Embrace:
We care about the OS/2 community and we are going to sell OS/2 to you 
with everything that IBM sells to you but for less money.

Extend:
We will enhance the desktop and delight the user with new features, an 
improved install, and a more beautiful desktop.

Extinguish:
We will still sell OS/2 to you and you can run it on a virtual pc (with 
a really nice desktop) rather than on its own hardware which will not 
need updated video/printer/usb/audio/nic/ide drivers that were funded by 
IBM because you will be able to run it on the emulated vpc hardware.


News:
16 November 2006
"SciTech Software, Inc. today announced that it has ceased further 
development of its SNAP device driver technology..."

10 October 2006
"We have engaged Win4Lin to develop support for eComStation as a
guest."

27 April 2006
"SSI intends to continue to expand support through its relationship with 
SciTech. Not because something went away ... nothing did. But because we 
want to continue to add value to our product and better support the user. "

-- 
Posted with OS/2 Warp 4.52
and Sea Monkey 1.5a

Hi David

You may want to look into the scitech newsgroup 
news.scitechsoft.com/scitech.snap.graphics.os2

Read the thread "SciTech SNAP Graphics technology is for sale!"

There is a response from Roderick of Mensys which indicates they are 
trying to find a solution to the probable lack of future video driver 
development resulting from the above sale.

Guess we have to await developments...

Can I ask a possibly silly question: If a company is really trying to 
move customers from eCS to a VPC based system why would they bother 
spending money to create an OS/2 version of OpenOffice V2? - the beta 
works reasonably well and the package cannot be far from GA.

Regards

Pete



David T. Johnson wrote:
> Embrace:
> We care about the OS/2 community and we are going to sell OS/2 to you 
> with everything that IBM sells to you but for less money.
> 
> Extend:
> We will enhance the desktop and delight the user with new features, an 
> improved install, and a more beautiful desktop.
> 
> Extinguish:
> We will still sell OS/2 to you and you can run it on a virtual pc (with 
> a really nice desktop) rather than on its own hardware which will not 
> need updated video/printer/usb/audio/nic/ide drivers that were funded by 
> IBM because you will be able to run it on the emulated vpc hardware.
> 
> 
> News:
> 16 November 2006
> "SciTech Software, Inc. today announced that it has ceased further 
> development of its SNAP device driver technology..."
> 
> 10 October 2006
> "We have engaged Win4Lin to develop support for eComStation as a
> guest."
> 
> 27 April 2006
> "SSI intends to continue to expand support through its relationship with 
> SciTech. Not because something went away ... nothing did. But because we 
> want to continue to add value to our product and better support the user. "
> 

[.advocacy removed - Let's keep that nonsense out of the rest of these 
groups!]

Peter Brown wrote:
> Hi David
> 
> You may want to look into the scitech newsgroup 
> news.scitechsoft.com/scitech.snap.graphics.os2
> 
> Read the thread "SciTech SNAP Graphics technology is for sale!"
> 
> There is a response from Roderick of Mensys which indicates they are 
> trying to find a solution to the probable lack of future video driver 
> development resulting from the above sale.
> 
> Guess we have to await developments...
> 
> Can I ask a possibly silly question: If a company is really trying to 
> move customers from eCS to a VPC based system why would they bother 
> spending money to create an OS/2 version of OpenOffice V2? - the beta 
> works reasonably well and the package cannot be far from GA.

Excellent question.  These conspiracy theories that Johnnson has been 
nursing since 1999 are never swayed by facts or logic, and often fall 
quite short of the mark when it comes to consistency.

Interesting that he's starting up the FUD engine again at this time.  It 
is a critical juncture for OS/2 and there is no company other than 
Serenity with any possible reason to go to bat for us (assuming Serenity 
can and wants to justify a reason to do so).

It's as if he's begging for the demise of OS/2.

It also seems like he doesn't mind ripping up the newsgroups by 
cross-posting this to advocacy in addition to the other groups.  Anyone 
who has taken a peek into that group recently can easily see just how 
destructive that could be.  The advocacy group no longer serves its 
original purpose thanks to the cross-posters from other groups (not even 
OS-related, let alone OS/2).  Its only useful purpose is as a buffer 
zone right now.

-- 
[Reverse the parts of the e-mail address to reply.]

On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 00:33:18 UTC, Peter Brown 
<losepeteSPAM-ME-NOT@ntlworld.com> wrote:

-> Hi David
-> 
-> You may want to look into the scitech newsgroup 
-> news.scitechsoft.com/scitech.snap.graphics.os2
-> 
-> Read the thread "SciTech SNAP Graphics technology is for sale!"
-> 
-> There is a response from Roderick of Mensys which indicates they are 
-> trying to find a solution to the probable lack of future video driver 
-> development resulting from the above sale.
-> 
-> Guess we have to await developments...
-> 
-> Can I ask a possibly silly question: If a company is really trying to 
-> move customers from eCS to a VPC based system why would they bother 
-> spending money to create an OS/2 version of OpenOffice V2? - the beta 
-> works reasonably well and the package cannot be far from GA.
-> 
-> Regards
-> 
-> Pete

Now Peter you know David is special.  His brain can only make up FUD 
and there isn't much point to discussing anything with him.  It 
appears his psychotroll buddy may or may not have resurfaced in Utah 
and I suppose he was so excited he had to post some drival he made up.
 

Since its been a while I guess it needs to be repeated that when 
dealing with trolls it is best to ignore them, if that isn't possible 
then please don't quote the idiots, and make sure you put [FUD4] as a 
prefix in the subject so people can filter out the trolls threads.

Mark


-- 
From the eComStation of Mark Dodel

 http://www.os2voice.org
 Warpstock 2006, Windsor, Ontario, Canada,  Oct 12-15, 2006 - 
http://www.warpstock.org

[cooa dropped from the groups list for sanity's sake]

Here in comp.os.os2.misc,
"David T. Johnson" <djohnson@isomedia.com> spake unto us, saying:

>Embrace:
>We care about the OS/2 community and we are going to sell OS/2 to you 
>with everything that IBM sells to you but for less money.

Actually, right now SSI is selling a form of OS/2 to us and IBM is not
selling it at all, which makes the extinquish part rather silly (IBM
killed the product first, and not through SSI's actions).

Besides, all third-party versions of products will tend to follow the
pattern you describe.  They will attempt to provide competitive pricing
and try to differentiate their version by adding value, but they will
eventually discontinue production.

Such is the finite lifespan of (almost) all non-FOSS software.

-- 
 -Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Mableton, GA USA
    Mainframe/Unix bit twiddler by day, OS/2+Linux+DOS hobbyist by night.
       WARNING: I've seen FIELDATA FORTRAN V and I know how to use it!
                   The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.

Silly rabbit ..

David T. Johnson wrote:
> Embrace:
> We care about the OS/2 community and we are going to sell OS/2 to you 
> with everything that IBM sells to you but for less money.

eComStation has always cost less than the IBM distribution. It has 
always included all the software available from and IBM, and more. IBM 
stopped selling OS/2 over a year ago. eComStation continues to be sold 
and enhanced.

> Extend:
> We will enhance the desktop and delight the user with new features, an 
> improved install, and a more beautiful desktop.

The appearance of the desktop is largely a matter of personal taste. 
Even so, I think the attention paid to the appearance of the desktop is 
appropriate. One of the issues which was often raised by users in 2000 
was that the Warp4 product looked dated.

And, through Serenity Systems International, additional features, 
drivers, and applications have been delivered.

> Extinguish:
> We will still sell OS/2 to you and you can run it on a virtual pc (with 
> a really nice desktop) rather than on its own hardware which will not 
> need updated video/printer/usb/audio/nic/ide drivers that were funded by 
> IBM because you will be able to run it on the emulated vpc hardware.

