11668 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  11:06:49
Sb: #11659-TMC7000EX problems
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Ray Stevens 76420,3330 (X)

Ray,

<<Have you tried a graphical install or do you know if it will work?>>

No. To the best of my knowledge it's impossible. this is an add on driver.
Since you cannot change any of the ini files on the cd-rom to tell the setup
program how to install the driver and what parameters...

But it will work with a DOS2NT install. I suppose you could then try a
graphical install afterwards, but I don't know how well that would work.

Art

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11724 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  18:27:09
Sb: #11668-TMC7000EX problems
Fm: Ray Stevens 76420,3330
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

Thats right, I forgot....I had tried doing a graphical with my old Future
Domain controller, but the FD controller test logic is already in the INI
file. OK, Thanks...

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11750 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  04:35:27
Sb: #11724-TMC7000EX problems
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Ray Stevens 76420,3330 (X)

Ray,

FWIW: I got the T128 and NEC-84 up and running on IRQ7. I had to reconfigure
my EISA machine to share an IRQ for com1 & lpt1 to make room for the T128
though. If this had not been an EISA machine I would not have been able to get
the CD to work.

Also you'll only be able to read data. Audio is out for this driver. no
errors, just no response.

Art

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11765 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  08:05:23
Sb: #11750-TMC7000EX problems
Fm: Ray Stevens 76420,3330
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

OK, I'm not really all that interested in the audio part anyway. I'd just like
to get at the CD-ROM sometimes.

Thanks for the info...

#: 11457 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  23:30:17
Sb: Tseng ET4000 800x600
Fm: RanDair Porter 70312,120
To: ALL


I am not having much luck configuring my system for my tseng video card. I
would like it to be configured just like my win 3.1 800x600,large fonts. I
have tried...

et400_60 -> vga.sys ts_800.dll ->vga.dll which results in a crazy display.

and et400_70 ->vga.sys ts_800.dll ->vga.dll still results in a crazy display.

finally pdii.sys -> vga.sys ts_800.dll or even ts_1024.dll -> vga.dll using
pdii.sys doesn't display crazy but appears to be in 1024x768 mode regardless
of ts_800.dll or ts_1024.dll

one other thing. Using pdii.sys I always get a dark, almost black desktop
background when using the arizona color scheme.

Any Help? RanDair

#: 11564 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  17:06:23
Sb: #11499-Tseng ET4000 800x600
Fm: RanDair Porter 70312,120
To: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 (X)

Sam, The vga card appears to be a generic vga et4000 graphics addapter. The
bios is tseng labs vga bios. Also, it has 1 Meg ram.

RanDair.

#: 11776 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  10:18:08
Sb: #11564-Tseng ET4000 800x600
Fm: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642
To: RanDair Porter 70312,120 (X)

RanDair,

The "pdii.sys" is specific for the Orchid ProDesigner IIs card.

I don't have any explanation to what is happening, except to guess that the
card does not support the ET4000 chip as close as it claims. I've tried the
configuration on one of my test machines (it has Orchid ProDesigner II card)
and it worked without any problems.

Do you have access to a different ET4000? If yes, I would suggest tring a
different card to double check the results.

Please let me know how it goes.

Sam Karroum [MS]

#: 11637 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  07:14:33
Sb: Fatal System error 69
Fm: DAVID MANNS 100112,2773
To: anyone

Whilst installing NT onto my 486 50MHz clone, I get the following error.
FATAL SYSTEM ERROR: 0X00000069       PHASE 1 I/O initialisation failed.
This happens at step 7 -Create Registry of the install using the DOS2NT
batch file after selecting Windows NT from the flexboot menu.
The mother board is a JUKO 486dx-50 256kc, the scsi controller is a Future
domain 16-bit. There is 16M of memory on the system. Please could you advise
me of what to do to overcome this problem.

#: 11656 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  09:32:09
Sb: #11637-Fatal System error 69
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: DAVID MANNS 100112,2773

David,

What FD controller are you using?  What HD's do you have in the system (make
and model)?

Here are some of the things that cause a 69: Error  0x00000069

This is a phase one initialization error, which happens when Windows NT tries
to talk with the HD controller.  It can be caused by any number of things.
Things to try:

* If the card allows, slow down the DMA transfer rate.

* Make sure both ends of the SCSI bus are terminated.

* Make sure there are no IRQ, or memory address conflicts.

* Make sure you're aren't using a faulty or un-supported driver i.e. the FD
1680 SCSI controller is supported, but there is a problem with that driver
which will be fixed and posted on WinNT, Lib 2.

* Make sure that your card is listed in the hardware compatibiltiy list which
was provided with your release notes.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11666 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  11:04:49
Sb: #11656-Fatal System error 69
Fm: Arthur Kreitman 76060,2677
To: na 71075,3225 (X)

   We're also getting a fatal error  69 on initial install.  We
have the following configuration

dell 486/25
adaptec 1542 with factory default jumpers
NEC intersect on 2
quantum 80mb on 0
quantum 100 mb on 1

We do an install.  The disks and the 1542 are detected.  The files
are copied from the cd-rom. a blue screen appears, it waits a few
minutes and the fails.



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11758 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  06:29:16
Sb: #11666-Fatal System error 69
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Arthur Kreitman 76060,2677

Arthur,

Is the 1542 a 1542b?  If so read the following:

Adaptec AHA 1542B Driver Can Cause Fatal System Error:

Summary: There is a known problem with the Adaptec AHA-1542B driver which
causes fatal system errors under some circumstances.

More Info: The problem is triggered by simultaneous I/O with the floppy and
the hard disk.  This will be corrected in the next release.  To avoid this you
may want to use an alternative floppy controller and disable he one on the
Adaptec.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11794 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  11:39:28
Sb: #11758-Fatal System error 69
Fm: Arthur Kreitman 76060,2677
To: na 71075,3225 (X)

   Its a 1542,  I tried your suggestion.   Still no good.

#: 11715 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  16:57:22
Sb: Hive 'Security' not open
Fm: David R. Johnson 72717,3617
To: SYSOP (X)

I have had very little success installing windows NT with the DOS2NT program.
After reformatting and re-organizing my first hard drive several times, I was
finally able to get NT to boot.  NT seems to demand to be in the first
partition on the disk, and will not function if the OS/2 2.0 boot manager is
active in ANY partition.  Also, I had to run DOS2NT from DR-DOS v6.0 becuase
MS-DOS 5.0 won't recognize my hard disk when the drive is in translation mode
(Maxtor 4380E & WD1009SE-V2).  DR-DOS XCOPY preserves the attributes as it
copies, and sees all files as being read-only from the CD.  The first time I
booted NT, it reported the it couldn't create or open several different
'Hives', and eventually crashed.  I re-installed the whole thing, and ran
'ATTRIB -r *.* /s" on the WINNT drive to get rid of the read-only flags.  Now,
continuing with Step 7 of the DOS2NT instructions, the first boot seems to
proceed okay - the system comes up, loads drivers, the WINNT opening banner
appeared, and then after a moment, the system rebooted as described.  On the
second boot, the system comes up, loads drivers, checks the FAT system on C:
and the HPFS (OS/2 2.0) partition on D:, and declares them clean.  It then
reports "Hive 'Security' could not be created/ opened".  The boot seems to
proceed from there, the Windows NT banner comes up, the hard drive operates
for 10 more seconds or so, and then nothing. No further activity after 15
minutes.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

System:  ALR PowerVeisa 486/33, 17 Mb RAM, ET4000 VGA, WD 1009SE-V2 ESDI
controller, Maxtor 4380E (1224 cyls., set for translation to 63 sectors per
track and 550 or so cyls.) with 125 Mb DOS partition, CDC 85MB drive with OS/2
2.0 HPFS partition.  CD-ROM is an unsupported unit (pinnacle).

Thanks.

#: 11775 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  10:18:02
Sb: #11715-Hive 'Security' not open
Fm: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642
To: David R. Johnson 72717,3617 (X)

David,

The message "Hive 'Security' could not be created/ opened" is generated by
NTOSKRNL during system initialization. It could be due to the Security
subsystem not installed correctly, or accounts not created properly during
setup. Currently, this is no supported direct way to modify this without
re-installing Windows NT.

I wonder if the problems you're running into are related to having IBM's MOST
utility on the system, or the way Digital Research write their boot record. I
have installed and reinstalled the July release and wasn't able to resproduce
the error message.

As per the release notes, Windows NT is not compatible with IBM's MOST
utility. Microsoft does not intend to support IBM's MOST boot scheme with
Windows NT's Flexboot, and has no plans to support installation on a drive
with MOST installed on it.

The only suggestion that I have at this time is to try installing again using
DOS2NT running under MS-DOS.

Regards, Sam Karroum [MS]





There is 1 Reply.

#: 11795 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  12:06:50
Sb: #11775-Hive 'Security' not open
Fm: David R. Johnson 72717,3617
To: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 (X)

I have found that WINNT will boot the same if I either disable the IBM MOST
partition (by making the DOS/NT partition active), or remove it entirely. This
current installation of NT was performed without the OS/2 MOST utility even on
the drive.  I must however use it to boot OS/2, as OS/2 is installed on my
second hard drive, and MOST is the only way I know of to boot from a partition
on the secondary hard disk.  I have no problem manually activating the various
partitions on my primary drive using Fdisk, at least while fiddling with
WINNT.  Question:

What does the OS/2 MultiBoot feature do or not do that makes it incompatible
with WINNT?  Is there or will there be a way to install WINNT on its own
partition without MS-DOS, and boot that partition directly without FlexBoot?
In this case, would OS/2's Multiboot work?  I suppose that I'm not suprised
WINNT has trouble with MOST, as I could not boot ISC Unix with it either
(again, I used fdisk to manually activate the needed partitions).

Anyway, my reason for DR-DOS 6.0 was that MS-DOS 5.0 had trouble with my hard
drive after I switched to translation mode.  Originally, I did not use
translation, as ISC Unix and NetWare 3.11 recognized the drive out to 1223
cylinders.  DOS and OS/2 think the drive is only 200 cylinders though
(1224-1024=200), and allow only 50Mb.  My next expirement will be to disable
translation and just truncate the drive at 1024 cylinders using setup, and
then try MS-DOS 5.

Question:  Am I more likely to achieve success by purchasing a supported SCSI
CD-ROM and using the graphical install method?  We've discovered that this
Pinnacle Micro drive won't work with OS/2, WINNT, or NetWare, and probably
won't work with UnixWare or Solaris 2.0, and we are temped to grab a SCSI CD
anyway.

Thanks for your input.

#: 11364 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  13:27:50
Sb: install error
Fm: Bob Churchwell 70743,3000
To: sysop (X)

When I try to run any DOS program a window appears with the following error:
      "Function Failure   Error Num -1073741583
[D:nt\private\mvddm\softpc\host\src\nt_sec.c[336]]"
(I installed on C drive, the D drive is my CD-ROM.)

I am installing it on an IBM PS2 Model 70 386 with a Future Domain MSC-600
controller.  The hard disk was formatted and only DOS 5.0 and the CD-ROM
drivers were installed.  I installed WinNT using the DOS2NT method following
the instruction in the release notes.  I also copy the fd1800.sys driver to
the winnt\system\drivers directory to be able to acces the CD-ROM drive.

I am unable to run anything in my dos directory, "setup" for Microsoft C 7.0,
and even some programs that came with WinNt such as "wowexec". All produce the
same message.

Any ideas would be greatly appreciated!

Michelle




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11485 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  07:52:25
Sb: #11364-install error
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Bob Churchwell 70743,3000 (X)

Bob,

Does your config.sys have the correct path to the himem.sys emm.sys and
command.com? Does your autoexec.bat have the correct path to redir.exe and
dosx.exe?

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11636 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  07:10:21
Sb: #11534-install error
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Bob Churchwell 70743,3000 (X)

BoB,

Your shell statement should look like:

shell=c:\winnt\system\command.com /p c:\winnt\system

If this does not work do the following: Once you try and execute a 16bit app
use PVIEW.exe and look at what System processes are running.  List them in
your next reply.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]


Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11646 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  08:44:41
Sb: #11636-install error
Fm: Bob Churchwell 70743,3000
To: na 71075,3225 (X)

I still have the error!
PVIEW gave me this list of processes:
  cmd.exe, crss.exe, eventlog.exe, lsass.exe, os2ss.exe,  progman.exe,
pview.exe, screg.exe, smss.exe, spoolss.exe, system process, system process,
taskman.exe, winlogon.exe.

DOSX was not in list list. Should it be? If I try to run dosx from either file
mngr or the dos window I get the same error I get with everything else.
                                                        Thanks for all your
help!
                                                                Michelle (not
Bob by the way)

#: 11763 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  08:03:57
Sb: #11646-install error
Fm: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225
To: Bob Churchwell 70743,3000 (X)

Michelle-not-Bob,

Well I was looking for NTVDM.exe and it is not there?

Take a look in the registry under:
HKey_local_machine|System|CurrentControlSet|Control|WOW

Do you have a value for cmdline and wowcmdline?

NTVDM should be on each of these lines.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy (not Bob by the way)<g>





There is 1 Reply.

#: 11766 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  08:51:51
Sb: #11763-install error
Fm: Bob Churchwell 70743,3000
To: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225

Scott (luckily not BOB!),
        ntcdm.exe was not listedin pview, but it is in the registry WOW. WOW
looked like this
        LogonSwitch: yes
        cmdline: ntvdm -f%SystemRoot%\system -a
        size: 2
     wowcmdline: ntvdm -f%SystemRoot%\system -a
%SystemRoot%\system\krnl286 wowexec
     wowsize: 4
SystemRoot is set to c:\winnt.
Ok what next?
                                                        Thanks Again!
                                                        Michelle (Bob's legs
are hairier)

#: 11812 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  15:48:55
Sb: #11766-install error
Fm: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225
To: Bob Churchwell 70743,3000 (X)

Michelle,

You got me! I will get with development and see what I can come up with.  I
will let you know what this error is caused by.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11816 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  15:49:21
Sb: #11766-install error
Fm: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225
To: Bob Churchwell 70743,3000 (X)

Michelle,

Development has seen this before.  If there is a Tokenring 16/4 card in the
machine.  Some people have been able to resolve the problem when they moved
the ram and rom address of the card.  The problem will be fixed in the next
release.

Let me know, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11376 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  13:57:35
Sb: Two Drive Speed
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Don Cock 72520,1500

Don,

There could be a number of reasons that may explain this. One could very well
be that ntdetect.com is building a structure with all the necessary hardware
information in it.  Since there is more hardware in the machine with 2 drives
it is logically going to take longer building the structure.

It could be disk speed, how does norton utils rate the harddrives for Average
seek, track-to-track seek or data transfer rate.

Are any persistant net connections being restored???

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11817 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  15:49:29
Sb: #11526-Two Drive Speed
Fm: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225
To: Don Cock 72520,1500

Don,

I can understand the Modem lights flashing.  NTdetect.com is initializing the
hardware.  This should occur all of the time not intermittantly.  I could also
understand the longer boot on the 2 drive system.  What I can't understand is
the slower compile time on a machine that has features above and beyond that
of another machine (CPU cache).

Could you boot both of these machines to dos and run Norton SYSINFO CPU speed
benchmarks?

Let me know, Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11820 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  16:47:12
Sb: Install AHA-1742A CDR74
Fm: James Gildea 73067,363
To: Sysop (X)

I have:

        Dell 450SE
        Adaptek 1742A SCSI Ctrlr.
        NEC CDR74 CDROM Reader

1742A in Enhanced Mode
        Device 1 is Sync Neg. Disabled, Disconnect Disabled

Using Dos drivers everything works fine but...
When Booting off of NT Boot Floppy, during the scanning for SCSI interfaces it
goes right past Adaptek 174x and comes up with a message that it can't find a
CD-ROM device.

Help

#: 11084 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  17:52:08
Sb: Moving the Paging File
Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643
To: Robert H. Bernard 71210,246

Robert,

It is not usual for the system directory to be marked as hidden. Nevertheless,
there are a couple ways to get around this.  Within the file manager, you can
elect to view hidden files.  Select "View->By File Type..." from the file
manager menu.  Check "She Hidden/System Files" and then click "OK".  Finally,
press the function key F5 to refresh the screen.  If you wish to unhide the
directory at this point, you can highlight the directory name, and then choose
"File->Properties" from the menu.

I hope this helps,
   -- Terence Hosken [MS]

#: 11826 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  17:51:22
Sb: #11084-Moving the Paging File
Fm: Robert H. Bernard 71210,246
To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 (X)

Thanks, Terry, for the info.
I already figured out that even if the directory is hidden, the RUN command
will run something from there if you give its fully-qualified path name.  So I
have been able successfully to move the paging file location.
Bob

#: 11829 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  17:54:40
Sb: TMC840 (sob)
Fm: Karl Froelich 71171,2247
To: sysop (X)

Hi 'dere! I've got a Future Domain 840 (alas) scsi card for my CD. I've set
the scsi id to 2 and IRQ to 5, just like it ought to be, but it won't install
(I expected that I guess, the docs start with a F-D 845, but heck, hope
springs eternal). I've been able to install useing dos2nt; that worked just
find. I'm wondering if support for the F-D 840 will happen?

Thanx for the shoulder,

Karl

#: 11837 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  19:11:54
Sb: Diamond Speedstar Video?
Fm: Tim Jones 70750,701
To: All

Has anyone gotten an old (non-24 bit artwork) Diamond Speedstar II+ TE4000
card working in anything but 640x480x16 mode?  I've tried using the method
described in the July release notes, but all I get is a blank screen.  I go
through the proper keystrokes blind to shut down NT and then tried each
successive setting from a DOS reboot - still no luck.  I have an NEC 4D, an
NEC-5FG and a Gateway CrystalScan 1024NI monitor and all give the same result.
I've tried both the TS400_60 and TS400_70 files as VGA.SYS and have tried both
TS_800.DLL and TS_1024.DLL as VGA.DLL in all combinations on all monitors with
no luck.

Tim

#: 11367 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  13:56:34
Sb: #10806-Kernel mode except
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Bill Li 76676,14

Bill, There are no DPT SCSI cards on the supported list.  This means that
there are no drivers currently to support the DPT cards. Have you tried the
DOS2NT install? Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11476 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  07:24:42
Sb: #11367-Kernel mode except
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: na 71075,3225 (X)

Scott,

<<There are no DPT SCSI cards on the supported list.  This means that there
are no drivers currently to support the DPT cards. Have you tried the DOS2NT
install?>>

FWIW: If there is no support for the DPT SCSI card and that is the SCSI card
for the boot disk, DOS2NT is not going to work either. <g>

Art

#: 11645 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  08:39:32
Sb: #11518-Kernel mode except
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

Art,

I thought that the last time I changed my name on CS all I needed to do was
type OPT then go through the menu.  Did this change or am I thinking of
another system?

Thanks for the advice, -Scott



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11648 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  09:00:01
Sb: #11645-Kernel mode except
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: na 71075,3225 (X)

Scott,

<<I thought that the last time I changed my name on CS all I needed to do was
type OPT then go through the menu.  Did this change or am I thinking of
another system?>>

That will work too. I was not sure if you were using a command line or menuing
interface. Both work.

Art

#: 11814 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  15:49:06
Sb: #11648-Kernel mode except
Fm: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

Art,

I wanted to thank you for all of the help on the forum.  It's people like you
that will make this product a success.

Thanks from everyone in WINNT support!



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11848 S3/Windows NT Setup
    09-Oct-92  03:17:43
Sb: #11814-Kernel mode except
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225

Scott,

<<I wanted to thank you for all of the help on the forum.>>

No problem. I know that you all (MS) have a lot to keep up with on the support
end. Having had my share of new experiances (software wise) I can relate to
people having install problems. <g> So I'll help out where I can.

