27 Jun
2001
27 Jun
'01
2:20 p.m.
In a message dated Wed, 27 Jun 2001 9:19:25 PM Eastern Daylight Time, "Iggy
Drougge" <optimus(a)canit.se> writes:
<< Vance Dereksen skrev:
Responses inline:
On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Mike Ford wrote:
> >BTW, I'm also very fond of MCA. Just glad
I haven't got on my own desktop.
> >=)
>
> A model 9595 was the first computer I was really impressed with
> mechanically when I opened it up. Its built like a Porsche, and actually
> LOOKS good internally.
The 8595/9595 is an excellent machine. Another one
that I like very much
is the MCA/PCI IBM PC Server 320 (8640).
I spent this day evaluating all my disk brackets to see if one of them would
fit the 95. No such luck. I guess I'll have to work something out with a saw
and some plywood. Then I spent the evening manufacturing drive power cables,
since the 95 power supply has got sockets just like those on drives, as
opposed to plugs prodding out of it as on every other PC PSU I've ever seen.
Then I carried a big, heavy SCSI drive back home so as to get it up and
running with a reference partition.
> I have a couple dozen of various models, with
about a dozen 9595 servers.
> One of my big scores in the auction last month was a box of 3Com MCA 10bt
> cards I had been trying to buy for a year or two.
I am trying to find some of those 100Base-T Olicom MCA
cards.
As spartan as my 95 was when I got it, at least it had
>one such card and an MO drive
Now, if only it had support under some decent OS...
whaddya mean? It's got great support for a superior OS! OS/2 of course. Ive gotten
warp server, warp connect and OS/2 version 4 running on some 95's I have. Easy and
painless, although time consuming install. I believe the 9595 series are on the NT4
compatibility list...
28 Jun
28 Jun
12:46 a.m.
SUPRDAVE skrev utan att citera som folk:
>As spartan as my 95 was when I got it, at least it
had >one such card and an
>MO drive Now, if only it had support under some decent OS...
whaddya mean? It's got great support for a superior
OS! OS/2 of course. Ive
gotten warp server, warp connect and OS/2 version 4 running on some 95's I
have. Easy and painless, although time consuming install. I believe the 9595
series are on the NT4 compatibility list...
The only version of Warp I've got lacks networking. Well, that's not entirely
true, it has got TCP/IP networking, but only across a modem.
Besides, as competent as Warp might be, it feels like working with a
multitasking MS-DOS.
--
En ligne avec Thor 2.6a.
Amiga 4000/040 25MHz/44MB/20GB RetinaBLTZ3/VLab/FastlaneZ3/Ariadne/Toccata
12:41 a.m.
on 6/28/01 8:46 AM, Iggy Drougge at optimus(a)canit.se wrote:
The only version of Warp I've got lacks
networking. Well, that's not entirely
true, it has got TCP/IP networking, but only across a modem.
Besides, as competent as Warp might be, it feels like working with a
multitasking MS-DOS.
Warp Connect Version 3 and above has full support for networking, both
over modem and ethernet. It even includes the OS/2 Novell client on the CD.
I tested it on my P70 (8573-121) with an Etherlink MCA NIC.
Jeff
6:23 a.m.
Jeff Hellige skrev:
on 6/28/01 8:46 AM, Iggy Drougge at optimus(a)canit.se
wrote:
> The only version of Warp I've got lacks networking. Well, that's not
> entirely true, it has got TCP/IP networking, but only across a modem.
> Besides, as competent as Warp might be, it feels like working with a
> multitasking MS-DOS.
Warp Connect Version 3 and above has full support
for networking, both
over modem and ethernet. It even includes the OS/2 Novell client on the CD.
I tested it on my P70 (8573-121) with an Etherlink MCA NIC.
But I've only got the old red version, whereas the Connect version is blue!
Although I don't particularly like Warp, I'd still enjouy running it on one of
my PS/2s, had I only got networking working.
--
En ligne avec Thor 2.6a.
G? med i SUGA, Swedish Usergroup of Amiga!
WWW: http://swedish.usergroup.amiga.tm/
BBS: 08-6582572, telnet://sua.ath.cx:42512
6:54 a.m.
On 28 Jun 2001, Iggy Drougge wrote:
But I've only got the old red version, whereas the
Connect version is
blue! Although I don't particularly like Warp, I'd still enjouy
running it on one of my PS/2s, had I only got networking working.
Not exactly.
The so-called 'red box' and 'blue box' OS/2 Warp refers to the inclusion
or exclusion of of Microsoft-licensed code in the form of Windows 3.1
If you had 'red box', or "OS/2 Warp for Windows" you had to supply your
own Windows installation disks to run Windows 3.1 apps under OS/2.
If you had 'blue box', it came with its own copy of Windows 3.1 and needed
nothing additional to run Windows 3.1 apps under OS/2.