Because this is titled "Extinguish" ... I'll make the leap and infer 
that DTJ is claiming that supporting OS/2 in a VM application is 
essentially the same as taking OS/2 out behind the barn and strangling it.

The problem with this thinking is that it ignores that more is being 
invested and more work is being performed to support eComStation 
directly on hardware than as a guest in a VM. ACPI, additional NIC 
support, improved hardware detection, and work to add "native" hardware 
support continues in 2007.

And support for "native" applications continues, including 
OpenOffice.org 2.0.4 as a native OS/2 application, and a new PDF file 
reader, Lucide.

SSI has always been about providing users with choices and value. And we 
have been very successful doing that. If a future distribution of 
eComStation includes the ability to run eComStation and/or OS/2 in a VM 
on Linux ... does that equal "extinguish" or choice?

If the same distribution includes many updates and new features to 
support a "direct on hardware" option, I would say "choice". And that is 
exactly what is happening.

The next version of eComStation to be delivered will include support for 
  both processors in the Intel dual core configuration, as well as 
support for installation on AMD64, and ACPI.

It would be quite a leap to think these are an attempt to "extinguish". 
Clearly they are an attempt to extend the useful life of the product.

Regards,
Bob St.John
Serenity Systems International

Oh!  I forgot to thank DTJ for this "marketing minute".  ;-)

Peter Brown wrote:
> Hi David
> 
> You may want to look into the scitech newsgroup 
> news.scitechsoft.com/scitech.snap.graphics.os2
> 
> Read the thread "SciTech SNAP Graphics technology is for sale!"
> 
> There is a response from Roderick of Mensys which indicates they are 
> trying to find a solution to the probable lack of future video driver 
> development resulting from the above sale.
> 
> Guess we have to await developments...

Yes, thanks for pointing out the Mensys comment.

> 
> Can I ask a possibly silly question: If a company is really trying to 
> move customers from eCS to a VPC based system why would they bother 
> spending money to create an OS/2 version of OpenOffice V2? - the beta 
> works reasonably well and the package cannot be far from GA.
> 

The eCS thing has always presented itself as a future for OS/2 after IBM 
ended it.  The problem I have had with that is that there wasn't 
anything substantial from 'Serenity Systems' to support.  Serenity was 
putting their efforts into the desktop and installer while it was IBM 
financing the critical updates and support with Serenity just going 
along for the ride.  Now, the IBM tractor has quit pulling.  No more IBM 
contract with SciTech.  No more IBM development of drivers.  No more IBM 
porting of Mozilla.

So...okay, then, what would be next?  I didn't personally see any way 
that OS2/eCS could keep going as an even slightly viable OS alternative 
without critical driver support such as the video driver that IBM was 
paying SciTech to do but Bob St. John claimed to have a 'relationship' 
of some sort with Scitech (see below) so maybe...just maybe...that would 
continue.  Well, now, that looks unlikely to put it mildly.

Regarding your question about Open Office v2.0, I have wondered why they 
were spending their resources to port it.  Open Office for eCS is an 
'application' that is not of any use if the underlying OS is not 
available.  While I would personally pay for Open Office v2.0, it has 
never been a priority for me.  If your question is rhetorical and meant 
to suggest that the very fact that Serenity is working on Open Office 
v2.0 means they do NOT plan for their customers to run eCS on a virtual 
PC, then I would say that I hope you are right but I doubt it and all we 
can do now is just wait and see.

I don't see very much use in running eCS or OS/2 in a vpc on Linux or 
Windows, other than as a way to migrate.  If you use Open Office on eCS 
running in a vpc, you still need OS/2 printer drivers to print your 
documents from the vpc but more importanly, why would anyone want to do 
that?

Thanks for posting but I'm not going to post anything further on this 
topic as the handful of flamers here always degrade the discussion level 
with a day or so anyway.

> 
> David T. Johnson wrote:
>> Embrace:
>> We care about the OS/2 community and we are going to sell OS/2 to you 
>> with everything that IBM sells to you but for less money.
>>
>> Extend:
>> We will enhance the desktop and delight the user with new features, an 
>> improved install, and a more beautiful desktop.
>>
>> Extinguish:
>> We will still sell OS/2 to you and you can run it on a virtual pc 
>> (with a really nice desktop) rather than on its own hardware which 
>> will not need updated video/printer/usb/audio/nic/ide drivers that 
>> were funded by IBM because you will be able to run it on the emulated 
>> vpc hardware.
>>
>>
>> News:
>> 16 November 2006
>> "SciTech Software, Inc. today announced that it has ceased further 
>> development of its SNAP device driver technology..."
>>
>> 10 October 2006
>> "We have engaged Win4Lin to develop support for eComStation as a
>> guest."
>>
>> 27 April 2006
>> "SSI intends to continue to expand support through its relationship 
>> with SciTech. Not because something went away ... nothing did. But 
>> because we want to continue to add value to our product and better 
>> support the user. "
>>


-- 
Posted with OS/2 Warp 4.52
and Sea Monkey 1.5a

Hi David

David T. Johnson wrote:
> Peter Brown wrote:
>> Hi David
>>
>> You may want to look into the scitech newsgroup 
>> news.scitechsoft.com/scitech.snap.graphics.os2
>>
>> Read the thread "SciTech SNAP Graphics technology is for sale!"
>>
>> There is a response from Roderick of Mensys which indicates they are 
>> trying to find a solution to the probable lack of future video driver 
>> development resulting from the above sale.
>>
>> Guess we have to await developments...
> 
> Yes, thanks for pointing out the Mensys comment.
> 
>>
>> Can I ask a possibly silly question: If a company is really trying to 
>> move customers from eCS to a VPC based system why would they bother 
>> spending money to create an OS/2 version of OpenOffice V2? - the beta 
>> works reasonably well and the package cannot be far from GA.
>>
> 
> The eCS thing has always presented itself as a future for OS/2 after IBM 
> ended it.  The problem I have had with that is that there wasn't 
> anything substantial from 'Serenity Systems' to support.  Serenity was 
> putting their efforts into the desktop and installer while it was IBM 
> financing the critical updates and support with Serenity just going 
> along for the ride.


I suspect that some of the updates were the result of eCS demanding them.


   Now, the IBM tractor has quit pulling.

Long ago really :-) - did it ever pull with all wheels for Warp4?

No is probably the honest answer as IBM had decided to scrap OS/2 before 
releasing Warp4.


   No more IBM
> contract with SciTech.


eCS had their own agreement with Scitech after IBM quit.


   No more IBM development of drivers.


That is the "IBM tractor" that I think will be missed - even if it was 
only pulling with 1 wheel.

Hopefully some talented people will be able to develop drivers as 
required - or develop a "Win Wrapper" like the GenMAC "Win Wrapper" 
which enables the use of Win32 NIC drivers.


   No more IBM
> porting of Mozilla.
>


Wow  :-)

Forgot the last time I fired up an IBM version of Mozilla - must be 
years ago.

I suggest trying the unofficial builds available here 
http://weilbacher.org/Mozilla/builds.html

Current Mozilla builds with some OS/2 enhancements - more than IBM 
managed  :-)


> So...okay, then, what would be next?  I didn't personally see any way 
> that OS2/eCS could keep going as an even slightly viable OS alternative 
> without critical driver support such as the video driver that IBM was 
> paying SciTech to do but Bob St. John claimed to have a 'relationship' 
> of some sort with Scitech (see below) so maybe...just maybe...that would 
> continue.  Well, now, that looks unlikely to put it mildly.
> 


The lack of future video driver support could be somewhat critical...

If that cannot be resolved then I guess eCS V2 will be the last OS/2 and 
will be limited to the video hardware currently supported in SNAP - 
unless someone fancies running their mega expensive, highly capable 
video card in vga on their large, highly capable monitor.