<<It's people like you that will make this product a success.>>

Well I have been waiting a long time for the right 32 bit OS. So far I'm quite
pleased with the way things are going with the Windows family products. You're
all doing a fine job in my book.

Now if that new CD would arrive RSN and if I could find ATI or 8514/a
support...

Art

#: 11379 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  13:57:58
Sb: #10249-NT Install 1E + 6B Error
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Neil Rosenberg 70444,31

Neil,

FD 885 is not on the list (ie. 845/850/700/1660/1680/700). Are you doing the
DOS2NT install?

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11757 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  05:51:35
Sb: #11379-NT Install 1E + 6B Error
Fm: Neil Rosenberg 70444,31
To: na 71075,3225 (X)

I have attempted the install with the:

Future Domain 850, 860, 885, 850m, 860m, and 885m boards.

Yes, I also attempted to do the DOS2NT install with the same hardware set.

The answer:  All of these boards work fine, the problem is that WinNT will NOT
install if your primary hard disk is also a SCSI device.  As soon as I
installed an IDE hard disk instead (and removed the SCSI hard disk) the GUI
install worked perfectly, first time. Your logic seems to be intolerant of a
SCSI hard disk as the boot/install disk.

#: 11774 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  10:16:54
Sb: #11757-NT Install 1E + 6B Error
Fm: Jeong Ho Lee 70253,1244
To: Neil Rosenberg 70444,31

>> .. WinNT will not install if your primary hard disk is a SCSI device..

That's not true. I have two Maxtor SCSI hard disk - primary and secondary. GUI
setup was working fine for me. I have Adaptec 1542B. Which makes differences ?

jLee

#: 11819 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  16:09:29
Sb: #11757-NT Install 1E + 6B Error
Fm: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225
To: Neil Rosenberg 70444,31

Neil,

Have you tried your configuration with 2 SCSI cards? One for the CD and one
for the HD.

I have 2 SCSI devices working in a machine here, however they are running off
an Adaptec.

Let me know. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11850 S3/Windows NT Setup
    09-Oct-92  03:27:58
Sb: #11757-NT Install 1E + 6B Error
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Neil Rosenberg 70444,31

Neil,

<<All of these boards work fine, the problem is that WinNT will NOT install if
your primary hard disk is also a SCSI device.>>

That's not quite accurate. NT can be installed on to a primary SCSI drive. But
you need to things. First a supported SCSI controler and drive. Secondly the
driver also has to support a primary SCSI drive.

For instance I have a driver from Trantor. In this release anyway it only
supports secondary (non-bootable) SCSI drives and CD-ROM drives as well.

Most likely the driver for the FD-850 series does not support bootable drives
either. If you have not already checked them out I believe that there is a new
FD series driver in the libs. I think it is called FD1800.ZIP.

Art

#: 11054 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  14:51:35
Sb: #10580-Flexboot
Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643
To: David C. Mack 76470,3606

David,

I don't really recommend that you try to move Windows NT directly from machine
to machine.  The proper way to get it on more than one machine is to install
it in each location. All of the files I mentioned are involved in the Windows
NT boot sequence, and the autoexec and config files are also read, but these
two files are of lesser importance.  ntldr gets exectuted first.  This is the
program which asks you if you want to boot to Windows NT or your previous
operating system. ntdetect is executed to determine what kind of hardware your
machine has.  If the hardware detected by ntdetect differs from what had been
previously configured in the system registry, you will most likely have
problems.  Note that the autoexec and config files do not control the boot
process, although they can have an effect on what environment variables are
set and so on.

I hope this helps,

   -- Terence Hosken [MS]

#: 11843 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  23:11:58
Sb: #11054-Flexboot
Fm: Ken Granderson 76300,2050
To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643

I just had to re-install DOS and it appears to have nuked the references to
NTLDR in my boot sector, thus I boot straight into DOS.  How can I quickly and
easily restore the NT boot sector without (shudder) re-installing NT?  I am
completely comfortable hacking away at my boot sector, partition table and
other system areas with wild abandon.


There is 1 Reply.

#: 11851 S3/Windows NT Setup
    09-Oct-92  03:33:57
Sb: #11843-Flexboot
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Ken Granderson 76300,2050

Ken,

<<How can I quickly and easily restore the NT boot sector without (shudder)
re-installing NT?>>

If you take a look at the DOS2NT batch file on the CD-ROM you'll find a debug
script to modify the boot sectors. Once you get things up and runing again you
might want to take a look in the libs. There is a program which will
make/replace the boot sector.

Art

PS: Aren't you glad that the release is on a CD? At least when you install
there is no floppy disk swap required. <g>

#: 11847 S3/Windows NT Setup
    09-Oct-92  03:14:36
Sb: NT no program manager
Fm: tom lesniewski 73276,41
To: microsoft

I am having a problem starting NT. At the point where I should be seening
progman window I still see only the Microsoft Logo.  Taskman appears ok, I can
open that and use it to shutdow the system. but when I select task switch, the
window shows no tasks running I did not modify anything not specified in
registry.ini. My system is a AST 386/33 12MB, W=w/ AST Premium II bios rel
2.03 system bios and AST video bios in Shadow ram.  The only boards in system
are AST CPUID memory board and a 3COM ethernet board 3c507, bas address 300
hex, interrupt 5, external trxcvr ram base addr. 0D0000 hex, Ram size 64K Rom
Base addr 0C6000 hex, zero waite state disabled, data mode turbo. Any help
would be appreciated

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11853 S3/Windows NT Setup
    09-Oct-92  03:48:37
Sb: #11847-NT no program manager
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: tom lesniewski 73276,41

Tom,

Just curious but do you have enough free space for the paging file to grow?
And have you tried to boot NT with all of your speed otptions turned off.
Things like bios shadowing, caches, etc? Sometimes little things can make the
difference.

Art

#: 11077 S3/Windows NT Setup
    02-Oct-92  17:15:09
Sb: #10714-Error in Event Viewer
Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643
To: Richard J Fennimore 72760,1701

Richard,

Have you followed the steps mentioned by Arthur Knowles?  By commenting out
all of the LAN drivers in the registry.ini during the DOS2NT installation, you
should be able to eliminate this error.

Regards,
   -- Terence Hosken [MS]

#: 11821 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  17:22:40
Sb: #11077-Error in Event Viewer
Fm: Richard J Fennimore 72760,1701
To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 (X)

Yes I have commented out all Lan drivers and I still get the error

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11856 S3/Windows NT Setup
    09-Oct-92  04:04:39
Sb: #11821-Error in Event Viewer
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Richard J Fennimore 72760,1701

Richard,

<<Yes I have commented out all Lan drivers and I still get the error>>

FWIW: Not only do you have to comment all of the entries for all of the LAN
drivers in the registry.ini and there sub-entries, but you'll need to delete
all of the WINNT directories before you re-install NT from scratch.

A fresh install is needed. Is that what you have tried and still get the
error? Or did you just either (1) use regedit to disable the drivers or (2)
delete the files in the config sub-directory, copy them back from the CD, and
redo the triple boot?

Art

#: 11858 S3/Windows NT Setup
    09-Oct-92  05:13:19
Sb: network help needed
Fm: brian ford 75300,2327
To: name

I'm having a real tough time getting two WIN NT machines to communicate over
an ethernet connection.  I set up TCP addresses on both machines but starting
the network always results in an error message. These are the only two
machines on this network, do you have any idea what I could be doing wrong?
can turn to for help?  Thanks

#: 11497 S3/Windows NT Setup
    06-Oct-92  08:59:47
Sb: 1E + 6B Install Errors
Fm: Tom Gentry 76507,3033
To: Scott B. Suhy 71075,3225

Scott, I have a long write-up of my installation woes which I can fax to you.
I would really appreciate some help.  I am at the end of things to try.
Thanks.

#: 11859 S3/Windows NT Setup
    09-Oct-92  05:19:02
Sb: 1E + 6B Install Errors
Fm: Tom Gentry 76507,3033
To: Scott B. Suhy 71075,3225

Scott, FYI.  I installed NT on my 486/50 ISA no-name last night.  Graphical.
No problems that I could see.  Wish the ASTs would work that easily!
Regards,
Tom

#: 11368 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  13:56:39
Sb: #10795-LibPath env variable
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: neil colvin 71650,3517 (X)

Neil,

The LibPath Environment Variable is not meant to be changed.  This is why the
control panel (ie. System) does not give the user the ability to do it.

Are you changing it in the registry? Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11410 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  19:34:17
Sb: #11368-LibPath env variable
Fm: neil colvin 71650,3517
To: na 71075,3225 (X)

The control panel is very happy to let me change it.  That is where I did it.
If it is not suppose to allow that, then that is a bug.  I was told by another
MS person on this forum that it was meant to be changed, and that in fact it
was the default set of paths to be searched for .DLL files.  You people should
get your stories straight.  I personally prefer the second, since I would like
to put my DLL elsewhere than in WINNT\SYSTEM.

#: 11815 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  15:49:14
Sb: #11549-LibPath env variable
Fm: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225
To: neil colvin 71650,3517 (X)

Neil,

If Path is set as a System environment variable and you also specify a Path as
a User environment variable then it will append the two. If LibPath is set as
a System environment variable and you also specify a LibPath as a User
environment variable then it will replace the one that was specified in the
System environment variable. However, I did notice that with the PDC build you
needed to log off and log back on again to get it to accept the change.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11860 S3/Windows NT Setup
    09-Oct-92  05:38:25
Sb: #11815-LibPath env variable
Fm: neil colvin 71650,3517
To: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225

I agree with everything you say.  However, having done that, it still seems to
have no effect, which was where I started.  The system still seems to look for
DLLs only in the original places.  What is the intent of this undocumented
environment variable.  Also, perhaps it should mimic path, and only append the
user value to the system value?

#: 11684 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  13:20:28
Sb: UltraStor 24F 0x69 msg
Fm: Charles Hoffman 71477,3612
To: ALL

I am using a Gateway 486/50DX2 EISA with 16meg ram, 2 half gig drives with an
UltraStor 24F controller.  Installed WIN NT stuff from the CD-ROM, great!
However, I cannot boot up WIN NT.  0x69 message. Have done all the recommended
steps listed in the Doc Release Notes for the Ultra Stor 24F.  Drives have
more than 1024 cyl.  What can I do?  How do we get past this message?

Does a Beta Driver exist now? If not when? Will one be avail in the true beta
NT release later this month?

Chas

#: 11811 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  15:48:50
Sb: #11684-UltraStor 24F 0x69 msg
Fm: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225
To: Charles Hoffman 71477,3612 (X)

Charles,

The support for the 24F will be in the Official Beta release. C. Straghal
[Ultrastore] has mentioned this on the forum many times.

A number of people have been able to get the 24F to work in ISA mode.

There is currently no support for an ESDI drive with >1204 if the hardware
does not do the translation.

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11862 S3/Windows NT Setup
    09-Oct-92  06:29:12
Sb: #11811-UltraStor 24F 0x69 msg
Fm: Charles Hoffman 71477,3612
To: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225

Scott,

Thanks for your reply.  I am interested in the prior mentions of UltraStor 24,
however after several searches for this info we are still unable to find any
referance.  We have not been monitoring this forum since there has been no
reason since we are unable to do a thing with NT until it is installed.
Possibly the messages you refer to have scrolled off the system? We have found
mention to many other Ultrastor drivers but not the 24.

Thanks, chas

#: 11159 S3/Windows NT Setup
    03-Oct-92  12:36:10
Sb: Seagate 3283A
Fm: Amocams/Modular, Inc. 76260,3666
To: sysop (X)

I have been working with NT since San Francisco using a 210 MB Seagate 1239A
IDE drive.  Disk space was a problem ( two SDK's, two versions of windows,
etc. ), so I added a second hard drive - Seagate 3283A IDE (240 MB). I made
the 3283A the master and the 1239A the slave partitioned as follows:
                C: 100MB
                D: 100MB
                E: 34MB         for NTFS
                F: 100MB        first partition on 1239A
                G: 100MB The initial setup screen sees all of these
partitions.  If I try to install on F:, the blue screen after the first
re-boot (MmInit) that that examines the file systems, give the message: Cannot
determine file system on drives C, D, and E.  The graphic install continues
until I assume that it is trying to write the boot sector information and
aborts with an I/O error. If I try to install on the D: drive, the blue screen
aborts with error 0x69 Phase 1 i/o init. failed. I would have added another
1239A but Seagate does not make it anymore; the 3283 is its replacement.  This
drive works fine with WFW and DOS 6.0. Any suggestions? I need to continue
working with WFW and NT? Thanks, --Bill Block

#: 11417 S3/Windows NT Setup
    05-Oct-92  19:48:00
Sb: #11159-Seagate 3283A
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Amocams/Modular, Inc. 76260,3666


What did you use to partition your drives?

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11670 S3/Windows NT Setup
    07-Oct-92  11:15:49
Sb: #11417-Seagate 3283A
Fm: Amocams/Modular, Inc. 76260,3666
To: na 71075,3225 (X)

Scott, I used DOS 6.0's FDISK program. I have tried to use the ST3283A stand
alone, and after the reboot, I received error 0x0A.  Also, the ST1239A has
been partitioned with DOS 6.0 and it works fine.  Do you have access to a 3283
so that it can be verified that it does not work.  I purchased this drive
specifically to run NT and need to determine where to go from here. Thanks for
the help. --Bill Block

#: 11813 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  15:49:02
Sb: #11670-Seagate 3283A
Fm: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225
To: Amocams/Modular, Inc. 76260,3666 (X)

Bill,

We don't have any 3283 drives in our lab.  I have also searched the forum to
see if anyone else has reported a problem with the drive and came up with 0
hits.

Have you tried partitioning the drive with Windows NT rather than DOS 6?

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11839 S3/Windows NT Setup
    08-Oct-92  19:34:03
Sb: #11813-Seagate 3283A
Fm: Amocams/Modular, Inc. 76260,3666
To: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225 (X)

That was my first thought, but as long as that drive is on by system i can't
install NT -- Catch 22.  I decided to keep the drive on another node since NT
can access files on a Windows for Workgroups server.  With MSTOOLS installed
on that node I have plenty of room left on my ST1239A to do development in NT.
I still hope that NT will be compatible with the 3283 since it is a very
commonly available drive.  Thanks for the help Scott.  --Bill Block

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11852 S3/Windows NT Setup
    09-Oct-92  03:39:04
Sb: #11839-Seagate 3283A
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Amocams/Modular, Inc. 76260,3666 (X)

Bill,

<<I still hope that NT will be compatible with the 3283 since it is a very
commonly available drive.>>

I have a couple of segate drives myself, but not the 3283. How large is the
drive? I was just curious if it had more than 1024 cyls, and if you were using
the translation mode. Also do you know what type of disk controller you are
using with that drive?

I've had to rearrange my controller/disk combinations a few times to get
things working for several OS's.

Art

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11882 S3/Windows NT Setup
    09-Oct-92  08:10:16
Sb: #11852-Seagate 3283A
Fm: Amocams/Modular, Inc. 76260,3666
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

<<I have a ouple of seaatedrives myself, uut not the 3283  How largeis the
drive?  was jsst curious if ithad more than 024 cyls, and i you were using the
translationmode. Also do yu know whatttyp of disk cottroller you are using wit
that drive

>> yes it does, the ST3283A is a 240 MB drive that has basically replaced the
ST1239A 210 MB drive. I am using the translation mode on both of these drives.
The 1239 works and the 3283 does not.  The 'A' at the end of the part number
indicates IDE, which means that the controller is integrated into the drive
itself.  Cards that are sold as IDE controllers are really nothing more that a
parallel port used to interface with the drive. In any event I am using the
same card for both drives and did also substitute a different card with no
change in behavior. I am currently using the drive out of a Windows for
Workgroups server on which I have installed the MSTOOLS directory. This is an
ok work around, but obviously I hope it does not have to be a long term
solution, since I would prefer for all of my machines to be running NT. --Bill
Block

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11892 S3/Windows NT Setup
    09-Oct-92  08:57:38
Sb: #11882-Seagate 3283A
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Amocams/Modular, Inc. 76260,3666

Bill,

<<yes it does, the ST3283A is a 240 MB drive that has basically replaced the
ST1239A 210 MB drive. I am using the translation mode on both of these drives.
The 1239 works and the 3283 does not.>>

Ah. I have the 1239A. It also experienced a few problems with NT. I could
perform a DOS2NT install, but a modified graphical install failed with a "disk
error".

As I understand it the translation is performed on the drive in hardware or
software (bios) in most instances. NT's device driver only works with drives
that do perform this translation in hardware or thru software (device driver).
But this translation may not work for all drives. Each vendor may implement
the translation a bit differently. So for drives that do not implement a
supported (curently) method of translation in hardware will require
modification of the NT device driver.

If the translation is performed in hardware and is invisible to the NT
software it will work. If not well...

Art




#: 11188 S4/MS-DOS/Win3.x Apps
    03-Oct-92  17:37:32
Sb: NO Win 16 Subsystem
Fm: Gary J. Walker 100020,1104
To: x

After 2 weeks of NT use, I'm only just trying to run Windows 3.1 progs ...
only problem is I can't.

I cannot get ANY Windows 3.1 programs to run.

Starting (eg) Write from a Program Group, the disk churns for a few seconds,
as if loading the Win 16 Subsystem - then nothing. Click Write icon again, and
eventually get a Application Error box saying - '' The Win 16 Subsystem is not
responding to your request. Choose RETRY .... or Cancel to Terminate the Win
16 Subsystem ''.

Trying to start write from the File Manager produces noting. From a cli /
command shell box, that box just locks.  Putting Wowexec.exe in my startup
group doesn't help either.

NT is on my D: partition under \winnt.

I had to go into regedit some weeks back to put the swapfile on d:\ - as
recommended (with cautions!) in Setup.

At a guess, I probably need to go into regedit again uner the
local_machine/system/controlset001/control/ windows or wow entry.

Can anyone point me in the right direction?

        Gary


#: 11806 S4/MS-DOS/Win3.x Apps
    08-Oct-92  15:45:48
Sb: #11188-NO Win 16 Subsystem
Fm: Jay Vernon[Microsoft] 72370,454
To: Gary J. Walker 100020,1104

Gary -

Could you tell me a little more about your configuration. 1. PC make and
model. 2. Memory 3. Disk controller and peripherals.

I have tested most Windows 3.1 Accessories, including write on different types
of hardware and have not run across this problem. With a little more
information I'm sure we can get to the bottom of it.

Thanks, Jay Vernon[Microsoft]

#: 11807 S4/MS-DOS/Win3.x Apps
    08-Oct-92  15:45:53
Sb: Function failed
Fm: Jay Vernon[Microsoft] 72370,454
To: Bob Churchwell 70743,3000 (X)

Bob -

This message and 10573 seem very strange. Can you please detail you
configuration for me. 1. PC make and model. 2. Memory, disk controller and
peripherals. 3. Anything else you thing I need to know.

Thanks, Jay

#: 11808 S4/MS-DOS/Win3.x Apps
    08-Oct-92  15:45:58
Sb: Floppy drive
Fm: Jay Vernon[Microsoft] 72370,454
To: Bob Churchwell 70743,3000 (X)

Bob - Please see 10571 if you haven't already. Thanks, Jay

#: 11809 S4/MS-DOS/Win3.x Apps
    08-Oct-92  15:46:03
Sb: 16-bit apps under NT
Fm: Jay Vernon[Microsoft] 72370,454
To: Bob Duste 70632,633 (X)

Bob -

If you're still having this problem. Please try copying the needed files from
the diskettes to your Windows NT machine and bypassing the setup for now. Then
just run winword (in the case of Word).