Both OS/2 Warp and OS/2 Warp Connect came in red and blue varieties. Warp
Connect was essentially Warp with an add-on IBM software package to give
it network capabilities; at one point you could abuse one of the fixpacks
to get Warp Connect functionality out of plain-old Warp.
I am an ex-bitter-OS/2-user and recovering former-Team-OS/2-member. There
are features of OS/2 which I think still haven't been fully realized in
other platforms (dig that SOM/Workplace Shell integration), but on the
whole OS/2 lacked polish. The world has moved on, and I'm okay with that.
ok
r.
9:13 a.m.
I am an ex-bitter-OS/2-user and recovering
former-Team-OS/2-member. There
are features of OS/2 which I think still haven't been fully realized in
other platforms (dig that SOM/Workplace Shell integration), but on the
whole OS/2 lacked polish. The world has moved on, and I'm okay with that.
ok
r.
Well, Warp4 seemed more polished and they finally added DHCP
support and stuff...
I'm still keeping Connect and Aurora (Warp4) alive here.
I'd be running the 4.5 stuff if it wasn't too expensive.
I'd liked a cross between OS/2 and VAX/VMS... maybe with FreeBSD
thrown in.
Always liked OS/2 and always will. IBM was screwed by M$ who kept
changing Win32 and keeping new apps from running on OS/2.
NT/2000 still isn't as SysAdmin friendly as either OS/2, VAX/VMS or
Unix/Linux.
Bill
---
Bill Gates is a Persian cat and a monocle away from being a
villain in a James Bond movie -- Dennis Miller
bpechter@shell.monmouth.com|pechter@pechter.dyndns.org
11:08 a.m.
Bill Pechter skrev:
I'd liked a cross between OS/2 and VAX/VMS... maybe
with FreeBSD
thrown in.
Isn't that Windows NT?
Always liked OS/2 and always will. IBM was screwed by
M$ who kept
changing Win32 and keeping new apps from running on OS/2.
So what? OS/2 is OS/2 and Windows is Windows. You can't just rely on some
other OS vendor to supply you with the right API and applications.
--
En ligne avec Thor 2.6a.
Age is a high price to pay for maturity.
10:49 a.m.
I'd liked a
cross between OS/2 and VAX/VMS... maybe with FreeBSD
thrown in.
Isn't that Windows NT? 
11:35 a.m.
New subject: OS/2
Bill Pechter skrev:
Not if you have to use the GUI to admin it and reboot to change
network addresses.
I'd liked a cross between OS/2 and VAX/VMS...
maybe with FreeBSD
thrown in.
Isn't that Windows NT? Always liked OS/2 and always will. IBM was
screwed by M$ who kept
changing Win32 and keeping new apps from running on OS/2.
So what? OS/2 is OS/2 and Windows is Windows. You can't just rely on some
other OS vendor to supply you with the right API and applications.
2:18 p.m.
New subject: OS/2
Bill Pechter skrev:
> Bill Pechter skrev:
>
> >I'd liked a cross between OS/2 and VAX/VMS... maybe with FreeBSD
> >thrown in.
>
> Isn't that Windows NT?
Not if you have to use the GUI to admin it and reboot
to change
network addresses.
You have to? I haven't used NT myself, but we all know about its OS/2 roots,
and it was developed by old VMS engineers.
> >Always liked OS/2 and always will. IBM was
screwed by M$ who kept
> >changing Win32 and keeping new apps from running on OS/2.
>
> So what? OS/2 is OS/2 and Windows is Windows. You can't just rely on some
> other OS vendor to supply you with the right API and applications.
But M$ promised if you code to Win32S it would be
portable to OS/2,
Win3.1 and Win95/NT and kept changing the DLLs to break it.
But OS/2 should really each its own. I really don't think that compatibility
with foreign systems is really beneficial to evolution. If people can just run
application X under Windows or Mac emulation, or rebooting into Windows for
that matter, or even just run some UNIX/GNU port, why would anyone ever bother
to develop application X for platform Y?
People tend not to exploit the particular features of platform Y if running
platform X software or hardware will do the job, and then there is little
incentive to keep running platform Y.
Look at the Mac, probably the world's most incompatible machine, yet probably
the non-Wintel platform with the most balanced software and hardware
selection.
Similarly, I think that Linux's lack of many packages which are considered
common appliances on other platforms owes much due to the fact that a sizable
portion of "Linux users" run dual-boot systems.
A lot of people have also complained about the fact that the ISA slots on big-
box Amigas were inactive (something Ethan Dicks has got a solution for =), but
if people could have used cheap ISA cards from the beginning, there would
probably never have been many Zorro cards developed, and Amiga users would
have had to deal with jumpers en masse instead of autoconfig and high transfer
rates.
The only problem in OS/2 was if the Workplace Shell
threads blocked and
locked up you'd lose the desktop... but all the server services
like network kept going.
I'd say the Workplace Shell is a problem in itself. It's so very IBM-ishly
unelegant.
Getting a prompt and login from Telnet was possible on
OS/2 when it
wasn't standard in NT.