> Regarding your question about Open Office v2.0, I have wondered why they 
> were spending their resources to port it.  Open Office for eCS is an 
> 'application' that is not of any use if the underlying OS is not 
> available.  While I would personally pay for Open Office v2.0, it has 
> never been a priority for me.  If your question is rhetorical and meant 
> to suggest that the very fact that Serenity is working on Open Office 
> v2.0 means they do NOT plan for their customers to run eCS on a virtual 
> PC, then I would say that I hope you are right but I doubt it and all we 
> can do now is just wait and see.
>
> I don't see very much use in running eCS or OS/2 in a vpc on Linux or 
> Windows, other than as a way to migrate.  If you use Open Office on eCS 
> running in a vpc, you still need OS/2 printer drivers to print your 
> documents from the vpc but more importanly, why would anyone want to do 
> that?
> 


I think I can agree with the above ideas in general but think that until 
we know what is happening about video support any further discussion is 
guesswork...

I really do not know anything about the Win4Lin hookup, probably did not 
pay any attention to any announcement as it does not interest me at the 
moment.

What does occur to me is that there are probably a few companies around 
looking to move older OS/2 based systems to linux/unix based systems and 
that maybe there is a marketing opportunity to be exploited. If that is 
the case then the Win4Lin bit could be fairly sound business sense.


> Thanks for posting but I'm not going to post anything further on this 
> topic as the handful of flamers here always degrade the discussion level 
> with a day or so anyway.
> 


Regards

Pete



>>
>> David T. Johnson wrote:
>>> Embrace:
>>> We care about the OS/2 community and we are going to sell OS/2 to you 
>>> with everything that IBM sells to you but for less money.
>>>
>>> Extend:
>>> We will enhance the desktop and delight the user with new features, 
>>> an improved install, and a more beautiful desktop.
>>>
>>> Extinguish:
>>> We will still sell OS/2 to you and you can run it on a virtual pc 
>>> (with a really nice desktop) rather than on its own hardware which 
>>> will not need updated video/printer/usb/audio/nic/ide drivers that 
>>> were funded by IBM because you will be able to run it on the emulated 
>>> vpc hardware.
>>>
>>>
>>> News:
>>> 16 November 2006
>>> "SciTech Software, Inc. today announced that it has ceased further 
>>> development of its SNAP device driver technology..."
>>>
>>> 10 October 2006
>>> "We have engaged Win4Lin to develop support for eComStation as a
>>> guest."
>>>
>>> 27 April 2006
>>> "SSI intends to continue to expand support through its relationship 
>>> with SciTech. Not because something went away ... nothing did. But 
>>> because we want to continue to add value to our product and better 
>>> support the user. "
>>>
> 
> 

In <wypxfphpv2cd092yn@visi.com>, on 11/18/2006 
   at 12:40 AM, rsteiner@visi.com (Richard Steiner) said:



>[cooa dropped from the groups list for sanity's sake]

>Here in comp.os.os2.misc,
>"David T. Johnson" <djohnson@isomedia.com> spake unto us, saying:

>>Embrace:
>>We care about the OS/2 community and we are going to sell OS/2 to you 
>>with everything that IBM sells to you but for less money.

>Actually, right now SSI is selling a form of OS/2 to us and IBM is not
>selling it at all, which makes the extinquish part rather silly (IBM
>killed the product first, and not through SSI's actions).

>Besides, all third-party versions of products will tend to follow the
>pattern you describe.  They will attempt to provide competitive pricing
>and try to differentiate their version by adding value, but they will
>eventually discontinue production.


You ecs shills live in a dream world. No one (but freeware authors) have
produced anything for OS2 in a few years now -- and of the freeware
products, I can't think of one that has any market presence.

That being said, I have made great use of some of the digital camera
utilities from Rick Walsh and others. The same goes for the Mozilla
updates. -- But you ecs shills need to deal with facts you don't like; 
OS2 from IBM is what you have.  You have a new installer that causes as
many problems as it solves.  There is no future for ecs.  Its dead. Now
stop the wishful thinking.

If you want to do something for OS2 -->start pressuring Scitech to release
the OS2 drivers before they sell it and its killed.






>Such is the finite lifespan of (almost) all non-FOSS software.

Hi Mark

Mark Dodel wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 00:33:18 UTC, Peter Brown 
> <losepeteSPAM-ME-NOT@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> 
> -> Hi David
> -> 
> -> You may want to look into the scitech newsgroup 
> -> news.scitechsoft.com/scitech.snap.graphics.os2
> -> 
> -> Read the thread "SciTech SNAP Graphics technology is for sale!"
> -> 
> -> There is a response from Roderick of Mensys which indicates they are 
> -> trying to find a solution to the probable lack of future video driver 
> -> development resulting from the above sale.
> -> 
> -> Guess we have to await developments...
> -> 
> -> Can I ask a possibly silly question: If a company is really trying to 
> -> move customers from eCS to a VPC based system why would they bother 
> -> spending money to create an OS/2 version of OpenOffice V2? - the beta 
> -> works reasonably well and the package cannot be far from GA.
> -> 
> -> Regards
> -> 
> -> Pete
> 
> Now Peter you know David is special.  His brain can only make up FUD 
> and there isn't much point to discussing anything with him.  It 
> appears his psychotroll buddy may or may not have resurfaced in Utah 
> and I suppose he was so excited he had to post some drival he made up.
>  
> 
> Since its been a while I guess it needs to be repeated that when 
> dealing with trolls it is best to ignore them, if that isn't possible 
> then please don't quote the idiots, and make sure you put [FUD4] as a 
> prefix in the subject so people can filter out the trolls threads.
> 
> Mark
> 
> 



I thought David made some interesting points that were worth responding 
to. He did not seem "over excited" in my view.

I thought he was looking for some sort of reassurance that some form of 
OS/2 may still be on sale in the future - probably a result of the 
Scitech announcement - and his follow up suggests that is the case.

Regards

Pete

In article <cLdq6jdb1N4Q-pn2-bEjGIyD0ERYe@localhost>
	   madodelNOSPAM@ptd.net "Mark Dodel" writes:

> [something -- but my newsreader is set to reject [FUD4] posts]
-- 
Andrew Stephenson

In article <06ydne2fMZ8PncLYnZ2dnUVZ_rednZ2d@comcast.com>
	   Serenity.Systems@comcast.net "Bob St.John" writes:

> [...]  If a future distribution of eComStation includes the
> ability to run eComStation and/or OS/2 in a VM on Linux ...
> does that equal "extinguish" or choice?

Bob, are SSI also trying to ensure OS/2::eCS will run fully and
well under Parallels on an Intel Mac?  My hardware future seems
to lie in that direction and I do want (and need) an ability to
run an OS/2 setup, with its DOS/Win-3.1 session options.  (OS-X
is quite good but doesn't please me as much as OS/2 does.)
-- 
Andrew Stephenson

David T. Johnson wrote:

> The eCS thing has always presented itself as a future for OS/2 after IBM
> ended it.  The problem I have had with that is that there wasn't
> anything substantial from 'Serenity Systems' to support.  Serenity was
> putting their efforts into the desktop and installer while it was IBM
> financing the critical updates and support with Serenity just going
> along for the ride.

Very well said, and a very good, real life observation.

I respect the desire to avoid flame wars, but if any of you other
hypocritical ecs shills don't pounce on this man's comments  and rip on
him, the way you classlessly tried to do to me, my case will stand as
unopposed, and it will be obvious that  you only wanted to piss on me
for the hell of it, and for your own gratification, not for any
logical, defensible reason. C'mon, this guy is talking like Tim. Give
him hell. Its what you all do, as you have little else to go with.