Thanks, Jay

#: 11810 S4/MS-DOS/Win3.x Apps
    08-Oct-92  15:46:14
Sb: Compatibility
Fm: Jay Vernon[Microsoft] 72370,454
To: Larry J. Seltzer 72241,445

Larry -

Very good point.  There are obviously programs in the 'Top 100' of the best
selling Windows 3.x (or DOS) that will not run under Windows NT's protected
subsystem structure.  If developers (in the case of Windows 3.x) used the
WIN16 api calls to write their programs most should run.  However, people who
execute system level or hardware calls may hit protection violations, in which
case they will have to rewrite their code. Norton is a very good example.
Some of the things Norton can do in unprotected DOS, would be a violation of
the requirements for C2 security which as you know we've applied for, in
addition to allowing a program operating in one subsystem crash the entire
operating system or another subsystem.

The statement could be 'the top (~)100 DOS and Windows 3.x applications that
do not require compromising the basis of Windows NT protected subsystems to
operate.'

Thanks for the clarification, it is very important. Jay




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11865 S4/MS-DOS/Win3.x Apps
    09-Oct-92  06:55:03
Sb: #11810-Compatibility
Fm: John Oellrich 72611,1452
To: Jay Vernon[Microsoft] 72370,454

Jay,

>>The statement could be 'the top (~)100 DOS and Windows 3.x applications that
do not require compromising the basis of Windows NT protected subsystems to
operate.'<<

Somehow this doesn't strike me as having the correct marketing pizzazz ;->

John

#: 11869 S4/MS-DOS/Win3.x Apps
    09-Oct-92  07:43:30
Sb: DOS bios compatability
Fm: John Estelle 70674,1510
To: sysop

The clock timer overflow flag located at 40:70 (midnight flag) is not getting
reset. Is this level of compatability going to be provided for DOS emulation
in the future?




#: 11289 S5/32-bit Windows Apps
    04-Oct-92  23:51:41
Sb: #10796-NT threads/multitasking
Fm: Marc C. Brooks 71461,320
To: Rob Tessier 76666,3633

Rob,

Earlier on, MS said that the kernal scheduler had some "quirks" in the July
release.  The swear they have smoothed things out since.  Don't judge too much
at the moment.

Marc


#: 11362 S5/32-bit Windows Apps
    05-Oct-92  13:20:58
Sb: NT EXE structure
Fm: Harald Pitro 100024,2662
To: All

Who can helps me to find the new structure of 32-bit-EXE/DLL files for Windows
NT?

Thanks

Harald

#: 11082 S5/32-bit Windows Apps
    02-Oct-92  17:50:31
Sb: winnt better w/EISA?
Fm: Jim Bublitz 72110,2267
To: anyone

I have bugeted money for a good 486 computer and I plan to heavily use WIN32
and maybe WinNT.   Can anyone who knows what they are talking about tell me if
it would be a good idea to buy an EISA machine rather than ISA.

Will there be anything you can do with Win32 on an EISA that you cant do on an
ISA.

The majority of my work on this machine will be Software Development using
C/C++./exit

#: 11413 S5/32-bit Windows Apps
    05-Oct-92  19:42:23
Sb: #11082-winnt better w/EISA?
Fm: neil colvin 71650,3517
To: Jim Bublitz 72110,2267

I run WINNT on both a 33 mhz 386 ISA machine and a 50MHZ 486 EISA machine.  It
works fine on both.  There is NOTHING that I cannot do on both machines.  The
50mhz 486 machine is about 3 - 4 times faster, thats all.

#: 11686 S5/32-bit Windows Apps
    07-Oct-92  13:31:36
Sb: Upload IcoShow ?
Fm: Harald Pitro 100024,2662
To: Sysop (X)

Dear Sysop,

I have revised my Shareware program IcoShow so it runs under Windows NT and I
had sent it to contest.
Would you advise me to upload it in this forum or it's better to wait?

Thanks and greats

Harald

#: 11290 S5/32-bit Windows Apps
    05-Oct-92  02:25:25
Sb: '_ctype' values wrong
Fm: Richard Spence 100112,304
To: Microsoft

Subject: "_ctype" values are wrong

From: Kevin Broadey <[e-mail]> via Richard Spence's
      CIS account

I am building an application on an Olivetti PWS4000 running the July release
of Windows NT using the MCL compiler.

I linked my application with the following libraries and isdigit('0') returned
zero (which it shouldn't).  I relinked it with libcmt.lib at the start of the
list and isdigit('0') returned a non-zero value (which it should).

The libraries were:-

win32libs=  $(LIB)\gdi32.lib $(LIB)\kernel32.lib $(LIB)\user32.lib \
        $(LIB)\userrtl.lib $(LIB)\crtdll.lib $(LIB)\ntdll.lib

I ran MCL with -E -C and checked the preprocessor output.  The macro version
of isdigit() was being used, so I put in a MessageBox call to wsprintf the
value of

    (int)(_ctype+1)['0']

It said 0xE1.  The 0x04 bit ought to be set for a digit.


So the question is, which of the above libraries defines "_ctype" and gives it
the wrong values?

#: 11818 S5/32-bit Windows Apps
    08-Oct-92  16:07:17
Sb: #11290-'_ctype' values wrong
Fm: Azfar Moazzam - Microsof 72370,453
To: Richard Spence 100112,304 (X)

Hi Richard,

This is a development related issue. Please post this message in the MSWIN32
forum. Our programming gurus in the MSWIN32 forum should be able to help you
with this issue. The WINNT forum is for setup and installation related
questions.

Best Regards.

Azfar [MS]




#: 11890 S6/OS/2, POSIX Apps
    09-Oct-92  08:38:15
Sb: Installing SQL Server
Fm: Dan Sullivan 76327,1534
To: SYSOP

I am trying to install SQL Server 4.2 on NT according to the release notes SQL
Server Programmers Toolkit for Windows NT. When I try to run setup on the OS/2
Setup Disk (Developer's System) I get the error from NT "Cannot connect to OS2
subsystem". What does this mean, how can I fix it.

Thanks in advance Dan





#: 11450 S7/Utilities/Applets
    05-Oct-92  22:57:57
Sb: #10794-How to use Epsilon.ini?
Fm: Mark Anders (Inmark) 76506,1112
To: Bob Byron 70107,1734

Bob,
       I'd check out Slick.  I have a copy and it does a very good job of
emulating Epsilon, as well as Brief, but since I don't use that, I'm not sure
how it compares with the original.  Slick does most of the stuff Epsilon does
and has the process buffer as well.

Mark Anders Inmark Development Corp.


#: 11624 S7/Utilities/Applets
    07-Oct-92  06:29:02
Sb: #10849-How to use Epsilon.ini?
Fm: Bob Byron 70107,1734
To: Cohagan 74375,313 (X)

Thanks for the suggesstion, but where do I find MicroEmacs?  I did not see it
in the WINNT area.

Bob

#: 11663 S7/Utilities/Applets
    07-Oct-92  10:41:09
Sb: #11624-How to use Epsilon.ini?
Fm: Cohagan 74375,313
To: Bob Byron 70107,1734

Bob-
  MicroEmacs is (or at least was) available in Lib 1 of the MSWIN32 forum. The
name of the file I downloaded was MEW10E.ZIP.  There is another file which
contains the MIPS version, but I don't recall its name.

Good Luck,
 Bill

#: 11667 S7/Utilities/Applets
    07-Oct-92  11:06:46
Sb: #10713-cd player
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Dan Barrett 75070,2231

Dan,

Are both CD's audio CD's?

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11802 S7/Utilities/Applets
    08-Oct-92  15:37:05
Sb: #11667-cd player
Fm: Dan Barrett 75070,2231
To: na 71075,3225 (X)

Yes, both CD's are audio CD's. The problem has changed a bit since I posted
the message, for some unknown reason, I can't hang NT anymore, but the CD
player keeps telling me to insert a CD even though the CD is loaded into the
drive. I can retry froever, with no success, but if I select abort or ignore,
and then rescan the disk it now loads fine.

I did discover 1 thing which might have a bearing on the problem, I noticed
that in the cdplayer.ini file, that this particular CD is the only one which
whose id starts out with letters instead of numbers.

Thanks, Dan

#: 11204 S7/Utilities/Applets
    04-Oct-92  01:50:08
Sb: xtradrive, IIT
Fm: Fankhauser Gerhard 100041,1275
To: Microsoft

Will Windows NT work with xtradrive from IIT ?

thanks i.a. for the answer

#: 11804 S7/Utilities/Applets
    08-Oct-92  15:43:37
Sb: #11204-xtradrive, IIT
Fm: Devlin Spearman(MS) 71075,645
To: Fankhauser Gerhard 100041,1275

I really do not know offhand.  Have you asked the vendor yet.  Thereare quite
a few apps that I may not have firsthand knowledge.  Your first best source is
the vendor in this case....


Devlin

#: 11805 S7/Utilities/Applets
    08-Oct-92  15:43:42
Sb: #10664-Losing system font
Fm: Devlin Spearman(MS) 71075,645
To: Kenneth Nicolson 100113,304 (X)

Hmmm...Please fill out the bugrep.txt form in lib3 and upload it to the same
LIB so we can process this prob....


Devlin




#: 11030 S8/H/W Compatibility
    02-Oct-92  11:17:02
Sb: NT Errors
Fm: Devlin Spearman(MS) 71075,645
To: Alex Howard 73310,2237 (X)

I'm sorry that you have continued to have probs.  Since you have already sent
us the data, I am sure that we are hard at work trying to get it straight.  If
we come up with a workaround for this build we wil let you know, but we are so
close to the general beta release, you may not see the results until then...


Devlin




There is 1 Reply.


#: 11052 S8/H/W Compatibility
    02-Oct-92  14:09:37
Sb: #11030-NT Errors
Fm: Alex Howard 73310,2237
To: Devlin Spearman(MS) 71075,645 (X)

Thanks, Devlin.  What concerns me is that the general beta will come out and
we still won't be able to access data on our CD Tech unit.  I certainly hope
we can.

Again, thank you.

-a.

#: 11057 S8/H/W Compatibility
    02-Oct-92  15:25:50
Sb: My CDU-8012 works
Fm: Carlen Hoppe 72110,2514
To: Devlin Spearman(MS) 71075,645 (X)

I was able to install NT using my Sony CDU-8012.  This drive is in a Sun
Microsystems box.  I used an Adaptec 1742 controller and did the full
graphical install.  It even played music on with the CD controller app.

#: 11065 S8/H/W Compatibility
    02-Oct-92  15:46:41
Sb: #10712-keyboard lockup
Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643
To: Dan Barrett 75070,2231 (X)

Dan,

I've just tried (with no success) to duplicate this on a Gateway 486/33 ISA
with a non-remapping keyboard.  Is it possible for you to swap keyboards to
try and narrow in on the problem?

Regards,
  -- Terence Hosken [MS]

#: 11109 S8/H/W Compatibility
    02-Oct-92  20:42:31
Sb: #10872-Plus Hardcard
Fm: Anil K. Sodhy 70143,365
To: Devlin Spearman(MS) 71075,645 (X)

I have managed to get around this limitation.  I can now use my Hardcard and
my regular IDE drive.  I will be testing lots of applications.

#: 11128 S8/H/W Compatibility
    03-Oct-92  03:13:04
Sb: #10945-Compex ethernet cards
Fm: James Mansion 100020,1650
To: Devlin Spearman(MS) 71075,645 (X)

Thanks - what I will do in the short term is to try a real SMC card (should
arrive any minute!) and see if that solves the problem.

James Mansion

#: 11138 S8/H/W Compatibility
    03-Oct-92  08:14:33
Sb: COM PORTS AND WINNT
Fm: Don Perry 76676,1127
To: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 (X)

I am unable to use my modem under WINNT.

  1. I have my modem (Hayes Ultra 14400) configured as COM1 and a serial
  mouse as COM2.  WINNT recognizes the mouse on COM2, appears to recognize
  the existence of COM1 but neither the TERMINAL.EXE program nor any DOS or
  WIN31 apps can use the modem.  The serial IO card has a NS16550AFN UART
  chip installed for COM1.

  2. When I try to inspect the "advanced" com port settings from the control
  panel (logged on as administrator) I get a "You do mot have proper IO
  privilege to save the advanced IO settings.  Contact the system
  administrator" message.

My modem works well under WIN31 and OS/2.  WHAT GIVES???

How do I obtain "proper IO privilege" to change com port settings in the
control panel???

Any information gratefully appreciated!!

     Don

#: 11028 S8/H/W Compatibility
    02-Oct-92  11:16:50
Sb: #10992-Fut Domain & NEC
Fm: Devlin Spearman(MS) 71075,645
To: Robert Chronister 70363,246 (X)

och!  You are correct. Thanx for catching my typo!


Devlin



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11098 S8/H/W Compatibility
    02-Oct-92  18:46:43
Sb: #11028-Fut Domain & NEC
Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246
To: Devlin Spearman(MS) 71075,645 (X)

Devlin:

Glad to be of help.  bob

#: 11029 S8/H/W Compatibility
    02-Oct-92  11:16:56
Sb: #10145-Fut Domain & NEC
Fm: Devlin Spearman(MS) 71075,645
To: Jeff Rosen 70034,3554

Have you tried moving around the order of the SCSI devices.  Some others with
similar probs have reported this to be an effective workaround in some
cases....



Devlin

#: 11205 S8/H/W Compatibility
    04-Oct-92  02:02:25
Sb: #10949-Fut Domain & NEC
Fm: Steve Dirickson 70313,3252
To: Devlin Spearman(MS) 71075,645

>Make sure that you do not have an IRQ conflict?  The HAL is being initialized
>at that point, and it is seeing all cards on the bus, driver or no driver. I,
><ahem>ran into that one the other day<sheepish grin>....

As I mentioned in one of my messages on this (you probably didn't see it--it
was a few weeks back) I stripped the machine down to nothing but the TMC-1680
and the video board (Paradise 512K VGA Professional), and still got the same
result.  Thanks for the consideration though.  At this late date, I'll probably
just wait until the next release comes out and see how that one does.

#: 11233 S8/H/W Compatibility
    04-Oct-92  10:39:07
Sb: #10894-SoundBlaster Pro MCV
Fm: John Marquette 76064,1037
To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643

Terence:

Thanks for the tip.  I've forwarded a copy of the file to the appropriate
internet address.  I'm anxious to see what Creative Labs is going to do with
this problem, as it's a problem for them on the Win31 DOS side as well.
Agreed, MCA machines are for all practical purposes orphans, but my sweetheart
deal on mine makes me want to milk it for all it's worth.

I'll send you a copy of the hardware report via CIS mail.

Regards,
John

#: 11342 S8/H/W Compatibility
    05-Oct-92  11:27:31
Sb: #10906-DTC3290AS SCSI Adaptor
Fm: Mike Snowden 100021,3015
To: HowieFomby 76645,754

Using the standard driver is so flakey as to be unusable.

Our supplier upgraded us to a caching controller on one node that
did work - but compiled our large MFC app in 1 hour instead of 20min,
so we reverted back.

I'm waiting to see whether a controller is included in the Developer
Membership kit, since we specified a bus type....

#: 11388 S8/H/W Compatibility
    05-Oct-92  14:59:17
Sb: $199 DAK CD-ROM???
Fm: tom campbell 75530,3607
To: All

Has anyone trieNT on that $199 CD-ROM machine from DAK? Cheap scum that I am,
I'd like to buy one if I can run NT. Yes, I know everything'll take forever.
--tom campbell

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11490 S8/H/W Compatibility
    06-Oct-92  07:58:05
Sb: #11388-$199 DAK CD-ROM???
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: tom campbell 75530,3607

Tom,

<<Cheap scum that I am, I'd like to buy one if I can run NT. Yes, I know
everything'll take forever.>>

You'll be able install NT from DOSusing the DOS2NT method, but don't expect to
be able to use it under NT. The drive/controller is a proprientary interface
(as I understand it) so ...

Art

#: 11591 S8/H/W Compatibility
    06-Oct-92  21:13:31
Sb: SCSI II Host Adaptors???
Fm: Karl Mitschke 73650,150
To: all

Hello All:

Nice to see you all again!<g>

I have recently purchased a Toshiba 3201 CD Rom drive for my Amiga, and figure
I will put it in an external case, so I can use it both for the Amiga, and
NT.. Now my question is... What SCSI Host Adapters work with this drive, and
NT? I would really like to end up with an Ultrastor, since they make my ESDI
controller, and it is FAST.. talking <10 seconds from power on to a working
WIN31 cursor...

So, either I need a cheap adapter that works now, or I need to get an
Ultrastor now and use dos2nt till beta days (after all, it's only money!)

Any comments, thoughts, warnings???

I have been saving for months for this, and sop have literally tens of dollars
burning a hole in my checkbook.. Help me spend it!!!

Karl

#: 11056 S8/H/W Compatibility
    02-Oct-92  15:18:14
Sb: #10943-AST 4/33
Fm: Carlen Hoppe 72110,2514
To: Devlin Spearman(MS) 71075,645 (X)

I succesfully installed NT (July) on my AST Power Premium 4/33.
My bios version is 1.05.  The only problem I had related to having
16 megs of ram and not having the over 16 mb EISA setting enabled.

#: 11345 S8/H/W Compatibility
    05-Oct-92  12:23:56
Sb: #11056-AST 4/33
Fm: Daniel Peterson 70363,2541
To: Carlen Hoppe 72110,2514

I had the guy from AST here.( he is a beta tester for MS also)
we for the life of us could not get nt to write / read from the floppys.
We even went back to bios ver 1.04 NO GOOD

we could not get rid of the error on boot of "ESIA memory information
incorrect using isa memopry configuration" have tried every thing we could
think of.

power premum 4/33
bios ver 1.05
16M mem

#: 11551 S8/H/W Compatibility
    06-Oct-92  14:17:00
Sb: #11345-AST 4/33
Fm: Carlen Hoppe 72110,2514
To: Daniel Peterson 70363,2541 (X)

How much ram do you have ?

When I installed 16mb, I recieved a EISA ram configuration error.
I had to change the "allow over 16mb of ram" software switch in
the EISA setup menu for NT boot without a error.  When you install
16mb in your system, you are given 16.25mb because of memory mapped
out of the UMB blocks.  Are you using the EISA disks that came with the PP or
another AST EISA machine ?

One nice thing about buying an AST is that your dealer should be more than
happy to declare all the parts in your power premium dead and order new ones
for you.

Carlen

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11601 S8/H/W Compatibility
    06-Oct-92  22:14:04
Sb: #11551-AST 4/33
Fm: Daniel Peterson 70363,2541
To: Carlen Hoppe 72110,2514

I did put 16 megs in and I will check the switch for the setting as I dont
remember what I set it to.
Dan

#: 11621 S8/H/W Compatibility
    07-Oct-92  05:04:18
Sb: Bernoulli Drive
Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246
To: Steve Fait (Microsoft) 75300,3143 (X)

Steve:

Got very surprised yesterday.  Added a 90 meg Bernoulli to my system using an
Adaptec 1542b.  Opened NT and it read the drive without trouble.  Thought that
the transportable drives were not recognized by NT.  NOte: the new Bernoullis
are SCSI II.  NT is now recognizing my 2 IDE drives, my 2 SCSI drives and the
Bernoulli.  As they sometimes say, "Doesn't get much more complicated than
this" <BG>.  Anway, curious about the Bernoulli.

                               bob

#: 11629 S8/H/W Compatibility
    07-Oct-92  06:48:51
Sb: UltraStor 24F
Fm: Charles Hoffman 71477,3612
To: ALL

I am using a Gateway 486/50DX2 EISA with 16meg ram, 2 half gig drives with an
UltraStor 24F controller.  Installed WIN NT stuff from the CD-ROM, great!
However, I cannot boot up WIN NT.  0x69 message. Have done all the recommended
steps listed in the Doc Release Notes for the Ultra Stor 24F.  Drives have
more than 1024 cyl.  What can I do?  How do we get past this message?

Does a Beta Driver exist now? If not when? Will one be avail in the true beta
NT release later this month?