Possible != standard.
The ftp and telnet servers made OS/2 pretty compatible
to
FreeBSD/Linux/Unix in what it could do on a lan.
Dito for just about every OS made after 1975. ;-)
Miserable Redmond $%*s.
Amen.
--
En ligne avec Thor 2.6a.
Vi m?ste vara r?dda om varandra - det ?r v?rt enda reciproka pronomen.
29 Jun
29 Jun
1:01 a.m.
New subject: OS/2
Not if you have
to use the GUI to admin it and reboot to change
network addresses.
You have to? I haven't used NT myself, but we all know about its OS/2 roots,
and it was developed by old VMS engineers. Getting a prompt and login from Telnet was
possible on OS/2 when it
wasn't standard in NT.
Possible != standard. The ftp and telnet servers made OS/2 pretty
compatible to
FreeBSD/Linux/Unix in what it could do on a lan.
Dito for just about every OS made after 1975. ;-)
Miserable Redmond $%*s.
Amen.
6:48 a.m.
New subject: OS/2
Bill Pechter skrev:
> >Getting a prompt and login from Telnet was
possible on OS/2 when it
> >wasn't standard in NT.
>
> Possible != standard.
Yup... Possible=standard. You just have to enable it
in the configs
and have the services start at boot time. (They even can run out of
inetd.conf.)
But was it shipped with a telnet d?mon in the box?
And why wouldn't it run out of inetd.conf, isn't that standard behaviour?
OS/2 is pretty slick for an OS that runs Win apps.
Once again, I beg to differ.
--
En ligne avec Thor 2.6a.
Haben Sie schon mal einen Wegweiser gesehen, der selbst den Weg geht, den er
weist?
--- Ludwig XV (K?nig von Frankreich, 1710-1774)
9:19 a.m.
New subject: OS/2
>
>Getting a prompt and login from Telnet was possible on OS/2 when it
> >wasn't standard in NT.
>
> Possible != standard.
Yup... Possible=standard. You just have to enable
it in the configs
and have the services start at boot time. (They even can run out of
inetd.conf.)
But was it shipped with a telnet daemon in the box? And why wouldn't it run out of inetd.conf,
isn't that standard behaviour?
It would... or you could run it as a detached background job without
inetd -- like doing telnetd &
IIRC -- all configurable and it could use a Unix like password file... so a
little cut and paste and you had telnet and ftp services like a linux box.
(and time and echo and all the little TCP/IP servers were there...)
OS/2 is pretty slick for an OS that runs Win apps.
Once again, I beg to differ.
1:09 p.m.
New subject: OS/2
Bill Pechter skrev:
> >> >Getting a prompt and login from
Telnet was possible on OS/2 when it
> >> >wasn't standard in NT.
> >>
> >> Possible != standard.
>
> >Yup... Possible=standard. You just have to enable it in the configs
> >and have the services start at boot time. (They even can run out of
> >inetd.conf.)
>
> But was it shipped with a telnet daemon in the box?
Yup it shipped with it in c:\tcpip\bin, I think.
In that case I stand corrected.
> And why wouldn't it run out of inetd.conf,
isn't that standard behaviour?
It would... or you could run it as a detached
background job without
inetd -- like doing telnetd &
Yes, that's the other way to launch a d?mon AFAIK.
IIRC -- all configurable and it could use a Unix like
password file... so a
little cut and paste and you had telnet and ftp services like a linux box.
(and time and echo and all the little TCP/IP servers were there...)
Doesn't every box?
Then again, I suppose that NT stems from the time when M$ thought that the
Internet was not their thing, not with M$N around. =)
--
En ligne avec Thor 2.6a.
Goto: A programming tool that exists to allow structured programmers to
complain about unstructured programmers.
28 Jun
28 Jun
1:09 p.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Iggy Drougge" <optimus(a)canit.se>
To: "Bill Pechter" <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 12:00 AM
Subject: Re: Whats a reasonable collection?
Bill Pechter skrev:
In it's dreams. There is anecdotal evidence that some VMS'isms were
included in NT 4(?)
by ex DEC developers. However this did not have the effect of making a
basically unstable OS
stable. It's a common joke that Bill would like NT 9.0 to work as well
as VMS.
Cheers
Geoff in Oz
I'd liked a cross between OS/2 and VAX/VMS...
maybe with FreeBSD
thrown in.
Isn't that Windows NT?
8360
days inactive
8362
days old
14 comments
9 participants
participants (9)
-
geoffrob＠stmarks.pp.catholic.edu.au -
jhellige＠earthlink.net -
optimus＠canit.se -
pechter＠bg-tc-ppp0.monmouth.com -
pechter＠bg-tc-ppp1297.monmouth.com -
pechter＠bg-tc-ppp1506.monmouth.com -
pechter＠bg-tc-ppp1667.monmouth.com -
red＠bears.org -
SUPRDAVE＠aol.com