Those are true words. I also said the same thing, and the immature
folks here attacked with full volume, frothing and foaming at the mouth
like I had just insulted your mother, making all kinds of false
accusations against someone whose opinion didn't fit your notion of
what was acceptable. What is your response to the same commentary, from
someone else? Get personal, be pig headed. Its what you did, so stand
up for what you believe with EVERYONE, or slink away into the night,
and be ashamed for your behavior.

Let's see if you are men, or just a group of animals looking for flame
wars at your convenience. Defend ecs and your belief system, against
this well phrased observation, or maybe you agree with it after all?

John

On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 14:28:35 UTC, Peter Brown 
<losepeteSPAM-ME-NOT@ntlworld.com> wrote:

-> I thought David made some interesting points that were worth responding 
-> to. He did not seem "over excited" in my view.

We haven't heard much from the troll gang in months and all of a 
sudden some nutball who has no posting history, with a gmail account 
(albeit form Utah instead of SF) pops up attacking eCS and then David 
and his angry smurf Ed pop out of the woodwork attacking people.  

->  
-> I thought he was looking for some sort of reassurance that some form of 
-> OS/2 may still be on sale in the future - probably a result of the 
-> Scitech announcement - and his follow up suggests that is the case.
->  

David is only looking to promote the same FUD and conspiracy innuendo 
he has for years.  His logic is flawed as usual and his only goal is 
to denegrate the few who still make it possible for us to continue 
using our abandoned platform of preference.   See Bob StJohn's 
response to the troll. 

Mark

-- 
From the eComStation of Mark Dodel

 http://www.os2voice.org
 Warpstock 2006, Windsor, Ontario, Canada,  Oct 12-15, 2006 - 
http://www.warpstock.org

Andrew Stephenson wrote:
> In article <06ydne2fMZ8PncLYnZ2dnUVZ_rednZ2d@comcast.com>
> 	   Serenity.Systems@comcast.net "Bob St.John" writes:
> 
> 
>>[...]  If a future distribution of eComStation includes the
>>ability to run eComStation and/or OS/2 in a VM on Linux ...
>>does that equal "extinguish" or choice?
> 
> 
> Bob, are SSI also trying to ensure OS/2::eCS will run fully and
> well under Parallels on an Intel Mac?  My hardware future seems
> to lie in that direction and I do want (and need) an ability to
> run an OS/2 setup, with its DOS/Win-3.1 session options.  (OS-X
> is quite good but doesn't please me as much as OS/2 does.)

I have no contact with Parallels, or any influence on what they will 
support.  As a user, you should move that forward as a requirement.

Regards,
Bob St.John
Serenity Systems International

John wrote:
> David T. Johnson wrote:
> 
> 
>>The eCS thing has always presented itself as a future for OS/2 after IBM
>>ended it.  The problem I have had with that is that there wasn't
>>anything substantial from 'Serenity Systems' to support.  Serenity was
>>putting their efforts into the desktop and installer while it was IBM
>>financing the critical updates and support with Serenity just going
>>along for the ride.
> 
> 
> Very well said, and a very good, real life observation.
> 
> I respect the desire to avoid flame wars, but if any of you other
> hypocritical ecs shills don't pounce on this man's comments  and rip on
> him, the way you classlessly tried to do to me, my case will stand as
> unopposed, and it will be obvious that  you only wanted to piss on me
> for the hell of it, and for your own gratification, not for any
> logical, defensible reason. C'mon, this guy is talking like Tim. Give
> him hell. Its what you all do, as you have little else to go with.
> 
> Those are true words. I also said the same thing, and the immature
> folks here attacked with full volume, frothing and foaming at the mouth
> like I had just insulted your mother, making all kinds of false
> accusations against someone whose opinion didn't fit your notion of
> what was acceptable. What is your response to the same commentary, from
> someone else? Get personal, be pig headed. Its what you did, so stand
> up for what you believe with EVERYONE, or slink away into the night,
> and be ashamed for your behavior.
> 
> Let's see if you are men, or just a group of animals looking for flame
> wars at your convenience. Defend ecs and your belief system, against
> this well phrased observation, or maybe you agree with it after all?
> 
> John
> 
Hello John and David,

I disagree with this statement entirely.  Serenity have produced (or at 
least provided a reason *to* produce) several useful enhancements, and 
have kept the product alive for the developers long after IBM gave up on 
it.  Yes IBM produced drivers, and yes most of "the rest" were developed 
by individuals (often for free), but without Serenity and Mensys keeping 
the whole thing going, chances are none of these projects would have 
seen the light of day (if the developers had written them, chances are 
they would just have kept them for themselves).  A new desktop really 
didn't take much, but the installer is light years ahead of the Warp 4 
version, and far easier to use (and yes, I have used both recently).

My �0.02

Stuart

In article <N8KdnVJIJdXgzcLYnZ2dnUVZ_hmdnZ2d@comcast.com>
	   Serenity.Systems@comcast.net "Bob St.John" writes:

> Andrew Stephenson wrote:
> >
> > Bob, are SSI also trying to ensure OS/2::eCS will run fully and
> > well under Parallels on an Intel Mac?  My hardware future seems
> > to lie in that direction and I do want (and need) an ability to
> > run an OS/2 setup, with its DOS/Win-3.1 session options.  (OS-X
> > is quite good but doesn't please me as much as OS/2 does.)
>
> I have no contact with Parallels, or any influence on what they will
> support.  As a user, you should move that forward as a requirement.

Er, okay: could you hereby consider it moved forward?  :-)

FWIW, people in the OS/2 NGs have already reported success with
running OS/2 under Parallels, as does the company, but I wanted
to hear whether SSI are watching this pot too.  It represents a
new recipe for sales.  I'd imagine Parallels (company) would be
happy to cooperate, if you didn't ask too much of them.
-- 
Andrew Stephenson

Srtgray wrote:

> I disagree with this statement entirely.

That's okay. No reason why the whole world has to agree on everything
:-)

>Serenity have produced (or at
> least provided a reason *to* produce) several useful enhancements, and
> have kept the product alive for the developers long after IBM gave up on
> it.

Can't dispute that at all.

> A new desktop really
> didn't take much, but the installer is light years ahead of the Warp 4
> version, and far easier to use (and yes, I have used both recently).

I would not wish to be compared to the infamous Tim, but the things you
mention really ought not be quite as costly as they are. Given that SSI
didn't have to develop the OS in the first place, its questionable why
it costs as much as new OS's that are available, but I will back away
from accusations, and leave that up to others to deal with :)

When I purchased v1.0, after its debut, I was very happy with what I
had in Warp, but felt like it would be worthwhile to invest in where
eCS said it wanted to go. All I know is, that where they went, is not
where I had hoped, so given all the other things in life, eCS doesn't
get me where I would like to be. At least not now.

>From  what I have seen, and read, people seem to like the new
installer. Its mostly a matter of what matters most. After all the
smoke and ugly discussion clears, in the light of day, it is just a
shame that so much apparent effort went into the installer and some
tools, when it would have been a good thing to put Odin or something
similar on the fast track, as well as the concept of Everblue.

These things may well have turned out to be technically impossible,
which is certain cause for giving up on them :-) but the key to moving
OS/2-eCS out into the mainstream, would be for such things to have come
to fruition.

Its still a fine,  useful, and reliable OS. no matter what flavor is
chosen.