Chas

#: 11261 S8/H/W Compatibility
    04-Oct-92  16:42:25
Sb: Panasonic CD support
Fm: Stephen W. Hiemstra 71531,575
To: sysop (X)

I am curious whether the beta version of Windows NT will expand on the current
list of hardware components supported.  In particular, I am concerned about NT
support of the Panasonic CD-ROM that comes with the Creative Labs Multimedia
Upgrade Kit.  I have already invested in this kit and am not anxious to look
for a new CD.  What's the good word?

#: 11673 S8/H/W Compatibility
    07-Oct-92  11:29:52
Sb: #11261-Panasonic CD support
Fm: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642
To: Stephen W. Hiemstra 71531,575 (X)

Stephen,

Microsoft's standard means of releasing drivers is with their CD releases.
Although Microsoft is not committed to continue this practice, currently all
fixed, updated, or new device drivers are being posted on the CompuServe
Forum: WinNT, Lib 2.  Microsoft is currently making every attempt to keep this
library updated with drivers as they become available. If you have hardware
that is not currently supported, or does not have a driver posted in WinNT,
Lib 2; please make a device driver request by filling out the hwfeed.txt form
and mail it to Microsoft at [e-mail].

Please be aware that because of Microsoft's support demands right now, this is
a one way alias; Microsoft is not likely to respond directly to you to confirm
that they have received your request.

The hardware compatibility list can be found in MSWIN32, Lib 17 on CompuServe
as 0792hw.txt.

Hwfeed.txt can be found on CompuServe in MSWIN32, Lib 17; or WINNT, Lib 1.

Regards, Sam Karroum [MS]

#: 11702 S8/H/W Compatibility
    07-Oct-92  14:25:02
Sb: #10921-cd player
Fm: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642
To: jim holmes 71507,1346

Jim,

Only SCSI-II CD drives are supported for audio output with the July release.
This is being looked into to add support for SCSI-I (if the term applies :)
for the beta release.

Regards, Sam Karroum [MS]

#: 11149 S8/H/W Compatibility
    03-Oct-92  10:14:54
Sb: #10597-Soundblaster CD-ROM
Fm: John A. Gallagher 74216,270
To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 (X)

I came into this late. Is there a question as to whether there will -ever- be
a driver for this CD-ROM? There are an awful lot of people that figured a
system developed for Windows 3.X would be -one of the first - supported by Win
NT! I am one of them. It now seems like we are being told that we may have to
reinvest in other drives and controllers. Can you offer any word of
encouragement? Who is the bottleneck - you or Creative Labs? The last time I
spoke to them, they suggested that they do plan to support NT -in the future.
How come noone can define when/if this will happen? P.S. I have already sent
in an HWFEED but feedback only seems to go one way.

#: 11703 S8/H/W Compatibility
    07-Oct-92  14:28:23
Sb: #11149-Soundblaster CD-ROM
Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643
To: John A. Gallagher 74216,270

John,

I didn't mean to sound discouraging.  I would expect any piece of hardware
with wide usage and a demand for Windows NT compatibility will get a driver.
 I just can't promise anything until it actually happens.  You never know when
lightning will strike!  There are two things you can do to encourage speedy
driver development, though.

1.  Contact the hardware vendor. 2.  Send in an hwfeed.txt.

Sounds like you've done both.

Regards,
   -- Terence Hosken [MS]

#: 11326 S8/H/W Compatibility
    05-Oct-92  06:54:36
Sb: winnt
Fm: RICH COMEAU 70751,3056
To: sysop

           BUZZWORDS INTERNATIONAL INC                 10-05-92
           RICH COMEAU
           RT. 1 BOX 215 T
           CAPE GIRARDEAU, MO 63701
           PHONE [phone]  FAX [phone]
           DIRECT LINE TO MR. COMEAU  314-335-1229
           MCI ACCOUNT ID   BUZZWORD
           COMPUSERVE ID    70751,3056

I GET THE FOLLOWING MESSAGE EVERY TIME I BOOT WINDOWS NT

INCORECT EISA MEMORY CONFIGURATION WINDOWS NT WILL USE THE IASA MEMORY
CONFIGURATION INFORMATION

MY OTHER  OPERATING SYSTEMS  DOS, OS/2 2.0, SCO UNIX, INTERNATIVE UNIX,
SOLARUS UNIX, UHC UNIX, AND UNIVELL UNIX DO NOT GIVE ME THIS MESSAGE

THE VERSION/DATE ON MY WIN32 CDROM SAYS  PRELIMINARY VERISION JULY 1992

MY HARDWARE CONFIGURATION FOLLOWS


INTERRUPT ASSIGNMENTS:                     STANDARD DMA ASSIGNMENTS: IRQ 0
System Timer                        DMA 0 IRQ 1  Keyboard
DMA 1 Sound Blaster IRQ 2  [Cascade]                           DMA 2 Floppy
Disk IRQ 3  Etherlink II                        DMA 3 IRQ 4  NE2000
DMA 4 [Cascade] IRQ 5  InPort Mouse                        DMA 5 IRQ 6  Floppy
Disk                         DMA 6 IRQ 7  Sound Blaster
DMA 7 Adaptec SCSI IRQ 8  Clock/Calendar IRQ 9  Available
SCSI ID = 2 WangDAT 3 Gig DAT 1300 IRQ 10 Western Digital Ethernet
SCSI ID = 3 MITSHITA CD-ROM CR-5xx IRQ 11 Adaptec IRQ 12 Available IRQ 13
80387

IO ADDRESS                                       80486 CPU  EISA BUS  AIR
BOARD Disabled Parallel Port(s) LPT1=378h              Floppy Drive A:
1.44M(3.5") Disabled COM1=3F8h Disabled COM2=2F8h UART 8250  Floppy Drive B:
1.2M(5.25") NE2000  IRQ 4 IO = 340  NO DMA NO RAM            Hard Drive C: =
107M ETHERLINK II IRQ = 3 IO = 300 MEM DC000          SEGATE ST8120A 16MS 3.5"
DRIVE ADAPTEC SCSI Adapter 330H SCSI Address 7         Base Memory Size:  640K
IDE CONTROLLER                                   Extended Memory Size:  15360K
Video Adapter: ATI ULTRA 1.5 MEG VIDEO RAM       Supports 64Meg on Mother
Board Video Bios Ver 1.1                               Clock/Calendar: CMOS
Clock Mouse: 2 Button(s)    Joystick(s): YES           19 Inch Mitsubishi
Diamond Scan PHYSICAL STATION NUMBER 0000:C0EF:C71C           Res 1024x768 Non
Interlaced
                                                 2ND VIDEO ADAPTER  HERCULES
CPU SPEED     15785 Dhrystones                   Phoenix Bios Ver. 1.01.03
VIDEO SPEED   17478 Chars/Second                 BIOS  Copyright 1985-1991
MATH SPEED    5640.0K Whetstones CLOCK SPEED   33 Mhz
IMPORT MOUSE DRIVER 8.20
                                                 XMS VERSION 3.00  DRIVER 3.07

#: 11707 S8/H/W Compatibility
    07-Oct-92  14:48:29
Sb: #11326-winnt
Fm: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642
To: RICH COMEAU 70751,3056

Rich,

Run the EISA configuration and double check for a switch or setiing that
enables memory above 16-Mb. If such a switch exists, and not set properly, the
amount of memory installed and the amount being reported will differ and
that's what triggering the memory message.

Hope this helps. Sam Karroum [MS]

#: 11742 S8/H/W Compatibility
    07-Oct-92  21:41:10
Sb: Hardware compatibility
Fm: Don Apperson 72700,1042
To: Steve Fait

I am getting ready to buy a CAD development computer for WIN32, but I don't
know if it will be compatable with Windows NT.  It is a Gateway 66MHZ 486DX2
with 32 MB and a 500 MB SCSI drive.  I assume this would not have any
compatibility problems, but I don't know about the graphics.  Gateway ships
this computer with a VESA Local Bus ATI Ultra Pro with 1MB VRAM.  The hardware
compatibility list seems to indicate that the ATI cards are not yet supported,
much less a VESA local bus.  Can anyone tell me if it will be OK or do I have
to get a SVGA card for now to develop on?

  Don

#: 11107 S8/H/W Compatibility
    02-Oct-92  20:20:55
Sb: #10985-Toshiba Source
Fm: Al Longyear 70165,725
To: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52 (X)

Ain't -- egh scratch that -- Isn't it the truth!

#: 11604 S8/H/W Compatibility
    06-Oct-92  22:35:50
Sb: #10953-Toshiba Source
Fm: Bruce Colwell 100026,1210
To: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52

Do you have any non 800 numbers for us international guys?
They sound like a good deal!

#: 11743 S8/H/W Compatibility
    07-Oct-92  22:46:25
Sb: #11604-Toshiba Source
Fm: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52
To: Bruce Colwell 100026,1210

Re: High Technology - every number they list is a 1-800 number, except for
their fax - 818-988-6581.  They are located at 16539 Saticoy Street, Van Nuys,
CA 91409-9277.

So far I'm delighted with my setup - just got it all working with DOS and
Windows, NT is next.

#: 11449 S8/H/W Compatibility
    05-Oct-92  22:24:22
Sb: A good CD-ROM drive??
Fm: Tim Smith 70313,1326
To: ALL

Greetings,

      Im looking to get a CD-ROM drive for my PC.  My requirements are
      for it to work with: DOS, OS/2 2.0, NT, the universe :-)
      Anyway, my picks so far are the following:

             CD Technologies CD Porta-Drive via the Microsoft offer,
             which is suppost to be SCSI-2 compatable,  but I have
             heard it will not handle sync negoation (not good).
             Has anyone else used this drive?  How do you like it?
             is MPC video smooth on it?  Would you buy another one
             if needed?  Im alittle worried about CD Technologies
             staying in business to support the drive since toshiba
             will not.

             NEC 74 via plain mail order.  This is only a SCSI-1 device
             but the update to os/2 will support it with DATA and AUDIO,
             so I assume that NT will also support more fully in time.
             It much faster than any others on the market.  Also it is
             XA compatable, whereas the toshiba is not.  If anyone out
             there has one, what do you think of it?  Would you buy another?
             And I know NEC will be there to support me.


                                         thanks.. tim

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11495 S8/H/W Compatibility
    06-Oct-92  08:18:23
Sb: #11449-A good CD-ROM drive??
Fm: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52
To: Tim Smith 70313,1326

Tim -

I bought the Toshiba XM3301E (same drive as the CD Tech unit) from High
Technology (800-366-6001) for $483 including shipping (vs $475 from CD Tech)
($387 for the internal unit versus $425) and ordered an Adaptec 1542B
separately.  Service was fast, and buying from this company qualifies you for
low$$ 1for1 CD ROMs (the list is 7 pages long).

I am very satisfied, and this drive is sold as a Toshiba (case by Tos too), so
I have no worries about service.  Hope this helps . . .

#: 11608 S8/H/W Compatibility
    06-Oct-92  23:23:28
Sb: #11449-A good CD-ROM drive??
Fm: Jon Tara 76477,3342
To: Tim Smith 70313,1326

> CD Technologies CD Porta-Drive... have heard it does not suppor sync >
negotiation, which is not good...

The NEC 74/84 also does not support sync negotiation.  If you turn sync
negotiation on on the host adapter, the NEC will fail about 50% of the time.

I solved this problem by turning off sync negotiation on my AHA1542B and
turning it ON on my HP C2247 hard drive.  As long as your devices that DO
support sync negotiation have a jumper to enable it, you can disable it on the
host adapter, and this will not interfere with devices that do NOT support it.

(BTW, Coretest is reporting about 2.0MB/sec on the HP without sync, 2.7 with.
The 2247 has variable sectors/track and runs between 2.5 and 5MB/sec transfer
rate.  So, I assume the reason it is so "slow" is because I haven't filled it
up much yet...)

Oh, yes, another NEC84 oddity - despite what has been reported here to the
contrary, the NEC 84 has NO provisions for SCSI bus termination!  (It was
reported by somebody else that switch 5 provides termination.)  In my
discussions with their technical support, they said that is not true, that
switch 5, like switch 6, is intended for use only during testing.  They
shipped me a little SCSI ribbon terminator, that plugs between the cable and
the drive.  They INSIST that in the cases where the NEC is the only device on
the bus, that terminators at the host adapter end are sufficient.  That's not
at all what the 1542B manual says, though.

And, another little NEC tidbit - the little bus termination adapter they sent
me is marked "Trantor".  Hint, hint...

#: 11746 S8/H/W Compatibility
    07-Oct-92  23:00:00
Sb: #11608-A good CD-ROM drive??
Fm: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52
To: Jon Tara 76477,3342 (X)

Jon -

If you don't mind my asking - I'm trying to get my 1542B running reliably, and
it only seems to be sensed about half the time on bootup. (Standard settings,
other than BIOS and FD disabled - I'm using it only for CD ROM.)  Would
turning off the sync negotiation help?  (I'll open up the box and try this, as
well as playing with the wait states, but some advice would be appreciated.)

Thanks in advance for the help.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11748 S8/H/W Compatibility
    07-Oct-92  23:38:35
Sb: #11746-A good CD-ROM drive??
Fm: Jon Tara 76477,3342
To: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52

If you are using a NEC CD-ROM, you definately need to turn off sync
negotiation on the controller (this is the way the board is shipped).  Also,
you can disable the BIOS, since it is used only for hard disks, and will just
slow down your boot procedure while it sits there looking for a hard drive.

I am using the CorelSCSI CDROM driver that shipped with the 1542B-Plus.  For
some reason, you HAVE to use the version of MSCDEX that ships with it, NOT the
slightly newer one available from Microsoft.  If you are using the older
Adaptec CD-rom ASPI driver that they sold (still do?) separately, I dunno
anything about it.  (To clarify - ASPI4DOS hasn't changed.  The -Plus model
ships with a set of ASPI drivers that you load after ASPI4DOS that support
CD-ROM, optical read/write drives, jukeboxes, etc. that were written by
Corel.)

Also, you should not address the CDROM as device 0 or 1, since these are
reserved for hard disks, at least in NT.  The NEC drives ship jumpered for
device 1.

#: 11148 S8/H/W Compatibility
    03-Oct-92  10:12:51
Sb: CDROM help re IRQs
Fm: Steve Liberty 71450,2341
To: all

Is it true that NT currently only supports CDROM's on IRQ5? I am about to buy
a CD ROM drive and SCSI controller, and I am trying to plan IRQ settings so
that I don't run into problems. Unfortunately, I have too much stuff in my
system, and IRQ5 is just not available. What is the scoop here? My current
plan is to get a NEC CDR84 with a Future Domain TMC885M-DOS kit. ANy help
would be appreciated. Steve

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11187 S8/H/W Compatibility
    03-Oct-92  17:23:46
Sb: #11148-CDROM help re IRQs
Fm: Clarke 75470,1676
To: Steve Liberty 71450,2341 (X)

Steve, no that's not true. It depends on the SCSI card, some cards like the
Future Domain FD-850 are currently supported on IRQ 5 only. Others like the
adaptec 1542B are supported on any IRQ the card supports.

The NEC 74/84 are not supported yet under NT, It's the FD cards that have the
IRQ restriction. Maybe in the next release, NT will support more IRQ's for
the FD-8xx series.

You should download the 0792 hardware compatibility list, before you buy
anything if you want to make it work with NT. There may be a new HW
Compatibility list out dated 0992.

-Clarke



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11198 S8/H/W Compatibility
    03-Oct-92  20:57:41
Sb: #11187-CDROM help re IRQs
Fm: Steve Liberty 71450,2341
To: Clarke 75470,1676 (X)

Thanks for the reply. The FD TMC 850 is listed in that file, but it doesn't
say anything about IRQ issues. Also, isn't the support issue with the NEC
74/84 only a problem if you get the NEC controller card? When I ordered the CD
with NT on it, the guy I was speaking to said that many people are
successfully using the NEC drives with FD controllers. WHat about the SONY
CDU-541 with a FD controller?

So the TMC 850 will have th IRQ5 restriction, but what about the TMC 885? This
is a controller that can be set for IRQs above 7 (10, 11, 15....). It sits on
a 16bit bus, even though it has an 8 bit SCSI chip.

Any additional comments would be appreciated.

Steve P.S. Are any of ou out there using the NEC 84 with an inexpensive
controller set for a high IRQ? Please let me know what card and settings have
worked for you.

There are 2 Replies.

#: 11279 S8/H/W Compatibility
    04-Oct-92  21:04:46
Sb: #11198-CDROM help re IRQs
Fm: Clarke 75470,1676
To: Steve Liberty 71450,2341 (X)

Steve, the same issue holds true for the 885 as does for the 850. All the
cards based on that chipset 830/850/885 are (under the current release)
supported at IRQ5.

As far as the NEC 84 goes, I have heard of problems running the unit under
NT, especially with the audio playback, but cannot confirm for sure (as I
don't own one...).  Also the NEC 84 is not on the current compatibilty list
as provided by MS, meaning that they have not sucessfully tested the unit
with NT.

I have used the 850 with the SONY CDU541 (what I first used to set NT up
with). It worked fine, and without problems.

-Clarke


There is 1 Reply.

#: 11327 S8/H/W Compatibility
    05-Oct-92  07:37:36
Sb: #11279-CDROM help re IRQs
Fm: Steve Liberty 71450,2341
To: Clarke 75470,1676

The list I downloaded here DOES include the NEC 84, so I am surprised when you
say otherwise. As for the IRQ5 stuff, I annot set my system for IRQ5. Are
there other inexpensive controllers that will allow me to use a higher IRQ
setting? Steve

#: 11399 S8/H/W Compatibility
    05-Oct-92  16:32:47
Sb: #11327-CDROM help re IRQs
Fm: Clarke 75470,1676
To: Steve Liberty 71450,2341 (X)

Oops, your right! The NEC 84 is listed on the list as being tested. my
mistake, You might want to take a wander through the Install/Setup forum and
read the messages about the 84/74. As for a cheap controller supporting NT, I
don't know. The FD 850 is the cheapest that I know of. The next release (due
end of this month...) hopefully will support the other IRQ's.

-Clarke


There is 1 Reply.

#: 11400 S8/H/W Compatibility
    05-Oct-92  17:11:16
Sb: #11399-CDROM help re IRQs
Fm: Steve Liberty 71450,2341
To: Clarke 75470,1676

Clarke, Thanks for all of the replies. Are you with Microsoft? I assumed not
since it didn't say Microsoft neaxt to your name, but you are one of only two
CIS members that have responded to my question. Are you saying that the next
release might support other IRQ's with any knowledge, or is it just wishful
thinking? Steve

#: 11619 S8/H/W Compatibility
    07-Oct-92  03:38:10
Sb: #11400-CDROM help re IRQs
Fm: Clarke 75470,1676
To: Steve Liberty 71450,2341 (X)

Nope, i'm not microsoft... I just had an interest because you had the same
card I started with. (plus i've recently started using TAPCIS and am able to
spend lots more time doing this stuff)

I don't know for sure that they are going to be providing support for more
IRQ's than IRQ5, but it seems like a logical step to me. As far as i'm aware
none of the other SCSI adaptors have that restriction.  Unles there is some
reason they (MS) can only code for IRQ5, I would expect support for more to
be forthcoming in the next release. But who knows what MS is going to be
doing.  I guess we will find out at the end of the month eh?

-Clarke


There is 1 Reply.