John

Andrew Stephenson wrote:
> In article <N8KdnVJIJdXgzcLYnZ2dnUVZ_hmdnZ2d@comcast.com>
> 	   Serenity.Systems@comcast.net "Bob St.John" writes:
> 
> 
>>Andrew Stephenson wrote:
>>
>>>Bob, are SSI also trying to ensure OS/2::eCS will run fully and
>>>well under Parallels on an Intel Mac?  My hardware future seems
>>>to lie in that direction and I do want (and need) an ability to
>>>run an OS/2 setup, with its DOS/Win-3.1 session options.  (OS-X
>>>is quite good but doesn't please me as much as OS/2 does.)
>>
>>I have no contact with Parallels, or any influence on what they will
>>support.  As a user, you should move that forward as a requirement.
> 
> 
> Er, okay: could you hereby consider it moved forward?  :-)

Hmm.... you misunderstood.  Parallels Workstation is a product of 
Parallels. We can't improve their application. Parallels needs to  do that.

Parallels claims to support eComStation 1.1 and 1.2 (see 
http://www.parallels.com/en/products/workstation/os/) If it isn't 
working properly, you need to contact Parallels as this is a supported 
configuration. If Parallels needs our assistance, we would be glad to help.

Regards,
Bob St.John
Serenity Systems International

In article <f4CdnX1obO78FsLYnZ2dnUVZ_ridnZ2d@comcast.com>
	   Serenity.Systems@comcast.net "Bob St.John" writes:

> Andrew Stephenson wrote:
>
> > Er, okay: could you hereby consider it moved forward?  :-)
>
> Hmm.... you misunderstood.  Parallels Workstation is a product of
> Parallels. We can't improve their application. Parallels needs
> to do that.

Okay, I thought you said that I should ask SSI to encourage eCS
to work with Parallels.  It sounded strangely bureaucratic that
I couldn't simply ask you, there and then. <g>  But encouraging
eCS to work with VMs like Parallels still seems an SSI "thing".

However...

> Parallels claims to support eComStation 1.1 and 1.2 (see
> http://www.parallels.com/en/products/workstation/os/) If it
> isn't working properly, you need to contact Parallels as this
> is a supported configuration. If Parallels needs our
> assistance, we would be glad to help.

This is encouraging, especially the final observation.  Ta.

Is there any news on whether there may be issues with eCS-2.0 in
Parallels, as/when it appears?  Or are basic connections between
the OS and its environment the same?
-- 
Andrew Stephenson

In <1163871570.051969.208690@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, on
11/18/2006
   at 09:39 AM, "John" <ewsnet@gmail.com> said:

>I respect the desire to avoid flame wars,

Don't be such a hypocrite.

>but if any of you other hypocritical ecs shills

You're begging the question, Tim, and it's you that is a hypocrite.

>don't pounce on this man's comments  and rip on him,

It will prove nothing.

>my case will stand as unopposed, 

No; that fact that you are a clueless ignoramus with delusions of
adequacy has noting to do with anything DTJ wrote or with anybody's
response to what he wrote. His article didn't remotely resemble yours,
so only a fool would demand that the responses be similar.

>and it will be obvious that  you only wanted to piss on me for the
>hell of it,

It may be obvious that the Earth is flat, but that doesn't make it
true. People chastised you because you behaved like an arrogant,
boorish, foolish, ignorant spoiled child.

>C'mon, this guy is talking like Tim.

No, tonto, *you* were. I may not agree with DTJ, but he has been far
more civil than you or your alter ego Tim.

>Let's see if you are men,

Why don't you make that crack to one of use in person, pendejo?

AMF. FOAD. 

*PLONK*

-- 
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT  <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>

Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action.  I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail.  Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me.  Do not
reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org

Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote:

> Don't be such a hypocrite.

Hey briainless, it takes TWO people to have a flame war.

>
> >but if any of you other hypocritical ecs shills
>
> You're begging the question, Tim, and it's you that is a hypocrite.

See, you are the second man on the war.
>
> No; that fact that you are a clueless ignoramus with delusions of
> adequacy has noting to do with anything DTJ wrote or with anybody's
> response to what he wrote. His article didn't remotely resemble yours,
> so only a fool would demand that the responses be similar.

Actually, my initial posts were just fine, said pretty much what he
said about eCS. It was only when the local fpinheads decided to pour on
the gasoline, that things got ugly, just like you are doing here.

DTJ hit the nail right on the head. IBM made the OS, SSI  added some
flufff, and an installer, because most jerkofss like you are too stupid
to  know how to install an OS, drivers, or applications. Care to defend
it, or you just want to be a baby and  whine about the messenger? I
could not care less what you think. You are just a jerk, with a
keyboard, whose opinions apparently come straight out of your ass. Big
deal, tough guy

>
> >and it will be obvious that  you only wanted to piss on me for the
> >hell of it,
>
> It may be obvious that the Earth is flat, but that doesn't make it
> true. People chastised you because you behaved like an arrogant,
> boorish, foolish, ignorant spoiled child.
>
You are just a child. Does your mommy know you are on the internet.....
?
>
> No, tonto, *you* were. I may not agree with DTJ, but he has been far
> more civil than you or your alter ego Tim.
>

Nah. ....... go back and reread it. I made some benign comments, your
girlfriends here jumped on it, and cranked up the insults, resulting in
the ugliness. This person said the same  thing that I did.  Serenity
has added no meat at all to the system, just the installer. IBM did the
hard stuff, and once they cut it off, it was over. Get used to it.

> >Let's see if you are men,
>
> Why don't you make that crack to one of use in person, pendejo?

oooohh...... I am sooooo  scared of the tough little boy with the
keyboard on his desk, threatening people with violence. Get a life,
peaches.

> *PLONK*

Another real man stays around to face the music. Ten bucks says the
dipshit didn't really killfile me, and that he will just HAVE to make a
reply. After  all, he has been challenged, and a -real-  man would not
walk away from such a thing. Tough guys in their PJs, eating Doritos,
unitl their mom comes home and makes them go to bed. Dime a dozen.

Grow up, you douche.

John wrote:
> Srtgray wrote:
> 
> 
>>I disagree with this statement entirely.
> 
> 
> That's okay. No reason why the whole world has to agree on everything
> :-)
> 
> 
>>Serenity have produced (or at
>>least provided a reason *to* produce) several useful enhancements, and
>>have kept the product alive for the developers long after IBM gave up on
>>it.
> 
> 
> Can't dispute that at all.
> 

:)

> 
>>A new desktop really
>>didn't take much, but the installer is light years ahead of the Warp 4
>>version, and far easier to use (and yes, I have used both recently).
> 
> 
> I would not wish to be compared to the infamous Tim, but the things you
> mention really ought not be quite as costly as they are. Given that SSI
> didn't have to develop the OS in the first place, its questionable why
> it costs as much as new OS's that are available, but I will back away
> from accusations, and leave that up to others to deal with :)
> 
> When I purchased v1.0, after its debut, I was very happy with what I
> had in Warp, but felt like it would be worthwhile to invest in where
> eCS said it wanted to go. All I know is, that where they went, is not
> where I had hoped, so given all the other things in life, eCS doesn't
> get me where I would like to be. At least not now.
> 

eCS 1.2 is far ahead of 1.0, which was more of a wrapper on Warp 4.52

>>From  what I have seen, and read, people seem to like the new
> installer. Its mostly a matter of what matters most. After all the
> smoke and ugly discussion clears, in the light of day, it is just a
> shame that so much apparent effort went into the installer and some
> tools, when it would have been a good thing to put Odin or something
> similar on the fast track, as well as the concept of Everblue.
> 

It isn't just a matter of taste, it really does do the job much better 
on my Thinkpad T20 and the desktop machines I have installed.  Having 
all the new (i.e. post 1996) stuff there (such as UniAud, wireless 
network driver for ARtem cards, SNAP) means that I am up and running in 
about one third of the time of the "traditional" installer (which is 
still pretty good, BTW).  I agree that ODIN needs more resources, but on 
the other hand, the Acrobat 5 installation from Innotek does a much 
better job. Just make a new program object for AR5OS2.exe, drop the 
windows installer programme on it, and it does what ODIN promised.  I 
can't remember what Everblue was all about, so can't comment there.

> These things may well have turned out to be technically impossible,
> which is certain cause for giving up on them :-) but the key to moving
> OS/2-eCS out into the mainstream, would be for such things to have come
> to fruition.
> 
> Its still a fine,  useful, and reliable OS. no matter what flavor is
> chosen.
> 

Wholehearted agreement!

> John
> 

On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 17:39:30 UTC, "John" <ewsnet@gmail.com> wrote:

> David T. Johnson wrote:
>  
> > The eCS thing has always presented itself as a future for OS/2 after IBM
> > ended it.  The problem I have had with that is that there wasn't
> > anything substantial from 'Serenity Systems' to support.  Serenity was
> > putting their efforts into the desktop and installer while it was IBM
> > financing the critical updates and support with Serenity just going
> > along for the ride.
>  
> Very well said, and a very good, real life observation.
>...

Well well, we've got _two_ dedicated concern trolls now. Rather 
heart-warming to see such loyalty to OS/2 when so many other things are 
right out there waiting to be bashed, and with larger user bases. Or is 
os/2's status as a really small puddle one of its attractions when other 
groups are more competitive?



-- 
Dan Drake
dd@dandrake.com
http://www.dandrake.com/
porlockjr.blogspot.com

Here in comp.os.os2.misc, letoured@nospam.net spake unto us, saying:

>You ecs shills live in a dream world.

Reality check, Ed.  As I've stated often in response to such ill-aimed
potshots in the past, I run OS/2 Warp 4 FP 15 here and not eComStation,
and my former eCS 1.1 box is currently running Puppy Linux 3.11.

While eCS is still installed on the above box, I don't think I've even
booted it for a year, and my eCS 1.2R discs still remain uninstalled.

Your insults are misdirected.

>No one (but freeware authors) have produced anything for OS2 in a few
>years now -- and of the freeware products, I can't think of one that
>has any market presence.

You're discounting projects like Firefox and Seamonkey, of course, and
the OpenOffice 2.x beta currently in development.  And Samba, which has
been adjusted to meet OS/2's needs quite recently.

I can't think of much commercial development software, either, outside
of the Pixel image editor and Maul Publisher, and maybe a handful of
other smaller programs.

However, the freeware universe is such that a lot can be accomplished
through timely ports.  It doesn't result in a commercially viable OS,
perhaps, but that isn't a concern of mine.  I already paid for OS/2,
and its continued functionality is my main concern, not marketing.

-- 
 -Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Mableton, GA USA
    Mainframe/Unix bit twiddler by day, OS/2+Linux+DOS hobbyist by night.
       WARNING: I've seen FIELDATA FORTRAN V and I know how to use it!
                   The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.

Dan Drake wrote:

>
> Well well, we've got _two_ dedicated concern trolls now. Rather
> heart-warming to see such loyalty to OS/2

Loyalty?  I have not been disloyal to OS/2, but did say that I  think
ecomstation was too expensive, and then the children came a-running and
elevated the temperature. Accussing a 14 year user of OS/2 who spent
all of those years developing it, defending it, and helping a ton of
people learn to use it, and convert to it, of being a troll who is
either the slimeball Tim Martin, or  one of his groupies was a no class
thing to do. I would bet I put up with his crap more than most here,
for a lot of years.

I came here and asked for help getting my  OS/2 Warp 4 system back on
line, and ended up being attacked by eCS users who accused me not only
of being Tim, but they based that on my comment that IMO, ecs was too
expensive, and get this, I use gmail.... What the hell kind of reason
is that to get after someone, and make assumptions about their
character?

 Yea, I got pissed off, and yes, I fought back instead of walking away.
Who wouldn't? Remember, it takes at least two to elevate the level of
discourse, so those who participated are just a guilty of misbehaving,
and treating others with contempt.

As for the troll comment, well, it would seem that when the issue
cannot be discussed or defended,  its just easier to call the messenger
a troll, than deal with the reality of the situation.

Yes, I know, someone will post yet another "but you were an asshole"
comment. I was, and got poked in the eye, and argued back. So what?
Most people would, but that doesn't alter the truth that I showed up
after a 2 year absence, stated that I wanted to get back to running
OS/2 warp4 after all those years, and requested a little help, and
instead, a few decided I was someone else that they have a vendetta
against, and did not even allow for any give and take, before
escalating things into something that ought not to have happened.

Hell, I was told that I was out of control, foaming at the mouth, and
needed  to relax because my keyboard has a problem with the space bar
and sometimes bounces to make two spaces instead of one, so some junior
birdman decided that rather than just ignore it, after I explained that
facts, he  put forth personal insults and make comments about my
family...... Spare me the piling on and lame comments on what I said,
and look in the mirror.

Attacking someone for spelling or typing errors in forums like this is
really witless and lame.

Given the size of the OS/2 community, it might be well for folks to
avoid  driving people away simply because they have an opinion that
does not align with the acceptable standard.

Bob St.John schrieb:

>> Extinguish:
>> We will still sell OS/2 to you and you can run it on a virtual pc
>> (with a really nice desktop) rather than on its own hardware which
>> will not need updated video/printer/usb/audio/nic/ide drivers that
>> were funded by IBM because you will be able to run it on the emulated
>> vpc hardware.
> 
> Because this is titled "Extinguish" ... I'll make the leap and infer
> that DTJ is claiming that supporting OS/2 in a VM application is
> essentially the same as taking OS/2 out behind the barn and strangling it.
> 
> The problem with this thinking is that it ignores that more is being
> invested and more work is being performed to support eComStation
> directly on hardware than as a guest in a VM. ACPI, additional NIC
> support, improved hardware detection, and work to add "native" hardware
> support continues in 2007.
> 
> And support for "native" applications continues, including
> OpenOffice.org 2.0.4 as a native OS/2 application, and a new PDF file
> reader, Lucide.
> 
> SSI has always been about providing users with choices and value. And we
> have been very successful doing that. If a future distribution of
> eComStation includes the ability to run eComStation and/or OS/2 in a VM
> on Linux ... does that equal "extinguish" or choice?
> 
> If the same distribution includes many updates and new features to
> support a "direct on hardware" option, I would say "choice". And that is
> exactly what is happening.
> 
> The next version of eComStation to be delivered will include support for
>  both processors in the Intel dual core configuration, as well as
> support for installation on AMD64, and ACPI.
> 
> It would be quite a leap to think these are an attempt to "extinguish".
> Clearly they are an attempt to extend the useful life of the product.
Yes, please, go on and try harder to "extinguish" eCS (OS/2) with
activities like that. ;-)

Kind regards and keep up the good work,
Herwig

In <Tzoyfphpvikf092yn@visi.com>, on 11/19/2006 
   at 06:18 PM, rsteiner@visi.com (Richard Steiner) said:



>Here in comp.os.os2.misc, letoured@nospam.net spake unto us, saying:

>>You ecs shills live in a dream world.

>Reality check, Ed.  As I've stated often in response to such ill-aimed
>potshots in the past, I run OS/2 Warp 4 FP 15 here and not eComStation,
>and my former eCS 1.1 box is currently running Puppy Linux 3.11.

non sequitur



>While eCS is still installed on the above box, I don't think I've even
>booted it for a year, and my eCS 1.2R discs still remain uninstalled.

non sequitur



>Your insults are misdirected.

non sequitur  -- the truth is not an insult unless you're an ecs shill. 



>>No one (but freeware authors) have produced anything for OS2 in a few
>>years now -- and of the freeware products, I can't think of one that
>>has any market presence.

>You're discounting projects like Firefox and Seamonkey, of course, and
>the OpenOffice 2.x beta currently in development.  And Samba, which has
>been adjusted to meet OS/2's needs quite recently.