#: 11622 S8/H/W Compatibility
    07-Oct-92  05:54:14
Sb: #11619-CDROM help re IRQs
Fm: Steve Liberty 71450,2341
To: Clarke 75470,1676

Clarke, Thanks for all of your help, and your responses. I think I have
decided to go with the Adaptec 1542bk instead of the Future Domain. The
TMC885mdos ends up costing about $100 less, but for now, it would be unusable
on my system. Now I just have to decide once and for all which drive to get.
All along I have been thinking Nec 84. When I called Developer Services, they
tried to discourage me on that one, saying that the masses have had better
luck with the Sony 541. Some of the vendors are advertising the Toshiba
3301/Adaptec 1542b as an NT kit. Then, another user here told me that he uses
the Nec 84 with the Adaptec, and has had no problems at all. Any comments on
this? Steve

#: 11704 S8/H/W Compatibility
    07-Oct-92  14:41:51
Sb: #11622-CDROM help re IRQs
Fm: Clarke 75470,1676
To: Steve Liberty 71450,2341 (X)

Steve, all I can tell you is what I have experianced here. When I first
started using NT, I ran with a Sony CDU-541 and the FD-850. I replaced the
FD-850 with an Adaptec 1540b (same as 1542 but without floppy drive). I was
extremly happy with the 1540b, but when I bought an EISA motherboard, i
replaced it with the Adaptec 1740A EISA SCSI.

The Sony CDU-541 is SCSI-2, has a 64K buffer, Supports the Kodak Photo-CD
format and has worked without flaw since I got it. It's got a great mechanism
and I have nothing bad to say about it except that it comes with an external
terminator - which is no big deal anyway.

I recommend both the 541, and Adaptec products in general, they seem to be
the best supported and compatible cards around.

-Clarke


There is 1 Reply.

#: 11734 S8/H/W Compatibility
    07-Oct-92  19:42:27
Sb: #11704-CDROM help re IRQs
Fm: Steve Liberty 71450,2341
To: Clarke 75470,1676

Clarke, Thanks again for all of your input. Between your thoughts and those of
Alan Paget, I am definately settled on the Adaptec controller. The drive is
probably going to depend on the availability and prices I can find. I like the
NEC for it's speed, but the Sony is cheaper and more available at this time.
Anyway, I will probably make the plunge this week. I will let you know what I
decide, and how everything works out. Steve

#: 11341 S8/H/W Compatibility
    05-Oct-92  11:08:41
Sb: #11198-CDROM help re IRQs
Fm: Muzaffer KAL 70324,2553
To: Steve Liberty 71450,2341

hi,
I have a 83M at irq 7 with TRANTOR T128 but I think that is not what you want.
I have a question: I have the above setup and I can not use the CD Player
applet in NT to play audio CDs. Is that because my CDROM is not SCSI II
compatible?
thanks

Muzaffer

#: 11489 S8/H/W Compatibility
    06-Oct-92  07:53:55
Sb: #11341-CDROM help re IRQs
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Muzaffer KAL 70324,2553

Mzaffer,

<<I have a question: I have the above setup and I can not use the CD Player
applet in NT to play audio CDs. Is that because my CDROM is not SCSI II
compatible?>>

That'w a rog. Only SCSI-2 drives are currently supported for audio. But
trantor has a device driver for the T128. I'm going to install is a bit later
and see if I can get ti working.

If trantor included the appropriate filtering it will then play audio. We'll
have to wait anv see on that one.

Art

#: 11565 S8/H/W Compatibility
    06-Oct-92  17:19:51
Sb: #11489-CDROM help re IRQs
Fm: Muzaffer KAL 70324,2553
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

Art,
I've downloaded Trantor's driver and installed it. It works like a charm when
it comes to text but it does not play my audio CDs. It gives an unrecognized
command error.

Muzaffer

#: 11754 S8/H/W Compatibility
    08-Oct-92  05:07:36
Sb: #11565-CDROM help re IRQs
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Muzaffer KAL 70324,2553

Muzaffer,

<<I've downloaded Trantor's driver and installed it. It works like a charm
when it comes to text but it does not play my audio CDs. It gives an
unrecognized command error.>>

I got it up and running now too. It's even on IRQ7. Ooooh. <g> But I cannot
play audio either. No error message (except cd player did say it could not
read the TOC). No eject response either.

When I loaded my 3.x app. I got an error loading the MCI audio driver. As I
understand it non-scsi2 drives will need a filter to translate scsi2 audio
commands to the proprietary command. Until this happens we are SOL.

I just wonder who is going to write the filter?

Art

#: 11577 S8/H/W Compatibility
    06-Oct-92  18:29:15
Sb: #11538-CDROM help re IRQs
Fm: Steve Liberty 71450,2341
To: Alan E Paget 76620,1707

Alan, Thanks for the reply. Now I am getting the kind of info I needed. What
IRQ are you using? Does NT work with the 1542b when it is set for high
numbered IRQ's? How do you like the NEC CDR84 in general? I think I can get
one for $509, but the Adaptec controller will cost me nearly $290 with the DOS
drivers and cable (1542bk). I guess in the long run, it will be worth while
though. I just don't want to buy hardware at such high costs, and find out
that it isn't going to work afterall. Perhaps you can email me your phone
number so I can pick your brain some more. Thanks for any help you can offer.
Steve

#: 11690 S8/H/W Compatibility
    07-Oct-92  13:44:56
Sb: #11577-CDROM help re IRQs
Fm: Alan E Paget 76620,1707
To: Steve Liberty 71450,2341 (X)

Steve, Here is the current settings that are used in by machine for the 1542b,
which work for dos/Windows and NT.

IRQ

#: 11691 S8/H/W Compatibility
    07-Oct-92  13:51:56
Sb: #11577-CDROM help re IRQs
Fm: Alan E Paget 76620,1707
To: Steve Liberty 71450,2341 (X)

Steve, Lets try this again (hit the wrong keys)

My current settings for the 1542b are:

IRQ - 11,  DMA - 5, I/O - 330h, Bios - Dc00h, Floppy enabled.

This works for DOS 5.0, Windows 3.1, and NT (without audio).

These settings are the factory default settings for the 1542b.

As for the NEC CDR84, It's great, NT booted and installed just like it should.
Still wating for the DOS drivers to enbale the audio.  NT is said to support
the audio in the beta release...


There are 2 Replies.

#: 11735 S8/H/W Compatibility
    07-Oct-92  19:42:32
Sb: #11691-CDROM help re IRQs
Fm: Steve Liberty 71450,2341
To: Alan E Paget 76620,1707

Alan, Thanks for your help. Now, I have definately decided on the Adaptec
controller. I will probably get the NEC if I can find it at the right price,
but I am still considering the Sony 541 as well, and the Toshiba 3301b is not
out of the running either. I like the NEC for it's speed, but right now it is
a little hard to find. I will be calling you to ask some more questions.
Thanks for your numbers. Steve

#: 11745 S8/H/W Compatibility
    07-Oct-92  22:54:41
Sb: #11691-CDROM help re IRQs
Fm: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52
To: Alan E Paget 76620,1707

Alan - Just installed my 1542B.  I'm using it only for CD ROM (now) so I
disabled the BIOS.  I'm calling tech support in the morning - system seems to
intermittently sense the presence of the 1542B on bootup - no rhyme or reason.
(If you have ideas here, I'd appreciate them.  Everything's standard, except
BIOS and FD disabled.)

Also, what range should be excluded in EMM386/Windows if the BIOS is enabled?
You seem to be knowledgable - pardon my asking all this technical stuff.
Thanks in advance for the help . . .

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11755 S8/H/W Compatibility
    08-Oct-92  05:40:32
Sb: #11745-CDROM help re IRQs
Fm: Bob Chronister 70363,246
To: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52

have my 1542b in the system in conjunction with an IDE controller.  I did not
disable the bios.  When the card finds C & D already installed, it does not
copy its bios to the system.  I have not excluded its range in emm386. Dos (5
& 6), win 3.1 and NT recognize all 5 of my harddrives, the tape backup and the
CD-Rom (until it died day before yesterday <BG>).  Have no problem at all.

                               bob

#: 11793 S8/H/W Compatibility
    08-Oct-92  11:39:00
Sb: Driver Stuff
Fm: H.T. GRIFFIN, II 72340,127
To: ANYONE

Hi,

I'm asking these questions for an associate that has the Windows NT developers
CD and he has some hardware problems.  Here his list of questions.

       Will the next beta release support:

               Allways IN-2000 SCSI card.
               Sound Blaster Pro CD-ROM drive.

       Why do long 100K+ .WAV files play when the small ones will
       work?

Thanks, H.T. Griffin, II

#: 11258 S8/H/W Compatibility
    04-Oct-92  15:22:36
Sb: R3000 Iris Indigo
Fm: Muzaffer KAL 70324,2553
To: MS

hi,
Is NT ever going to run on an R3000 Iris Indigo? If yes, what
about October release ?

Muzaffer

#: 11350 S8/H/W Compatibility
    05-Oct-92  12:58:03
Sb: #11258-R3000 Iris Indigo
Fm: Alex Madarasz 72537,707
To: Muzaffer KAL 70324,2553

> Is NT ever going to run on an R3000 Iris Indigo?

C'mon, ... this looks like a great excuse to lobby for an Iris Blackjack with
Elan graphics!            ;-)

(altho, I don't even know if the Blackjack will run NT either, I'll just take
any excuse to lobby my company for 'em!)

---  Alex  ---

#: 11782 S8/H/W Compatibility
    08-Oct-92  10:26:29
Sb: #11258-R3000 Iris Indigo
Fm: Jay Vernon[Microsoft] 72370,454
To: Muzaffer KAL 70324,2553

Muzaffer -

The Silicon Graphics R3000 Iris Indigo has not been tested and certified with
Windows NT.  It is safe to assume it will not be certified for the up comming
beta release. The Magnum 4000 Class C Systems will run Windows NT and will be
fully supported.

We must rely on Silicon Graphics to produce the needed drivers for the R3000
Iris Indigo machines, as you know the graphical base is very different from
the Magnum.

Thanks, Jay Vernon[Microsoft]

#: 11801 S8/H/W Compatibility
    08-Oct-92  15:04:22
Sb: R3000 Iris Indigo
Fm: Yuri Diomin 75020,404
To: Muzaffer KAL 70324,2553

Muzaffer,

I heard two times from sources inside Silicon Grphics that Windows NT is going
to work neither on the current machines of the IRIS line (including all
Indigos) nor on successors inside the line. However, in addition to the MIPS
machines inherited by SGI, the company is going to start a new line (I believe
named Sapphire, if I don't mix it up with something esle) which would be R4000
based EISA bus machines with GL graphics, designed specifically for Windows
NT. All this was promised to happen sometime 1993.

Yuri

#: 11828 S8/H/W Compatibility
    08-Oct-92  17:51:59
Sb: Floppy recognition
Fm: Robert H. Bernard 71210,246
To: All

From WINNT I ran a DOS program from Compaq that builds a diagnostic floppy
disk.  The program failed claiming that no such device is present.

I presume that since the program normally writes a 720KB diskette and my drive
is dual 720/1440KB, that WINNT's test for diskette drive did not indicate the
ability for this drive to also write 720KB.


There is 1 Reply.

#: 11854 S8/H/W Compatibility
    09-Oct-92  03:57:34
Sb: #11828-Floppy recognition
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Robert H. Bernard 71210,246

Robert,

<<I presume that since the program normally writes a 720KB diskette and my
drive is dual 720/1440KB, that WINNT's test for diskette drive did not
indicate the ability for this drive to also write 720KB.>>

My bet is that the application attempted a system or bios call or attempoted
to directly access an i/o port to see if the drive was present. NT's
protection scheme might have prevented this call/access.

The DOS/WOW is not 100% compatible with the "real thing". <g> And there's so
many ways to do things under DOS, which has no protection scheme at all.

Art

#: 11456 S8/H/W Compatibility
    05-Oct-92  23:26:25
Sb: NEC CD-ROM
Fm: Ivan Monso 70244,3142
To: ALL

ALL,

Has anyone gotten NT to work with the NEC CDR-74 CD-ROM. Apparently the 73(M)
is an older model and the 74 replaces it.  I am looking for the right combo of
CD-ROM & controller which will work.  I am also looking to get the Adaptec
1540 or 1542 SCSI controllers.  Does this combo work?

Thanks,

Ivan.

#: 11554 S8/H/W Compatibility
    06-Oct-92  14:50:05
Sb: #11456-NEC CD-ROM
Fm: Danny Thorpe 76646,1035
To: Ivan Monso 70244,3142

Ivan,

  The Adaptec 1542B + NEC CDR-74 work fine for me.  I had to install NT with
the Dos2NT utility, but after NT is up and running, it recognises the CDR-74
just fine.

  The NEC drive is self-terminating and must be the last device on the SCSI
chain.

-Danny




There are 2 Replies.

#: 11609 S8/H/W Compatibility
    06-Oct-92  23:23:35
Sb: #11554-NEC CD-ROM
Fm: Jon Tara 76477,3342
To: Danny Thorpe 76646,1035

> The NEC drive is self-terminating...

Hmmm... is that why their Tech support told me that is has NO provisions for
termination and shipped me an in-line terminator for the ribbon cable???

(Like the guy says, "I don't know, I'm just asking!")

Incidently, while I was waiting for the terminator, I decided to put the NEC84
FIRST on the chain, and an HP C2247 (1MB 3.5") last.  (Didn't really want to
do this, since it means I run the cable up to the top of the tower first,
where the CD ROM is, and down from there to a (future) DAT slot, and finally
to a burried internal "slot" where the HP lives - which happens to be right
next to the controller card - so the cable is twice as long as it needs to
be...)  Anyway, it works just fine this way, so I ain't messin' with it.

Make sure to turn OFF sync negotiation on your host adapter.  If you have a
hard drive that supports it, turn it ON on the hard drive.

#: 11698 S8/H/W Compatibility
    07-Oct-92  14:21:03
Sb: #11609-NEC CD-ROM
Fm: Danny Thorpe 76646,1035
To: Jon Tara 76477,3342 (X)

Jon,

  Adaptec and a NEC rep both told me that the NEC CDR 74 CDRom drives needed
to be terminated with a cable plug. That was after I had been using the NEC
drive with my other SCSI drives for over two months without any problems, so
their credibility went through the floor. I went to a local hard disk
wholesaler who said he'd be glad to sell me a $5 terminator plug, but that it
just wasn't necessary.  The wholesaler is where I picked up the term 'self
terminating.'

  When it works, and works well, I leave it alone.  When it doesn't work, I
investigate.

-Danny

p.s. Is a '1MB HP C2247' one of those itty bitty hard disks? <g>



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11747 S8/H/W Compatibility
    07-Oct-92  23:16:10
Sb: #11698-NEC CD-ROM
Fm: Jon Tara 76477,3342
To: Danny Thorpe 76646,1035

External devices (i.e. the CDR74) are normally terminated with a cable plug,
and MOST manufacturers ship their products with one in the box.  Internal
devices are normally terminated on-board, with termination selected by either
removing/not removing SIPs or by plugging/not plugging a jumper.

FWIW, my CDR84 worked most of the time without termination, but after a couple
of days I started having some failures.  They went away when I switched things
around so that the CD-rom was first in the chain and the hard-disk last.

This isn't the only way in which the NEC drive is a bit odd.  The 84's ribbon
connecter is upside-down from the norm, which causes an UGLY twist in the
cable when chained with devices with the more conventional orientation.

Oh, yes, the HPC2247 is, indeed, one of those "itty-bitty" hard drives.  I
really had to scrounge to find one (I think they're getting a bit more
available), but I'l be damned if I was gonna buy a 5 1/4" drive, with so may
3/12" 1GB drives poised for release.  Weight, power consumption, speed, and
reliability (due in no small part due to the lower mass) make this a
no-brainer decision vs. 5 1/4.  I'm real happy with it.  2.5-5MB/sec transfer
rate, 10mSec access time (though Coretest says it's a bit slower on the
average access time), 5yr warranty.  Runs a little on the warm size, though.
DEC, Maxtor, Hitachi, Micropolis, all have similar drives now or soon
shipping, though the HP seems to be the fastest of the lot.  (The Maxtor spins
faster, at 6300RPM, but doesn't pack the data as tight.  All the other drives
are 5400RPM, vs. the old "standard" 3600RPM.)

#: 11610 S8/H/W Compatibility
    06-Oct-92  23:23:40
Sb: #11554-NEC CD-ROM
Fm: Jon Tara 76477,3342
To: Danny Thorpe 76646,1035

Oh, yes, also had no problem installing NT from the NEC 84/1542B with the
standard install procedure.  If you need to use DOS2NT, I suspect there is
something wrong.

#: 11697 S8/H/W Compatibility
    07-Oct-92  14:20:56
Sb: #11610-NEC CD-ROM
Fm: Danny Thorpe 76646,1035
To: Jon Tara 76477,3342 (X)

Jon,

  I didn't use the normal setup program because the NT boot disk GP faults
immediately after displaying the blue screen and "Windows NT Setup" across the
top of the screen.  I've got a lot of hardware in my machine and haven't had
time to tear it apart to find out what NT doesn't like. OS/2 2.0 installed and
runs fine, and the Dos2NT batch worked well enough to get things running.  The
NEC 74 works fine in NT, and I don't need CD audio right now.

-Danny

#: 11891 S8/H/W Compatibility
    09-Oct-92  08:42:15
Sb: #11610-NEC CD-ROM
Fm: David P. Krasnow 71161,551
To: Jon Tara 76477,3342

I recently got a NEC CDR-84J with a Trantor T130 SCSI adaptor. The CD-ROM
install says there is no recognizable SCSI CD-ROM device attached.  Did anyone
have a successful install of this combo?
BTW, I have no other SCSI devices attached, and this is my first experience
with a SCSI device.  I will see if I can figure out whether the problem is one
of the following two which I understand are the usual culprits:
1. Device 0 or 1.
2. Terminator problem.
However, because of my meagre SCSI experience I thought a simultaneous attempt
to get some input from experienced users was in order.  thanks, Dave




#: 11210 S9/File System
    04-Oct-92  05:55:12
Sb: #10491-Floppy Drive Bug
Fm: Neil Robinson 100016,2775
To: Tom Hazel [Microsoft] 72360,1176

Tom,

Could it be that NT checks the DOOR OPEN line on the floppy and only re-reads
the directory if the door has been opened since it was last read? If so, all
that would be necessary to have this problem on his machine is for the signal
indicating DOOR OPEN not to be connected. It probably wouldn't show up as a
problem under most circumstances.

Ciao, Neil


#: 11256 S9/File System
    04-Oct-92  12:56:28
Sb: #10491-Floppy Drive Bug
Fm: Timothy H. White 75300,1772
To: Tom Hazel [Microsoft] 72360,1176

Sorry, it turns out that my floppy drive started going belly-up.  What was
wierd was that DOS handled it *much* better than NT did, and that's why I
initially thought it to be an NT bug.

Thanks for checking it out anyway!

Timothy

#: 11682 S9/File System
    07-Oct-92  13:17:42
Sb: More than 26 log volumes
Fm: neil colvin 71650,3517
To: Sysop (X)

I now have 26 logical devices on my machine (A-Z).  If I was running Unix,
this would not be a problem, but NT has seemingly adopted the archaic drive
letter holdover from CPM.  Are there plans to somehow support more than 26
logical devices under NT?? If so, how?  If not, help!!!

#: 11344 S9/File System
    05-Oct-92  11:55:48
Sb: DOS 6? File compression
Fm: Mike Snowden 100021,3015
To: all

I am NOT on the DOS 6 beta, but the press reports say that DOS6 will
contain a file compression utility.

I am fast running out of disk space (400Meg!) but am loath to install
any compression utility that would prevent NT from reading a partition.

Will NT be able to cope with volumes compressed under "standard" DOS 6
utilities?  If not, then I don't see much advantage in using DOS 6
over DOS5 and Workgroups Connection.

#: 11699 S9/File System
    07-Oct-92  14:21:36
Sb: #11344-DOS 6? File compression
Fm: Tom Hazel [Microsoft] 72360,1176
To: Mike Snowden 100021,3015

Mike,
   I am told that other third party companies like stacker are working on
drivers for compressed drivers for Windows NT. However, disks that are
compressed with MS-DOS 6.0's compression feature will be able to be accessed
with Windows NT later in the product life. I am certain though that Microsoft
will provide a driver that can access MS-DOS 6.0 compressed volumes but that
will be after the release of MS-DOS 6.0 and most likely not in product one of
Windows NT. If it is possible to include this driver in product one then it
will be. However, priorities put this driver at a lower ranking than other
functional components of the system.