Still no market presence.  Nothing have been developed for OS2 in years
that didn't have its origins in something IBM did. 

PS:  No one wants Openoffice, anymore then they want MS Office.  Its all
bloatware.



>I can't think of much commercial development software, either, outside of
>the Pixel image editor and Maul Publisher, and maybe a handful of other
>smaller programs.

>However, the freeware universe is such that a lot can be accomplished
>through timely ports.  It doesn't result in a commercially viable OS,
>perhaps, but that isn't a concern of mine.  I already paid for OS/2, and
>its continued functionality is my main concern, not marketing.

Prove me wrong with facts; list the new things for ecs that have not come
from IBM or from shareware developers who made them available to all.

letoured@nospam.net wrote:
<snip>
> 
> 
> Prove me wrong with facts; list the new things for ecs that have not come
> from IBM or from shareware developers who made them available to all.
> 
> 
> 

You are missing the point Ed.  IMO, without Serenity being a presence 
(albeit small), I don't believe that these developers would have 
released anything, since IBM had already abandoned OS/2 for everyone 
except large corporations (whom they were actively encouraging to move 
off OS/2).  So whilst the things done were released for all OS/2 users, 
it was the existence of eCS which encouraged the activity.

Stuart

In <1164020569.2832.0@demeter.uk.clara.net>, on 11/20/2006 
   at 12:02 PM, Srtgray <srtgraynot@clara.co.uk> said:



>letoured@nospam.net wrote:
><snip>
>> 
>> 
>> Prove me wrong with facts; list the new things for ecs that have not come
>> from IBM or from shareware developers who made them available to all.
>> 
>> 
>> 

>You are missing the point Ed.  IMO, without Serenity being a presence 
>(albeit small), I don't believe that these developers would have 
>released anything, since IBM had already abandoned OS/2 for everyone 
>except large corporations (whom they were actively encouraging to move 
>off OS/2).  So whilst the things done were released for all OS/2 users, 
>it was the existence of eCS which encouraged the activity.


Prove "it was the existence of eCS which encouraged the activity."   You
can't because the claim is conjecture, with no basis in reality.  

I'm not going to go on playing this ecs troll game with you.  The fact is
that in all the years that booby has been hawking his game, we have not
seen one single new program, driver or OS2 fix that can be traced back to
ecs in any way, shape or form.  The origins are all somewhere else. 






>Stuart

On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 11:02:15 UTC, Srtgray <srtgrayNOT@clara.co.uk> 
wrote:

-> 
-> You are missing the point Ed.  IMO, without Serenity being a presence 
-> (albeit small), I don't believe that these developers would have 
-> released anything, since IBM had already abandoned OS/2 for everyone 
-> except large corporations (whom they were actively encouraging to move 
-> off OS/2).  So whilst the things done were released for all OS/2 users, 
-> it was the existence of eCS which encouraged the activity.
-> 

Ed is an insane angry troll.  There is nothing you can say, no matter 
how truthful or logical, that will change his hateful opinions, so it 
is pointless to continue.  You just end up in endless circles and he 
will just get nastier.  If you really have to respond to him please do
the rest of the group a favour and put [FUD4] in the subject so people
can filter out the thread.  This has been going on for years.  
Ignoring these people is the only thing that works.

http://www.mr2ice.com/TMFaq/

Mark


-- 
From the eComStation of Mark Dodel

 http://www.os2voice.org
 Warpstock 2006, Windsor, Ontario, Canada,  Oct 12-15, 2006 - 
http://www.warpstock.org

Mark Dodel wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 11:02:15 UTC, Srtgray <srtgrayNOT@clara.co.uk> 
> wrote:
> 
> -> 
> -> You are missing the point Ed.  IMO, without Serenity being a presence 
> -> (albeit small), I don't believe that these developers would have 
> -> released anything, since IBM had already abandoned OS/2 for everyone 
> -> except large corporations (whom they were actively encouraging to move 
> -> off OS/2).  So whilst the things done were released for all OS/2 users, 
> -> it was the existence of eCS which encouraged the activity.
> -> 
> 
> Ed is an insane angry troll.  There is nothing you can say, no matter 
> how truthful or logical, that will change his hateful opinions, so it 
> is pointless to continue.  You just end up in endless circles and he 
> will just get nastier.  If you really have to respond to him please do
> the rest of the group a favour and put [FUD4] in the subject so people
> can filter out the thread.  This has been going on for years.  
> Ignoring these people is the only thing that works.
> 
> http://www.mr2ice.com/TMFaq/
> 
> Mark

Mark,

Consider this, when the Trolls start up then goods things are around the 
corner. When they go away it will signal the end of OS/2.

Mike

John wrote:

> Its still a fine,  useful, and reliable OS. no matter what flavor is
> chosen.
> 
> John
> 

And thats the whole point !!
============================

We are still at WSeB 4.52 on 5 machines and 2 with Linux
But OS/2 has some features that we miss(different) in Linux
And it still does the job without problems
"IF" we need to upgrade, it would be the choice between a/the new "OS/2"
(yes, there is a roadmap under construction) or a Mac/Linux box

Arjan
http://www.dunhill.ws

Get over your bullshit dogel -->You have bene asked, along with the other
ecs shills to list the things that make ecs great --> that did not come
from IBM or are otherwise not available to the OS2 user.

You and the rest of the shills have failed for years to do this.  The
reason is there is nothing that has not come from IBM or that is not
otherwise available to the OS2 user.

Now go play your anger games somewhere else.  Seek the professional
treatment you need to live in the real world.  






In <cLdq6jdb1N4Q-pn2-O1er4w4egbXc@localhost>, on 11/20/2006 
   at 05:55 AM, "Mark Dodel" <madodelNOSPAM@ptd.net> said:



>On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 11:02:15 UTC, Srtgray <srtgrayNOT@clara.co.uk> 
>wrote:

>-> 
>-> You are missing the point Ed.  IMO, without Serenity being a presence 
>-> (albeit small), I don't believe that these developers would have  ->
>released anything, since IBM had already abandoned OS/2 for everyone  ->
>except large corporations (whom they were actively encouraging to move 
>-> off OS/2).  So whilst the things done were released for all OS/2
>users,  -> it was the existence of eCS which encouraged the activity. -> 

>Ed is an insane angry troll.  There is nothing you can say, no matter 
>how truthful or logical, that will change his hateful opinions, so it  is
>pointless to continue.  You just end up in endless circles and he  will
>just get nastier.  If you really have to respond to him please do the
>rest of the group a favour and put [FUD4] in the subject so people can
>filter out the thread.  This has been going on for years.   Ignoring
>these people is the only thing that works.

>http://www.mr2ice.com/TMFaq/

>Mark

Hi Ed

letoured@nospam.net wrote:
> In <1164020569.2832.0@demeter.uk.clara.net>, on 11/20/2006 
>    at 12:02 PM, Srtgray <srtgraynot@clara.co.uk> said:
> 
> 
> 
>> letoured@nospam.net wrote:
>> <snip>
>>>
>>> Prove me wrong with facts; list the new things for ecs that have not come
>>> from IBM or from shareware developers who made them available to all.
>>>
>>>
>>>
> 
>> You are missing the point Ed.  IMO, without Serenity being a presence 
>> (albeit small), I don't believe that these developers would have 
>> released anything, since IBM had already abandoned OS/2 for everyone 
>> except large corporations (whom they were actively encouraging to move 
>> off OS/2).  So whilst the things done were released for all OS/2 users, 
>> it was the existence of eCS which encouraged the activity.
> 
> 
> Prove "it was the existence of eCS which encouraged the activity."   You
> can't because the claim is conjecture, with no basis in reality.  
> 


I wrote a small application for eCS called USBcfg, which you can find on 
hobbes, as a direct result of someone called Nick Morrow talking me into 
it, in an eCS newsgroup, on behalf of eCS.