Does that answer your question?

Tom Hazel [MS]

#: 11453 S9/File System
    05-Oct-92  23:14:06
Sb: Photo-CD
Fm: James Mansion 100020,1650
To: All

IBM are one up - their device driver will read my Kodak Photo-CD disk as a
standard filesystem.  Drive is an XA spec Toshiba, controller Adaptec.

Ideally I'd like 32 bit Photo-CD software, but I'll settle for the 16 bit code
working.

James

#: 11701 S9/File System
    07-Oct-92  14:21:47
Sb: #11453-Photo-CD
Fm: Tom Hazel [Microsoft] 72360,1176
To: James Mansion 100020,1650

James,
   I am not familiar with this drive system. However, if you would like it to
be supported then you should fill out HWFEED.TXT from WINNT Lib 1 and send it
to internet:[e-mail]. That will let Microsoft know you want your
specific hardware supported for Windows NT. You should also contact your
hardware manufacture and let them know you want it supported top.

Tom Hazel [MS]

#: 11737 S9/File System
    07-Oct-92  19:51:10
Sb: The Long and Short of it
Fm: Gary Byers 76377,205
To: All

[This is in the 6/92 developer's pre-release, on an i386.]
Try the following, where "x:" is an NTFS-formatted partition:

c:\> x:
x:\> copy con: a.bbb.ccc.d
This is file "a.bbb.ccc.d"
^Z
x:\> copy con: a.bbb
This is file "a.bbb"
^Z
x:\> type a.bbb.ccc.d

and, if you're as confused as I was when something analogous
happened to me, do:

x:\> dir a.bbb*

Hmmm.  Ok, so "a.bbb" happens to be the short (8.3) version
of the longer pathname, and it seems that references to this
shorter name are interpreted as references to the longer one.
I didn't think that I was asking for this behavior (and was
therefore surprized when I got it); if it's something other
than a bug in the pre-release version of NTFS, is there some
way of avoiding it ?

#: 11206 S9/File System
    04-Oct-92  02:11:48
Sb: xtradrive, IIT
Fm: Fankhauser Gerhard 100041,1275
To: Microsoft

        Will xtradrive from IIT work with Windows NT ?

thanks i.a. for your answer

#: 11700 S9/File System
    07-Oct-92  14:21:39
Sb: #11206-xtradrive, IIT
Fm: Tom Hazel [Microsoft] 72360,1176
To: Fankhauser Gerhard 100041,1275

Sorry if I sound dumb regarding this issue but what is xtradrive from ITT?

I have not heard of it and is that is the case, it is most likely no. But
before I can give you a definative answer, I need to know more about what it
is.

#: 11830 S9/File System
    08-Oct-92  18:40:17
Sb: #11700-xtradrive, IIT
Fm: Marc C. Brooks 71461,320
To: Tom Hazel [Microsoft] 72360,1176 (X)

Tom,

XtraDrive is a Stacker-like product.   In fact I think Stac has a law-suit
pending against them.  I would guess the answer is no, but who am I? <g>

Marc

#: 11840 S9/File System
    08-Oct-92  21:18:59
Sb: De-Frag for NT
Fm: Carl Byington 74040,1156
To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643

I am just jumping in here, so maybe this has already been discussed.  I would
like to make a distinction between the HPFS,NTFS, FAT systems as a <file
system>, and the (current) code that implements these file systems.  I define
a file system by the data (directories, etc) that are stored on the disk.  In
this sense, any of these file systems could be implemented by code that
reduced fragmentation.  There are many ways to do this.  One way is to have
the application tell the OS how large the file is going to be so the OS can
preallocate the space.  Another way is for the OS to dynamically determine
that this heavily used file is fragmented and automatically start moving
things around to defragment it (whenever the disk is not doing anything more
important).




#: 11060 S10/Device Drivers
    02-Oct-92  15:31:49
Sb: #10791-ATI ULTRA Drivers
Fm: Carlen Hoppe 72110,2514
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

I am waiting for the EISA version of the AST Graphics Ultra Pro.
It is available with 2mb for a SLP of $700.  A salesperson at ATI
said it should be available in November.


#: 11073 S10/Device Drivers
    02-Oct-92  17:10:13
Sb: #10726-ATI ULTRA Drivers
Fm: Darrell McCombs 70404,3722
To: Issie Chaimovitch 70621,3344 (X)

Send it back and get the new one....

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11143 S10/Device Drivers
    03-Oct-92  08:44:02
Sb: #11073-ATI ULTRA Drivers
Fm: Issie Chaimovitch 70621,3344
To: Darrell McCombs 70404,3722

I can't send it back and get a new one, as the new ones haven't even started
to ship yet.

Issie

#: 11058 S10/Device Drivers
    02-Oct-92  15:27:09
Sb: I/O MAPPED HARDWARE
Fm: Nathan Berg 72350,537
To: SYSOP (X)

Just as 640K has become too limiting for applications, so has the
384K become too limiting for custom I/O hardware.  There are a few
capabilities in NT that would make NT a viable OS for these modern
I/O expansion cards.


1.  We need the ability to tell NT that 'this range of memory is
    reserved for hardware, and should not be used for RAM'


2.  Since we are developing custom hardware, we will be implementing
    a custom API to access this hardware, implemented as a DLL/Device
    Driver combination.  Thus there has to be some method for a custom
    DLL to communicate with a custom Device Driver.


3.  For performance reasons, we need the ability to access our memory
    mapped card directly from an application.  I understand the
    protection/security issues, but forcing an app to ask a device
    driver for a hardware pointer preserves protection and security,
    but allows maximum flexibility/performance.


How can I find out if these capabilities exist in NT???


Thanks -
Nathan

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11325 S10/Device Drivers
    05-Oct-92  06:48:19
Sb: #11058-I/O MAPPED HARDWARE
Fm: Brian Merson 73330,3573
To: Nathan Berg 72350,537

>> 1.  We need the ability to tell NT that 'this range of memory is reserved
for hardware ...  <<

I'm not sure on this one, but if you find out let me know, too.

>> 2. ... there has to be some method for a custom DLL to communicate with a
custom Device Driver.  <<

I believe the primary method for communicating with a custom device driver is
going to be the DeviceIoControl() api.  Since the DDK is not yet out, I can
only assume that this function is conceptually similar to the UNIX ioctl()
function.  That is, the driver will contain an "standard" entry point for I/O
control and will differentiate requests based on the dwIoControlCode parameter
to the above function.

>> 3.  ... we need the ability to acess our memory mapped card directly from
an application. ... <<

I have been assured by MS people that this is possible.  It better be, because
I have the same need. <g>  Basically, the approach that you describe looks
like the preferred way to implement this (i.e., the driver provides a mapping
function, performs the mapping and returns a pointer to the caller).

Since the DDK is not out, this information is real limited.  There isn't much
here, and what is here has taken quite a while to put together. Hopefully, all
will become clear at the DDK conferenct in 3 weeks.

Brian

#: 11382 S10/Device Drivers
    05-Oct-92  14:19:32
Sb: #10750-Trantor NT SCSI Drivers
Fm: Trantor Systems 72760,1346
To: David Hayden 70444,30 (X)

I think you can make it install the 'real' way by renaming the Trantor drivers
to the same name as the Adaptec driver.  That may do the job.

Trouble is, you need to have the driver installed and registered on the disk
before you can do the install... a catch 22 if I ever saw one!

Hopefully, Microsoft will include the Trantor drivers on a later release, then
you should be able to do the install more easily.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11431 S10/Device Drivers
    05-Oct-92  20:31:23
Sb: #11382-Trantor NT SCSI Drivers
Fm: David Hayden 70444,30
To: Trantor Systems 72760,1346

If I rename it to (????) Can I thien use the Graphice Setup to do a
re-install?

#: 11451 S10/Device Drivers
    05-Oct-92  23:13:54
Sb: Compex ENET/U in WD Mode
Fm: James Mansion 100020,1650
To: All

Apologies to all who saw this before - and especially to the MS guy who
replied.

I'm still configuring my OLR and I'm afraid that the replies have gone ...

Anyway, to summarise:  I have some Compex ethernet cards that I have been
happily using in WD emulation mode with DOS, OS/2 1.x and OS/2 2.0 (using the
IBM drivers in the latter cases).  NT wouldn't start its lan services, and the
latest SMC DOS drivers didn't work.

I now have a real SMC Combo card and NT works fine.  The DOS drivers don't
work but that's no big deal.  Also, trying to NET VIEW my Lan Server 2.0 beta
server will crash the server. I haven't tried with the gold code level - not
had any other problems!

So - it seems that Compex should be prodded into action.  It may be that their
latest cards (which like the SMC Combo have all three interfaces) are more
compatible.

James

#: 11104 S10/Device Drivers
    02-Oct-92  19:44:22
Sb: Inst Trantor T128 driver
Fm: Mark Swinkels 75020,464
To: ALL

Has anyone successfully installed the Trantor T128 drivers from the Trantor
BBS. I have been unable to get the driver to install.

I am suffering from a serious lack of documentation. The documention that came
with the NEC T128 card doesn't document the IRQ jumper settings (because
the're not needed in Dos). The readme that Trantor includes with the driver
says to add the driver name to the registry as explained in the NT
documentation, I haven't found any documentation on how to add driver names to
the registry.

Hopefully someone from Trantor or someone who has successfully installed this
driver will be able to give me more detailed step by step instructions on how
to get this driver working.

Thanks, Mark Swinkels

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11297 S10/Device Drivers
    05-Oct-92  04:18:13
Sb: #11104-Inst Trantor T128 driver
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Mark Swinkels 75020,464 (X)

Mark,

I have the same documentation problems you do as well aspnot being able to get
NT to see the SCSI card and work. THough I have edited the registry and added
the appropriate (maybe not) entries. If I get it to work I'll let you know.

Art

#: 11385 S10/Device Drivers
    05-Oct-92  14:29:04
Sb: #11297-Inst Trantor T128 driver
Fm: Trantor Systems 72760,1346
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

For documentation, read the section 2.2 in the Win32 SDK Release Notes, page
12 onwards, for description of how to do the DOS2NT installation.

There are 2 Replies.

#: 11432 S10/Device Drivers
    05-Oct-92  20:35:02
Sb: #11385-Inst Trantor T128 driver
Fm: David Hayden 70444,30
To: Trantor Systems 72760,1346

I think we just need the documentation on the registry editor, and how this
matches the Trantor doc about installing for NT. How about a little re-write
of the doc and a re-posting? If we could get a little program to add it to the
registry that would be ideal. Count the messages going around the forum
concerning this, it's probably worth your time for the goodwill factor, before
everyone changes to Apaptec cards. Microsoft - any help?

#: 11467 S10/Device Drivers
    06-Oct-92  03:25:32
Sb: #11385-Inst Trantor T128 driver
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Trantor Systems 72760,1346


<<For documentation, read the section 2.2 in the Win32 SDK Release Notes, page
12 onwards, for description of how to do the DOS2NT installation.>>

I have no problems with the DOS2NT install. It's modifying the registration
based on your T128.INI file that was confusing. For instance the Group key was
not defined as REG_SZ, and the device subkey (hope it's a subkey under T128)
is not clearly defined.

Since regedit itself is an unsupported method of modifying the registry there
isPno official documentation.

But I'll check out my hardware and see if I can get things up and running.
Thaoks fo stopping by the forum.

Art

PS: On another machine I have the MediaVision Pro-16. Any idea of when drivers
will be available for it?

#: 11671 S10/Device Drivers
    07-Oct-92  11:26:21
Sb: Adaptec on DDK?
Fm: Mike Snowden 100021,3015
To: sysop (X)

Re: Message #10436

        Data Technology Corp
        DTC3290AS
        EISA caching SCSI Host Adaptor.

This card claims to be "almost" an adaptec 154x contoller.

1)      What does NT look for to recognize a controller type?
        (a BIOS copyright string?)

2)      If this card is really like a generic adaptec, will there be
        an adaptec driver on the DDK disk, that we can SIMPLY modify, so
        that our cards are recognized?

This might sway our decision on whether to attend the DDK conference,
so we need a reply before the close-out date of oct 23rd.

#: 11678 S10/Device Drivers
    07-Oct-92  12:42:12
Sb: Graphics Accelerators
Fm: Jeong Ho Lee 70253,1244
To: SYSOP (X)

Hello,

With next release ( Octorber ) of NT, will we be able to use any of graphics
accelerators like S3, ATI, TIGA ?  NT with VGA has been proved to be just a
humour.

Thanks

#: 11741 S10/Device Drivers
    07-Oct-92  21:29:05
Sb: NT DDK Availability
Fm: Darryl Nadvornick 72271,243
To: Microsoft

Is it possible to get ahold of the NT DDK separately from the upcoming DDK
conference in Anaheim, CA?  If yes, how?  If not yet, when?  Is the DDK
release included at the conference a one time shot, or does that include
future interim releases up to and including the initial production release
(ala an NT-style beta program)?

Darryl

#: 11772 S10/Device Drivers
    08-Oct-92  10:15:47
Sb: #11741-NT DDK Availability
Fm: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340
To: Darryl Nadvornick 72271,243 (X)

Yes, we will be making the DDK available separately from the conference. Right
now it looks like the end of November. The DDK at the conference (as well as
the DDKs folks purchase) will include upgrades and the final version. I'll
post a phone number as soon as we are set up to handle the orders.

-Dwight (MS)

#: 11100 S10/Device Drivers
    02-Oct-92  18:59:12
Sb: Trantor T128
Fm: David Hayden 70444,30
To: All

If anyone from Trantor see this:

I just installed a T128 with a NEC CDR-74. I downloaded the driver from your
bulletin board but the directions about using the RegEdit aren't clear to me
(Is that documented somewhere?). Anyway, I ended up destoying NT (it failed
big-time on the boot), I had to reinstall from scratch. Any help on getting
the device to work would be very appreciated.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11296 S10/Device Drivers
    05-Oct-92  04:16:35
Sb: #11100-Trantor T128
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: David Hayden 70444,30

David,

<<I just installed a T128 with a NEC CDR-74. I downloaded the driver from your
bulletin board but the directions about using the RegEdit aren't clear to me
(Is that documented somewhere?). Anyway, I ended up destoying NT (it failed
big-time on the boot), I had to reinstall from scratch. Any help on getting
the device to work would be very appreciated.>>

I'm working on this myself. I got the same error. but I just renamed the
T128.SYS file to another name and NT booted. I did gt NT to boot, but it would
not access the drive.

I put the Device portion on a seperate level. Did you? When I did I got an
unhandled excption in kernel. When I deleted the device key the erros went
away. But no access to the CD.

Art

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11338 S10/Device Drivers
    05-Oct-92  10:27:20
Sb: #11296-Trantor T128
Fm: Mark Swinkels 75020,464
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

Hello Arthur You replied to me on a different thread re the same problem but I
thought I'd move over to this thread and keep things in one place. I'm almost
certain that device is a sub-key of T128, I looked around at the other devices
and that's the way the others work. I couldn't tell from your message but do
you actualy know which pins on J1 on the NEC adapter set the interupt to IRQ5,
I think I've tried all the obvious ones (jumpering two opposing pins) but I've
seen all sorts of interesting configurations of jumpers for this kind of
stuff.

I logged on to the Trantor bbs this morning but noticed that you had already
left a message. I'll leave the Trantor bbs to you, it takes too long to get
through. Didn't you love going in to pick up the driver, 30 minutes to get
through, 10 minutes to answer the questionaire, 2 minutes to pick up the
driver. Why they didn't just post to WINNT I don't know.

Hoping to hear from trantor soon

Mark



There is 1 Reply.

#: 11339 S10/Device Drivers
    05-Oct-92  11:02:30
Sb: #11338-Trantor T128
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Mark Swinkels 75020,464

Mark,

<<I'm almost certn that deve is a sub-key of T128, I looked around at the
other devices and that's the way the others work.>>

Yeah so was I. But when I installed the driver this way and booted NT I got a
system error 0x1e and then an unhandled kernell exception. So m figured I
would ask and make sure. After all they did forget to the REG_SZ for the group
name, so...

I can't open this box that has the T128 (co rules) so I can't check the jumper
settings. The default was IRQ5 so I thought I might get lucky. I did have com2
using IRQ5, so I disabled it for the T128 install, but no go. i again had to
rename the T128.SYS file so NT would not install it. The interesting thing is
that if I delete the device key I do not have the error, but no access to the
CD-ROM drive either. <g>

I don't know why Trantor did things the way they did. The MS FD driver for the
850 for instance uses the Tag field for the IRQ. (I think anyway) I'm under
3.1 at the moment so can't verify that for sure.

<<I'll leave the Trantor bbs to you, it takes too long to get through.>>

That's not really a problem for me as long as I start early. being on the east
coast and getting in by 6:00 AM local time means that not many people are
accessing the BBS. We'll have to see what happens. I'm going to have someone
come up here and open this box so I can check the settings for the T128. Maybe
then I'll get it goin~.

Art

#: 11383 S10/Device Drivers
    05-Oct-92  14:25:42
Sb: #11339-Trantor T128
Fm: Trantor Systems 72760,1346
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

You MUST install the IRQ jumper on the T128 before you try to install it.
Otherwise you WILL get an error!

The IRQ jumper settings are listed in the T128 manual Appendix.

REGEDIT is a clumsy way to install things right now, but hopefully it will be
made easier in a later NT version.

For those who can't find their manuals, the IRQ settings are:
. . . . . .
___ . . . .     IRQ 5

. . . . . .
. ___ . . .     IRQ 7

NOTE: you must install the first time with IRQ 5 enabled

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11463 S10/Device Drivers
    06-Oct-92  03:13:18
Sb: #11383-Trantor T128
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Trantor Systems 72760,1346


<<You MUST install the IRQ jumper on the T128 before you try to install it.
Otherwise you WILL get an error!>>

Thanks for the info. I thought the T128 (by default) had the jumper for IRQ5
enabled. I'll check into this ASAP.

Art

#: 11581 S10/Device Drivers
    06-Oct-92  19:06:07
Sb: #11383-Trantor T128
Fm: Ray Stevens 76420,3330
To: Trantor Systems 72760,1346

I've tried to get on your BBS and cannot get a clean connect. Is it possible
for you upload the driver here??

#: 11384 S10/Device Drivers
    05-Oct-92  14:26:20
Sb: #11339-Trantor T128
Fm: Mark Swinkels 75020,464
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

Yes! Yes! Yes!
As you can guess I got it working. It turned out to be that the irq was not
set correctly. I called trantor and got the settings, set it to irq5 and
poof, it works. Crashing NT if the irq isn't set seems a little drastic, but
then I have no idea how NT does these things.

T128 irq settings

 JP1 1 2 3 4 5 6  | Bus Connector |
     7 8 9 A B C  v               v

Jumper 1 and 2 for irq3, 7 and 8 for irq5, 8 and 9 for irq7.

I don't guaranty any of these settings except that for irq5.

Good Luck

Mark

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11464 S10/Device Drivers
    06-Oct-92  03:16:16
Sb: #11384-Trantor T128
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Mark Swinkels 75020,464 (X)

Mark,

<<As you can guess I got it working.>>

Thanks. that's good to know. Now lets see if I can get it all working. <g>
Particularly since I will have to use IRQ7. Of course to boot the first time
it'll have to be set to IRQ5.

<<Crashing NT if the irq isn't set seems a little drastic, but then I have no
idea how NT does these things.>>

Yup. Sounds a bit drastic to me too.

Art

#: 11798 S10/Device Drivers
    08-Oct-92  13:20:48
Sb: #11464-Trantor T128
Fm: Frank Waldner 72550,1162
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

How can I get a copy of this T128 drivers?  Is there a Trantor BBS phone
number and access info ?

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11846 S10/Device Drivers
    09-Oct-92  03:11:03
Sb: #11798-Trantor T128
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Frank Waldner 72550,1162

Frank,

<<Is there a Trantor BBS phone number and access info ?>>

Yes. The BBS number is 510-656-5159. The file you want is called NT-TSL.EXE.
It's listed in the bulletin and is in the new upload section. I've requested
permission to post it here, but we'll have to wait and see what Trantor says
about it.

Art

#: 11361 S10/Device Drivers
    05-Oct-92  13:19:41
Sb: Orchid VGA
Fm: John Estelle 70674,1510
To: sysop (X)

Where can I find support for the Orchid Prodesigner IIs video card in higher
resolution than generic VGA It is listed in the Hardware Compatability List.

#: 11867 S10/Device Drivers
    09-Oct-92  07:34:48
Sb: #11501-Orchid VGA
Fm: John Estelle 70674,1510
To: Scott Alexander 76556,557 (X)

Thanks for your response on the Orchid VGA question. Discovered the info in
the Release Notes just after sending the message. 512K was definitely a
colorful alternative.(All Pale green)




#: 11133 S11/Network services
    03-Oct-92  06:42:48
Sb: RCP problem
Fm: Scott Wheeler 100022,2005
To: sysop (X)

This may have been reported before as I don't read all the threads in WINNT. I
use RCP to pull files off a Sun Sparc 1. Usually this works,

but a couple of days back I found that a lot of files were missing the last
1-4 bytes. This may have been the only time I have copied over existing files.
I was copying 324 files with the command line

rcp bmt_sparc1:/apps/xxx/yyy/src/*.asm .

Scott

There is 1 Reply.


#: 11157 S11/Network services
    03-Oct-92  11:55:53
Sb: #11133-RCP problem
Fm: Scott Wheeler 100022,2005
To: Scott Wheeler 100022,2005 (X)

Sorry, I didn't say, but I'm not worried about a fix for this, its just a bug
I thought you might want to hear about.

Scott

#: 11357 S11/Network services
    05-Oct-92  13:11:39
Sb: #10674-NFS availability
Fm: WINNT  12 [Microsoft] 71075,3222
To: Jon McLane 76500,256

>What are Microsoft's plans for supporting Network File System in Windows NT,
>if any?

There are some third party vendors who are working with us on NFS.

Thanks,

-Krishnan Parameshwaran [MS]

#: 11358 S11/Network services
    05-Oct-92  13:11:45
Sb: #10527-LM over TCP/IP and NT
Fm: WINNT  12 [Microsoft] 71075,3222
To: Don Kolva 70610,360 (X)

Don,

Please look at the response to #10799

Thanks,

-Krishnan Paramesharan

#: 11359 S11/Network services
    05-Oct-92  13:11:52
Sb: #10691-Error2186 Netlogon?
Fm: WINNT  12 [Microsoft] 71075,3222
To:   Jay Marcucci 75300,702

>Help , we've installed NT and its running, Telnet works(TCP/IP) but we can't
>start the Netlogon from either Dos prompt or the Network server section.
>We're >able to start all other network services(Alerts, TCP/ip, Messages,
etc) >without error. We can see other networked servers(IBM's Lan server on
OS/2 >1.3 >& 2.0) But other users cannot share our NT resources.

You will not be able to do LM based stuff using only TCPIP as your transport.
You will have to use NetBEUI to do LanManager based activity on the July
release of NT.

>We also tried under users profiles to add users to the Login services group
>which returned an 9 digit error number. >Any suggestions would be greatly
appreciated.

The July release of NT can not act as a Domain controller to logon users in a
LanManager Domain. It can logon user's on your local nt machine.


>Jay M.

Thanks,

-Krishnan Parameshwaran [MS]

#: 11408 S11/Network services
    05-Oct-92  18:52:14
Sb: #10615-rpc
Fm: Zhacary Smith (MS) 71075,644
To: Christian betrisey 76600,1450

Christian,

This is a very good question. However, you will get a faster answer by posting
this question in the MSWIN32 section. You can get there by typing GO MSWIN32.

Thank you, Zhacary Smith MS Windows NT Support

#: 11356 S11/Network services
    05-Oct-92  13:11:31
Sb: #10907-TCP/IP for NT
Fm: WINNT  12 [Microsoft] 71075,3222
To: HowieFomby 76645,754 (X)

Don & Howie:

The July build of NT's tcpip support is primarily for UNIX connectivity. You
will not be able to LanManager based activity on TCPIP at this time. But later
releases of NT should have that capability. What is not shipped, is NBT.SYS,
this  is the netbios mapping layer for TCPIP compliant to RFC 1001&1002.

FileManager is based on LM connectivity. If you need this over tcpip, just
wait for the next release.

Howie, the same thing holds true for the LMX server. The LMX support is
primarily a *IX based SMB server. Server Message Blocks is what LanManger
uses.

Thanks,

-Krishnan Parmeshwaran [MS]




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11478 S11/Network services
    06-Oct-92  07:33:34
Sb: #11356-TCP/IP for NT
Fm: Don Kolva 70610,360
To: WINNT  12 [Microsoft] 71075,3222 (X)

Does later releases mean the October Beta 1 release?

Don Kolva

#: 11365 S11/Network services
    05-Oct-92  13:33:39
Sb: #11007-network startup
Fm: Jacob  Avital 71172,2722
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

Thanks Art.
Using RegEdit is the solotion for starting services. We have to start to use
it and to get use to the face that this is not DOS.
Koby

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11462 S11/Network services
    06-Oct-92  03:10:39
Sb: #11365-network startup
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Jacob  Avital 71172,2722

Koby,

<<Using RegEdit is the solotion for starting services.>>

Regedit is only a temporary solution. Regedit is expected to disapear in later
releases. So don't get to used to it. <g>

Art

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11481 S11/Network services
    06-Oct-92  07:47:14
Sb: #11462-network startup
Fm: Don Perry 76676,1127
To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X)

>> Regedit is only a temporary solution...

Art:

I have mixed emotions about this one.  If we do not have some way of modifying
configuration files manually, this assumes all programs that do modify the
files always do so properly.  Experience for me has shown this not always to
be the case.

I guess we'll be reduced to punching in binary codes from a DOS window
DEBUG.COM session :-).

Don




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11491 S11/Network services
    06-Oct-92  08:03:52
Sb: #11481-network startup
Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613
To: Don Perry 76676,1127

Don,

<<I have mixed emotions about this one.  If we do not have some way of
modifying configuration files manually, this assumes all programs that do
modify the files always do so properly.>>

Not to worry. Way back in July I and others let out a primal scream or two
about regedit and the lack of documentation. We were informed that there would
be a much better and supported method of accomplishing the same functionality
as regedit in later releases.

Art

#: 11059 S11/Network services
    02-Oct-92  15:29:03
Sb: Changing lan adapters
Fm: Carlen Hoppe 72110,2514
To: All

Do I have to re-install NT to change from a NE3200 lan driver to a WD/SMC
Elite lan driver.  What would I have to change in the registry ?

#: 11496 S11/Network services
    06-Oct-92  08:20:51
Sb: #11059-Changing lan adapters
Fm: na 71075,3225
To: Carlen Hoppe 72110,2514

Carlen,

Since the PDC release did not contain the code to Remove adapters you should
install a new adapter using the network icon and then disable the Network
Binding to the old adapter (bindings pushbutton on network dialog).

Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS]

#: 11265 S11/Network services
    04-Oct-92  18:16:36
Sb: #10909-regedit access denied
Fm: alex matijaca 76330,2703
To: Louie LaPlant 76600,3523

I had the same problem, but fixed it by leaving TcpipSvc highighted in
regedit, then selecting Security then Permissions from the menu bar. I found
that Administrators have Read Access to TcpipSvc. Change this to full access,
then go back and the modification of Start should work. Regards,
        Martin (aka Alex)

#: 11553 S11/Network services
    06-Oct-92  14:40:21
Sb: #10909-regedit access denied
Fm: Krishnan P [Microsoft] 71075,3222
To: Louie LaPlant 76600,3523

>I tried to change the start value of tcpipsvc in regedit while logged on as
>administrator. However, after I change the value and hit ok, I get an error
>which says I don't have the priviledges to do this oporation, access denied.
>What gives?

1. start regedit 2. Higlight
   HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE->SYSTEM->CurrentControlSet->Services->TCPIPSVC 3. ALT-S
for Security
    P for Permission
     ALT-A for Add
       <Give Administrator 'FULL ACCESS'> 4. Now try to change the start value
and it should work.

Goodluck,

-Krishnan Parameshwaran [MS]

#: 11568 S11/Network services
    06-Oct-92  17:39:41
Sb: WinNt -> Lantastic
Fm: Paul J. Levesque 72621,3477
To: WINNT  12 [Microsoft] 71075,3222 (X)

I'm trying to connect a WinNT worhstation to a Lantastic server, can anyone
tel me if this can succesfuly be done using July release. Can I connect to a
MS-net server??? Thanks Paul

#: 11665 S11/Network services
    07-Oct-92  10:53:21
Sb: #10975-are requests fail
Fm: Krishnan P [Microsoft] 71075,3222
To: Tony Dye 71075,612

>Hi Bruce,

>Just another observation.  Any comment would be appreciated.

>After some long period of time (days), PCs running NT stop responding to arp
>requests.  This causes name server lookups to fail and also causes
connections >to the numerical address to fail.  I can't track down any
specific condition >leading up to this, but it has happened enough that I
believe there is some >real problem.

I will check it up. I have some machines running tcpip, not for many days
though cuz it keeps going up and down. I try to get our repro-lab to check it
out.

Question for you is, what do you get when you do 'arp -g' ? The life of an arp
cache entry is usually around 9 minutes. I tried to ping a machine after its
cache timed out and it responded and created its cache entry.

>PCs are generic clone 486/33s with 3Com Ethernet cards.

>Thanks,

>There is 1 Reply.

Give us some more information which will help us debug this problem more.

Thanks,

-Krishnan Parameshwaran [MS]

#: 11664 S11/Network services
    07-Oct-92  10:53:11
Sb: Window on NT from Mac?
Fm: David Lawlor 71171,1556
To: All

Hi all,

Does anyone know of a current or future product which will allow a Macintosh
get a window on a NT based machine?  What I'm thinking of is similar to X
servers / clients in Unix, but change Unix to NT andchange X to windows.

Any info will be appreciated. Thanks Dave

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11688 S11/Network services
    07-Oct-92  13:44:26
Sb: #11664-Window on NT from Mac?
Fm: Krishnan P [Microsoft] 71075,3222
To: David Lawlor 71171,1556

>Hi all,

>Does anyone know of a current or future product which will allow a Macintosh
>get a window on a NT based machine?  What I'm thinking of is similar to X
>servers / clients in Unix, but change Unix to NT andchange X to windows.

Once you have an X server for Windows NT you should be able to do that with X
Windows. If HCL eXceed/W ported their code to NT it would seem that you could
run both X Windows and MS Windows clients on that NT machine.

>Any info will be appreciated. Thanks Dave

-Krishnan Parameshwaran [MS]

#: 11355 S11/Network services
    05-Oct-92  13:11:18
Sb: #10910-starting workstation
Fm: WINNT  12 [Microsoft] 71075,3222
To: Spencer Frink 71461,1001

>I can't get the LanMan workstation service to start.  I would appreciate any
>insights somebody can give me to get thsi working.

If you are trying to start LM services over tcpip, you can not do it in this
release. What you need is a file called nbt.sys, which is the netbios mapping
layer. This is what provides the netbios functionality over tcpip. It was not
shippped with the July PDC. Later releases should have that file.

>The error is: The LanManWorkstation could not be started. A system error has
>occured. The workstation is in an inconsistent state.  Reboot the machine
>before restarting the workstation service.

If you want lan manager kind of access, use NetBEUI as your transport.

>The EventLog has LanManWorkstation error 3113.

>TCP/IP, RPC, and Workstation Server all are working correctly over the Lan.
>No packets leave the system durring the attempted workstation start.

All the TCPIP utilities should work. The tcpip support in the July release was
primarily for UNIX connectivity.

>Thanks, Spencer Frink

Goodluck,

-Krishnan Parameshwaran [MS]

#: 11708 S11/Network services
    07-Oct-92  14:58:55
Sb: #11355-starting workstation
Fm: Spencer Frink 71461,1001
To: WINNT  12 [Microsoft] 71075,3222 (X)

I believe that I am correctly configured for the workstation service to run
over NetBEUI, the same as the Server.  The Bindings network applet shows both
Workstation and Server running over NetBEUI, which is bound to an ELNKII
(3COM503) driver.  Regeditshows a file, nbf, being one of the dependancies.
This is different than the module nbt you describe. Are you saying the
Workstation service must be run over tcp-ip? The reason I mentioned the Server
and ARPA services was to show that the basic network path was functional, not
to imply I wanted to run the worksation service over tcp-ip, though that would
be nice too :)

Any ideas for further trouble shooting?

Thanks,

Spencer Frink

#: 11445 S11/Network services
    05-Oct-92  21:58:10
Sb: network setup
Fm: Bob Bogardus 76470,3066
To: Anyone at ms

I need basic info on using Control Panel-Network to configure my NT system to
communicate via TCPIP with a UNIX workstation (I only need rcp).  I have no
system administrator to confer with.  My workstation is set up w/o yellow
pages and successfully links with another UNIX system via TCPIP
(etc/hosts...).  My NT card is 3COM/Etherlink16 Driver was loaded at setup
time, but IP address etc not specified yet.  Tried IP address 07.04.76.01/
mask 255.0.0.0/gateway NULL.  net start tcpipsvc said "TCPIPSVC service could
not be started." I assume configuration is improperly set up.  Help.

#: 11641 S11/Network services
    07-Oct-92  08:26:29
Sb: #11445-network setup
Fm: Krishnan P [Microsoft] 71075,3222
To: Bob Bogardus 76470,3066

>I need basic info on using Control Panel-Network to configure my NT system to
>communicate via TCPIP with a UNIX workstation (I only need rcp).  I have no
>system administrator to confer with.  My workstation is set up w/o yellow
>pages and successfully links with another UNIX system via TCPIP

You can not use YP or NIS with NT. The options you have are either use the
%SystemRoot%\system\drivers\etc\hosts file or use NT as a DNS client.

The best way to resolve your problem is try the IP number and then use the
%SystemRoot%\system\drivers\etc\hosts file. You can set the search order in
the ControlPanel->Networks->TCPIP->Configure->Connectivity dialog box. (Select
HostsFile only)

>(etc/hosts...).  My NT card is 3COM/Etherlink16 Driver was loaded at setup
>time, but IP address etc not specified yet.  Tried IP address 07.04.76.01/
>mask 255.0.0.0/gateway NULL.  net start tcpipsvc said "TCPIPSVC service could
>not be started." I assume configuration is improperly set up.  Help.

Ensure that you have the following files in

%SystemRoot%\system\drivers directory:

afd.sys, streams.sys, tcpip.sys, telnet.sys

also a directory 'etc' under it with the following files:

hosts, network, protocol, services.

These are in the i386 subdirectory on the CD if you dont have them. Copy them
into the respective places and then try to start the tcpipsvc.

Goodluck,

-Krishnan Parameshwaran [MS]

#: 11712 S11/Network services
    07-Oct-92  15:11:30
Sb: #11641-network setup
Fm: Bob Bogardus 76470,3066
To: Krishnan P [Microsoft] 71075,3222 (X)

<Krishan:> net start tcpipsvc still fails.  All files you said to check are on
the disk. Trace on the net start yielded:
.. Using IP address specified in the Registry Inferring subnet maks from IP
address class ioctl (248, I_STR,
IP_NET_ADDR={mux=5,net=127.0.0.1,sub=255.0.0.0, forwb=0,kalve=0 mtv=0
broadcast type=0}); DOWNSTREAM to arp DOWNSTREAM to sndis open (... ioctl
(236, I_PUSH, "arp") Using Network adapter specified in Registry ioctl (236,
I_STR, DATAL_IBIND=\Device\Elnk1601) NDIS_DRV s_ioctl failed Announce Service
Status  Current State 1; Control accepted 0 win32ExitCode 4294967295;
serviceSpecExitCode 4294967295, checkpoint 0; waitHint 0

My setup:
  gatway: (null)
  adapter:  3Com Etherlink 16
  IP:  07.04.76.01
 Subnet 255.0.0.0
  Connectivity:  Hosts file only hosts file:
  07.04.76.01   machine1
  07.04.76.02   NT networks:
  test  07 protocol/services unchanged

Any ideas?  (Why does ioctl(248 use 127.0.0.1???) I am not familiar with
Gateway, TCP Domain name from UNIX-are these values relevant?

#: 11639 S11/Network services
    07-Oct-92  08:13:44
Sb: Shared NT on LAN?
Fm: Raymond W. Six 70530,433
To: ALL, SYSOP (X)

Hi.  I don't currently run NT - just Win3.1, but I'm planning a LAN in the
future and wan't some idea of how NT will figure into it.

Specifically, what I want to know is: is it possible to install a "shared copy
on a network server" with NT like you can with Win3.1 (as detailed in the
Windows 3.1 resource kit?  If so, how would this configuration be setup? (a
small portion of NT resident to boot the workstation - then loading the rest
of NT from the server? or some other configuration?)

#: 11661 S11/Network services
    07-Oct-92  10:16:59
Sb: #11639-Shared NT on LAN?
Fm: Anthony Murfet 70602,1634
To: Raymond W. Six 70530,433 (X)

Raymond,
        NT is both client *and* server, right out of the box. IOW if you
install it on one machine, you got yourself a workstation; if you install it
on two machines with network cards and some cable, then you got two peer
servers that also run as workstations, with the addition of Lanmanager for NT
your peer server becomes a full fledged domain controller. Thats the basics,
there is much more functionality; You should read up on everything you can lay
your hands on, both here and in MSWIN32.
                        best...Tony.

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11733 S11/Network services
    07-Oct-92  19:11:52
Sb: #11661-Shared NT on LAN?
Fm: Raymond W. Six 70530,433
To: Anthony Murfet 70602,1634 (X)

Thanks for the info.  I guess its time to start reading....

- Ray

#: 11588 S11/Network services
    06-Oct-92  20:54:19
Sb: MIPS and Token Ring
Fm: John Tarbox 71201,2467
To: All

    Has anyone tested putting a Token Ring adapter into a MIPS R4000 box
running NT?

#: 11711 S11/Network services
    07-Oct-92  15:07:01
Sb: #11588-MIPS and Token Ring
Fm: Tom Hazel [Microsoft] 72360,1176
To: John Tarbox 71201,2467 (X)

John,
    Token Ring works fine with our tests with the upcoming beta release.
However, there were some problems with the Preliminary Release of Windows NT.
These problems have been fixed and if you have problems with this with the
Beta release, please contact us.

Tom Hazel [MS]




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11744 S11/Network services
    07-Oct-92  22:46:55
Sb: #11711-MIPS and Token Ring
Fm: John Tarbox 71201,2467
To: Tom Hazel [Microsoft] 72360,1176 (X)

    Tom, thanks for your quisk response on Token Ring in MIPS boxes.  Can you
tell me whose Token Ring card MS has been testing with in the MIPS box and if
it is a ISA or EISA card?

#: 11689 S11/Network services
    07-Oct-92  13:44:33
Sb: #10627-NT & win workgroup
Fm: Krishnan P [Microsoft] 71075,3222
To: Alan E Paget 76620,1707

>Will WinNT connect up to Windows for Workgroups?

You can set the Work Group name in Windows NT to a Windows for Workgroup name.
You will be able to see the Windows NT on the Windows for Workgroups machine,
you can even browse it. But remember in the July release of NT you have to
start the XACTSRV in order to be able to browse the NT server.

Goodluck,

-Krishnan Parameshwaran [MS]






There is 1 Reply.

#: 11767 S11/Network services
    08-Oct-92  08:52:43
Sb: #11689-NT & win workgroup
Fm: Ken Granderson 76307,3571
To: Krishnan P [Microsoft] 71075,3222

I am having problems running WFW as an NT client.  It appears that NT does not
realize when files on the WFW client have closed, and as a result I often get
"Sharing Violation" errors that render the client unusable.  Even after a
client process has been closed, attempts to use files which the process had
opened will fail.

Example 1: My client system loads After Dark (which is located on the NT
server) on startup.  After an apparent hang on the client, I finally get a
system modal "Sharing Violation" dialog box.  At this time, if I look at the
files in use option of the NT Control Panel server applet, there are two
entries for AD.EXE, the After Dark executable. Selecting either Retry or
Cancel on the client's error dialog continues the client's startup
successfully, and After Dark is loaded.  I have had identical problems with
TrueType fonts which reside on the server causing this problem.

Example 2: I open a DOS box on the client and run PKUNZIP on a file named, for
instance, TEST.ZIP.  I then close the DOS box.  NT Control Panel tells me that
TEST.ZIP is open for read access by the client.  Refreshing the open file list
does nothing, and attempts to delete TEST.ZIP from the server or the client
will fail with sharing violation types of messages.

Please advise me as to how to fix this problem, as it presently means that
when NT is running, my client workstation is essentially useless.
Thank you.

#: 11652 S11/Network services
    07-Oct-92  09:21:03
Sb: #10738-DOS Lan Requester(IBM)
Fm: Mitch Millar 70700,3307
To: Azfar Moazzam [Microsoft 71075,641

Hello, Azfar.
Prior to loading the first Win32 beta - Windows NT on my system, I was able to
run the DOS LAN REQUESTOR through an EtherLink II card
and drivers.  After loading the Win32 beta - Windows NT and booting into my
original (DOS) operating system, When I start the Dos Lan Requestor everything
runs as per normal until the NET command.  Here
the response is : Network not loaded.  Now I have no access to that network.
What happened ??  Can I setup NT to log on to this network?
Thanks.
-Mitch

#: 11781 S11/Network services
    08-Oct-92  10:24:40
Sb: #11652-DOS Lan Requester(IBM)
Fm: Azfar Moazzam - Microsof 72370,453
To: Mitch Millar 70700,3307 (X)

>Hello, Azfar. >Prior to loading the first Win32 beta - Windows NT on my
system, I was able >to >run the DOS LAN REQUESTOR through an EtherLink II card
>and drivers.  After loading the Win32 beta - Windows NT and booting into my
>original (DOS) operating system, When I start the Dos Lan Requestor
>everything >runs as per normal until the NET command.  Here >the response is
: Network not loaded.  Now I have no access to that >network. >What happened
??  Can I setup NT to log on to this network? >Thanks. >Mitch >

Hi Mitch, It seems that your config.sys got messed up. Do you see any error
messages when you are loading the DOS LAN Requester drivers in DOS? Do any of
the drivers fail to load. Basically, if you boot in DOS and all the drivers
load correctly, then you should be able to connect to your LAN Server as you
used to. If you are getting a "Network not loaded" error message then that
means that the network drivers did not load properly. Make sure that the
correct config.sys and autoexec is loaded. Type out your config.sys and see if
it is loading the network drivers. Also, make sure that in DOS, the Windows NT
subdirectories are not in the path.


Best Regards.

Azfar Moazzam [MS]

#: 11780 S11/Network services
    08-Oct-92  10:24:29
Sb: #11001-DOS Lan Requester(IBM)
Fm: Azfar Moazzam - Microsof 72370,453
To: April Hope 100034,1047 (X)

>Hi Azfar, > >Thanks for replying, yes you're probably right I'm trying to use
IBM Dos Lan >Requester drivers which are not written for NT.  Any idea if the
beta >release >will connect with IBM Lan Server networks. > >April. >

Hi April, You do not need to load the IBM Dos LAN requester on Windows NT for
LAN Server connectivity. What you need to do is to install the windows NT
network drivers and the NetBEUI protocol stack. On the LAN Server, you need to
have NetBIOS installed. Once you have these two set up, you can test the
connectivity by typing "Net View \\lanservername" from the command prompt on
Windows NT. You should see the shares available on the LANServer. If you don't
see this, then please tell me what is the error code and error message that
you see.

The basic things needed for LAN Server connectivity is having NetBIOS on the
LANserver and NetBEUI on the machine running Windows NT.

Best Regards.

Azfar Moazzam [MS]

#: 11640 S11/Network services
    07-Oct-92  08:26:19
Sb: #10925-tcpipsvc startup in NT
Fm: Krishnan P [Microsoft] 71075,3222
To: Don Cock 72520,1500

>Ideas?

Don, Go into the security pull down menu in regedit and assign 'Full Access'
permissions to administrator on TCPIPSVC.

>DonC

This should do it.

Good luck,

-Krishnan Parameshwaran [MS]

#: 11784 S11/Network services
    08-Oct-92  10:55:59
Sb: #11640-tcpipsvc startup in NT
Fm: Don Cock 72520,1500
To: Krishnan P [Microsoft] 71075,3222 (X)

That did it!

Thanks,
     DonC


#: 11799 S11/Network services
    08-Oct-92  14:52:20
Sb: Win NT TCP/IP setup
Fm: George Halpert 72370,1151
To: UNFORMATTED

Windows NT TCP/IP Network Setup

We installed Win NT using the express graphical setup and the Network Control
Panel was used to install and configure our network adapter and TCP/IP.

The adapter card is an EtherLink II (IRQ=5,I/O=300) and the machine name is
unique. At "net start tcpipsvc" the result is: "tcpipsvc is starting; tcpipsvc
could not be started" (err 3523). When using ping we received the error "ICMP
network unreachable". The same errors have been experienced with Western
Digital WD8003EP and WD8013EP network adapters.  Does anyone have an idea what
the problem might be?

George Halpert 72370,1151

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11835 S11/Network services
    08-Oct-92  18:56:15
Sb: #11799-Win NT TCP/IP setup
Fm: Tim Jones 70750,701
To: George Halpert 72370,1151

Hi George,

While I am not going to offer up as your saviour on this one, I've seen net
start invoked successfully on my system (Gateway 386/33 w/12Mbyte RAM, same
ELink card and settings).  When I ping a known good ip address (our HP 3000),
I get the same "ICMP: Network unreachable (maynhp)" message.  I am using
etc\hosts only.  If I ping a bogus ip address, I get 0 of 4 packets returned,
instead of network unreachable.

HOSTS:

127.0.0.1   localhost 192.6.3.4   maynhp maynhp.maynard.com 192.6.3.11
mayniac mayniac.maynard.com 192.6.3.12  maynodt maynodt.maynard.com 192.6.3.21
maynnt maynnt.maynard.com   ### My machine name

All of these are talking marvelously amongst themselves except for me and my
NT system.

Hope this adds info to your situation and gets us a fix.

Tim Jones

#: 11669 S11/Network services
    07-Oct-92  11:14:01
Sb: add adapter wd8013
Fm: Michael R Matson 71461,55
To: MS

I can not get NT to recognize my wd8013 or SMC ellite 16 adapter.
I booted from the NT floppy and installed as per release notes.
I specified wd8013 adapter but it never asked about parameters for
the card.
After installing I tried the control-panel/network option to
add adapter.  It tells me the driver is already load,     new/current/cancel?
It never askes for card parameters.  When I exit
from network setup it says    no adapter found.
I got the updated wd from lib2 with the docs to install.  I tried the
DOS2NT procedure by using regedit to add the driver.
Under HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE
SYSTEM
  CurrentColtrolSet
   Service
    Wdlan01
     Parameters

I don't have a Wdlan01, just Wdlan, is this significant?
also under NBF/Linkage you bind to \Device\WdLan01,
should this be \Device\WdLan

I'd like to get this on the LAN to start using it,
Thanks
--
mike

#: 11893 S11/Network services
    09-Oct-92  09:14:14
Sb: #11669-add adapter wd8013
Fm: Azfar Moazzam - Microsof 72370,453
To: Michael R Matson 71461,55


>After installing I tried the control-panel/network option to >add adapter.
It tells me the driver is already load, new/current/cancel? >It never askes
for card parameters.  When I exit >from network setup it says    no adapter
found. >I got the updated wd from lib2 with the docs to install.  I tried the
>DOS2NT procedure by using regedit to add the driver. >Under
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE >SYSTEM >  CurrentColtrolSet >   Service >    Wdlan01 >
Parameters > >I don't have a Wdlan01, just Wdlan, is this significant? >also
under NBF/Linkage you bind to \Device\WdLan01, >should this be \Device\WdLan >
>I'd like to get this on the LAN to start using it, >Thanks >->mike >

Hello Mike, Did you do a clean install with DOS2NT? Also, did you uncomment
the WDLAN driver in the enabledrivers section of the reistry.ini before
rebooting. If not then this maybe the problem. In such a case you will need to
do a clean install with DOS2NT.

You also indicated that you did a graphical install in the begining. Did you
see any problems while performing the install?

Azfar




#: 11739 S12/Printing
    07-Oct-92  21:03:41
Sb: Printing problem..
Fm: Hien Nguyen 71204,254
To: All

I have an Epson LQ-510 connect to my local LPT1: port. When I print a file
from NotePad, nothing happens. NT does not even initialize the printer when I
boot up my system like DOS used to do. Anyone know what is the problem??? I
install NT using dos2nt procedure. Thanks.


#: 11764 S12/Printing
    08-Oct-92  08:05:04
Sb: Printing CD Documention
Fm: Robert H. Bernard 71210,246
To: All

Has anyone successfully printed the PostScript documentation files that come
on the Windows NT Developers Preliminary Release CD-ROM?  I tried to print the
following ones on two different models of the Apple LaserWriter (an older one
and a newer LWINT), and get PostScript errors from both.

I would appreciate knowing which PostScript printers people have used
successfully to print these and other files.

OVR32WM.PST
OVR32SS.PST
OVR32EXT.PST
OVR32GDI.PST

Thanks,
Bob

#: 11836 S12/Printing
    08-Oct-92  18:56:29
Sb: Printer Problems HP-DJ
Fm: Tim Jones 70750,701
To: Sysop (X)

As mentioned by others in this area - I also have attached a HP DeskJet to
LPT1: and cannot Print to it.  If I send a print job from any NT app, nothing
appears in the printer manager and the printer never initializes.

LPT1: is IRQ-7 and there are no other devices set to that level.

Tim Jones




#: 11068 S14/Documentation
    02-Oct-92  16:07:30
Sb: #10652-NT Docs
Fm: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340
To: Nick Wagner 75176,1763 (X)

Are you asking about the Windows NT end-user docs or low-level kernel, NT
executive information???

BTW, the SDK docs are not the same as 3.1. They are substantially different
and were written by a different group. You're correct in that the C docs are
the same as C7.

-Dwight (MS)


#: 11119 S14/Documentation
    02-Oct-92  22:53:00
Sb: NT Documentation
Fm: Nick Wagner 75176,1763
To: Dwight Matheny

I am asking about what youmight call end user information. I would like to
know at least enough to be able to install and configure NT, including info
about major   differences fromm 3.1 -- such as the way dr are used, the way
configuration is done with the registry etc. I know many of these things are
asked and discussed on the forum but some of the important stuff should have
been published on the CD or perhaps later as a file on the forum. I really am
glad to have the pre-release to play with and don't mean to complain too much,
but all the literature seems to suggest that "THE Documentation" is on the CD
--7500 paaaages --I expected some of that to be NT documentation.(User Manual)
Repeating [Dmy question --- will there be a user manual included with the beta
release??? Thanks for your reply --------------- Nick

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11277 S14/Documentation
    04-Oct-92  20:59:34
Sb: #11119-NT Documentation
Fm: Al Longyear 70165,725
To: Nick Wagner 75176,1763

User docs????

What user docs??

How to install it came in a pamplet called "Microsoft Win32 Preliminary
Software Development kit for Windows NT July 1992 Release Notes". How to
operate it?? Gee, if you can find that then let me know. I purchased the
documentation in printed format and can not really find how to operate Windows
NT in any documentation other than the pamplet. (or its PS copy on the CDROM.)
There is the "tools" manual which describes the microsoft tools. But there is
no equivalent to the "Users Guide" which came with the _finished_ product
called Microsoft Windows 3.1.

#: 11264 S14/Documentation
    04-Oct-92  17:32:41
Sb: Neet Technical NT Docs
Fm: William Verthein 76557,3623
To: ALL

I am a CS graduate student as well as a professional developer and I have to
do a paper for my Advanced OS class on NT.  I was wondering if anyone knows
where I can get technical documentation (MS or 3rd party) on the internal
architecture of NT.   Any articles (ACM, IEEE or symposiums) as well as books
would be very helpful.  Please pass on any info you know of to me via email:

William Verthein [76557,3623]

Thanx in advance for ANY help you can offer...

wgv

wgv


There is 1 Reply.

#: 11278 S14/Documentation
    04-Oct-92  21:01:44
Sb: #11264-Neet Technical NT Docs
Fm: Al Longyear 70165,725
To: William Verthein 76557,3623

It is my belief that the Windows NT kernel is loosely based upon the MACH
kernel. (Or so I have heard from other people . . . .)

#: 11488 S14/Documentation
    06-Oct-92  07:53:04
Sb: DOC PRINTING PROBLEMS
Fm: Terry Lemons 71033,3114
To: ALL







[A/EXIT

I'm trying to print the SDK PostScript document on a number of DEC printers
(especially the printerSeturbo PrintServer 20 (LPS20) and DEClaser 3250
(LN08). I'm ha notice problems tathat, from what I've heard, are causee d by
the printers exhausting virtual memory.  I've also heard that this is caused
by problems in the application(s) that generated the PostScript, in that they
aiddidn't adhere to the PostScript standard regarinddgin page indepencence.

Any thoughts on how I can work around these problems?  I've heard that these
have already been discussed here , so I'm not supplying a lot of details.  If
you want specifics, please let me know.

Thanks! tl/exit

#: 11280 S14/Documentation
    04-Oct-92  21:43:56
Sb: DEC Alpha HAL Spec?
Fm: Randy Wiser 76046,2537
To: all

I don't know if this is the right place to ask but: I'm looking for a document
I think is called "The 21064 HAL (Hardware Architecture Layer?) Interface
Specification for Windows NT" that someone from Digital Equipment Corporation
told me was on the July developers CD.  Does anyone know the filename of this
document or if it's available from Microsoft in some other form?

Any leads would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Randy Wiser

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11324 S14/Documentation
    05-Oct-92  06:44:47
Sb: #11280-DEC Alpha HAL Spec?
Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267
To: Randy Wiser 76046,2537

I don't think there are any HAL specs on the CD - they're all a bit more
secret than that.  What do you need it for though? (just  curious!)  Don't you
like DEC's HAL code & want to write your own?

#: 11605 S14/Documentation
    06-Oct-92  22:55:42
Sb: DEC Alpha HAL Spec?
Fm: Randy Wiser 76046,2537
To: Andy Champ

I did think it somewhat unusual for the HAL spec. to be on the CD, but hasn't
DEC been pushing the "openess" aspect of Alpha APX?  If they expect others to
design this chip into new products, it make sense to provide easy access to
this kind of information.

I can't be sure the HAL spec. will be of any use to me.  But I would certainly
like to have a look at it if it's not proprietary.  If DEC's HAL code is
available and _applicable_ that would be great.

This is all pie-in-the-sky thinking at this point.  But if anyone at MS can
comment publicly or privately on this subject I would appreciate it.

#: 11602 S14/Documentation
    06-Oct-92  22:20:50
Sb: Real Programmers
Fm: Rex Wheeler 70712,110
To: All

Real Programmers don't need documentation. They don't write it either.


(It's a joke, no *flames*)

#: 11787 S14/Documentation
    08-Oct-92  11:25:26
Sb: #11602-Real Programmers
Fm: Mike Widseth 71151,1430
To: Rex Wheeler 70712,110

Real programmers don't document their programs internally, either. If it was
hard to write, it should be hard to understand and even harder to modify <g>.

Real programmers don't document.  Documentation is for simpletons who can't
read listings or the object code from a core dump <g>.

-Mike-  (that was fun!)  (I, too, wish to ward off flames by pointing out that
these were an attempt at comedy!)

#: 11458 S14/Documentation
    06-Oct-92  00:10:23
Sb: NT "End User" Docs
Fm: Nick Wagner 75176,1763
To: Dwight Matheny

Your confirmmation is as I suspected -- There is no NT documentation. I am
confused by reference to the beta end user version of NT. I am anxiously
waiting for an a upgrade( the beta version?) in the mail any day. Will that
include the same version of NT as the "end user" version. Will it include NT
documentation??? -- I think you just said it will not. -- Why not? If not, and
if the "End User" version does -- Is it possible to get the "End User Version
also? I am still trying to get the compiler to run without crashing so am
looking for the beta version to solve that. (The mswin32 guys are working on
it).

#: 11716 S14/Documentation
    07-Oct-92  17:07:10
Sb: #11522-NT "End User" Docs
Fm: Scott Alexander 76556,557
To: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 (X)

Is there any way to request these docs NOW so they can be shipped when ready,
or could they be placed on the cd rom like the SDK manuals?

ps: Do you really think that most developers do not want to see the end user
manuals?  I would be surprised, I certainly want to know how Microsoft is
telling people to use Windows/NT.  I do not need any surprises about how
people are accessing, printing, sharing, etc, or about how you are
reccomending to adminster security and how I plan to secure my objects, etc.
I would think developers, at a minimum would need to see the end user docs
related to security and the registry.

#: 11773 S14/Documentation
    08-Oct-92  10:15:57
Sb: #11716-NT "End User" Docs
Fm: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340
To: Scott Alexander 76556,557 (X)

I found out yesterday afternoon that the end-user doc files made it on the
October SDK CD. I was worried that this might not happen, but they made it!
You'll be able to print them out and have the same docs as people on the
end-user beta program.

-Dwight (MS)




There are 2 Replies.

#: 11796 S14/Documentation
    08-Oct-92  12:11:46
Sb: #11773-NT "End User" Docs
Fm: Thomas Talley 70353,2003
To: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 (X)

What format will the docs be in (i.e. Postscript or W4W Doc)??

Tnx. Tom

There is 1 Reply.

#: 11824 S14/Documentation
    08-Oct-92  17:30:21
Sb: #11796-NT "End User" Docs
Fm: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340
To: Thomas Talley 70353,2003

Postscript and Write.

-Dwight




There is 1 Reply.

#: 11833 S14/Documentation
    08-Oct-92  18:53:04
Sb: #11824-NT "End User" Docs
Fm: James Ferguson 71477,2345
To: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 (X)

Write? Has Write been converted to native 32-bit mode? It wasn't even in the
July pre-release.

-- Jim F.

#: 11838 S14/Documentation
    08-Oct-92  19:28:06
Sb: #11773-NT "End User" Docs
Fm: Steve Siegel 72630,3704
To: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 (X)

Do these "end-user" docs include architectural overview, detailed system
guide, etc.; and will they be available in hard copy at reduced rate to
purchasers of the SDK?

Thanks,
   -Steve

#: 11717 S14/Documentation
    07-Oct-92  17:39:29
Sb: #11522-NT "End User" Docs
Fm: Graham Welland 70023,1267
To: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 (X)

Dwight,

Even developers need the basic documentation for setting up network cards/NT
commands etc.  Will this level of documentation come with the next development
beta or not?  A pre-lim resource kit would be invaluable to developers, since
NT is not just about the win32 API set!

Graham