I agreed to have a shot at writing the USB configuration app for eCS and 
donate the code to eCS as long as I was allowed to also put the app on 
hobbes for OS/2 users benefit.

May not be the best application of all time but some people have found
it helpful judging by email recieved.

So, Some things to consider:-

If eCS had not happened I doubt if I would have purchased the IBM
offering - I thought that was overpriced, possibly in an attempt to get
rid of the smaller users.

If I had not gone with eCS I would not have got involved in a discussion 
in an eCS newsgroup about writing a configuration application for eCS; 
the app would not exist.

Therefore "it was the existence of eCS which encouraged the activity."

Regards

Pete



> I'm not going to go on playing this ecs troll game with you.  The fact is
> that in all the years that booby has been hawking his game, we have not
> seen one single new program, driver or OS2 fix that can be traced back to
> ecs in any way, shape or form.  The origins are all somewhere else. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> Stuart
> 

On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 10:04:22 +0000, letoured wrote:

> PS:  No one wants Openoffice, anymore then they want MS Office.  Its all
> bloatware.

Darn you're so right! I'm immediately going to take OpenOffice 2 and
Linux off my son's PC and install OS/2 and DeScribe. And when his
school calls up and asks why he wasn't able to download and open his
schoolwork and homework assignments, including presentations, charts
and spreadsheets from his directory on their server I'll tell them that I
don't want bloatware on my PCs. I'll tell them to stop using XP and Office
and use something compatible with OS/2 and DeScribe! I'm sure I can
convince them! In fact, I'm going to get on the phone right now and tell
them!

Wayne



-- 
/home/wayne/.pan2/sigfile

Here in comp.os.os2.misc, letoured@nospam.net spake unto us, saying:

>In <Tzoyfphpvikf092yn@visi.com>, on 11/19/2006 
>   at 06:18 PM, rsteiner@visi.com (Richard Steiner) said:
>
>>Here in comp.os.os2.misc, letoured@nospam.net spake unto us, saying:
>
>>>You ecs shills live in a dream world.
>
>>Reality check, Ed.  As I've stated often in response to such ill-aimed
>>potshots in the past, I run OS/2 Warp 4 FP 15 here and not eComStation,
>>and my former eCS 1.1 box is currently running Puppy Linux 3.11.
>
>non sequitur

You called me an eCS shill.  I'm an OS/2 user who does not even use eCS
at this point in time, and I certainly don't advocate its use over OS/2
in the general case, only in those cases where OS/2 doesn't install or
might be problematic due to unsupported hardware or user inexperience.

What part of the above is unclear to you?

>>You're discounting projects like Firefox and Seamonkey, of course, and
>>the OpenOffice 2.x beta currently in development.  And Samba, which has
>>been adjusted to meet OS/2's needs quite recently.
>
>Still no market presence.  Nothing have been developed for OS2 in years
>that didn't have its origins in something IBM did.

Mozilla Firefox and Seamonkey together are pushing between 20% and 40%
of the web browser market depending on the web sites you ask.

That isn't bad, and (sadly, IMO) it's also light years ahead of the few
non-MS commercial offerings around like Opera.

Samba isn't related to IBM at all except inasfar as it implements the
CIFS protocol which I believe IBM originated (but which Microsoft has
extended quite a bit), and it's the most common filesharing tool used
in the Linux and BSD world if Windows is involved.

>PS:  No one wants Openoffice, anymore then they want MS Office.  Its
>all bloatware.

I tend to use StarOffice 5.1a here yet under OS/2.  It works well.

-- 
 -Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Mableton, GA USA
    Mainframe/Unix bit twiddler by day, OS/2+Linux+DOS hobbyist by night.
       WARNING: I've seen FIELDATA FORTRAN V and I know how to use it!
                   The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.

In <ejtijd$vh1$1@aioe.server.aioe.org>, on 11/21/2006 
   at 01:51 AM, Wayne <rondonjin@yahoo.com> said:



>On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 10:04:22 +0000, letoured wrote:

>> PS:  No one wants Openoffice, anymore then they want MS Office.  Its all
>> bloatware.

>Darn you're so right! I'm immediately going to take OpenOffice 2 and
>Linux off my son's PC and install OS/2 and DeScribe. And when his school
>calls up and asks why he wasn't able to download and open his schoolwork
>and homework assignments, including presentations, charts and
>spreadsheets from his directory on their server I'll tell them that I
>don't want bloatware on my PCs. I'll tell them to stop using XP and
>Office and use something compatible with OS/2 and DeScribe! I'm sure I
>can convince them! In fact, I'm going to get on the phone right now and
>tell them!

>Wayne


You could read the word files if you weren't married to a 12 year old dead
word processor.  I have no trouble with MS word files using Lotus Smart
Suite.   If you came out of the age of retired software, you could stop
whining. 

On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 12:57:19 +0000, letoured wrote:

>>Darn you're so right! I'm immediately going to take OpenOffice 2 and
>>Linux off my son's PC and install OS/2 and DeScribe. And when his school
>>calls up and asks why he wasn't able to download and open his schoolwork
>>and homework assignments, including presentations, charts and
>>spreadsheets from his directory on their server I'll tell them that I
>>don't want bloatware on my PCs. I'll tell them to stop using XP and
>>Office and use something compatible with OS/2 and DeScribe! I'm sure I
>>can convince them! In fact, I'm going to get on the phone right now and
>>tell them!
> 
>>Wayne
> 
> 
> You could read the word files if you weren't married to a 12 year old dead
> word processor.  I have no trouble with MS word files using Lotus Smart
> Suite.   If you came out of the age of retired software, you could stop
> whining.

Fat lot of good being able to read Word 95 files! I have Smartsuite, in
fact the wordprocessor part is the ONLY app on the PC I have running OS/2.
Other than being able to convert all the documents I made with it to RTF
so I can use OpenOffice to edit and print them it's totally useless and out
of date as far as file formats are concerned. Welcome to 2006!



-- 
/home/wayne/.pan2/sigfile

chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
> Oh!  I forgot to thank DTJ for this "marketing minute".  ;-)

Bob, it has been awhile since I ventured in here. Amazing how things 
never change...

Irv

On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 22:53:59 UTC, Irv Spalten <ispalten@cfl.rr.com> 
wrote:

> chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
> > Oh!  I forgot to thank DTJ for this "marketing minute".  ;-)
> 
> Bob, it has been awhile since I ventured in here. Amazing how things 
> never change...

I was installing a fixpack the other day...and it set me to wondering 
how you were!

-- 
Bob Eager
begin  123  a new life...take up Extreme Ironing!

On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 22:53:59 +0000, Irv Spalten wrote:

> chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
>> Oh!  I forgot to thank DTJ for this "marketing minute".  ;-)
> 
> Bob, it has been awhile since I ventured in here. Amazing how things 
> never change...
> 
> Irv

Wow! A blast from the past! (In a good way, of course)

Hope you're doing well Irv.

Wayne



-- 
/home/wayne/.pan2/sigfile

In <ejutqa$6bm$1@aioe.server.aioe.org>, on 11/21/2006 
   at 02:09 PM, Wayne <rondonjin@yahoo.com> said:



>On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 12:57:19 +0000, letoured wrote:

>>>Darn you're so right! I'm immediately going to take OpenOffice 2 and
>>>Linux off my son's PC and install OS/2 and DeScribe. And when his school
>>>calls up and asks why he wasn't able to download and open his schoolwork
>>>and homework assignments, including presentations, charts and
>>>spreadsheets from his directory on their server I'll tell them that I
>>>don't want bloatware on my PCs. I'll tell them to stop using XP and
>>>Office and use something compatible with OS/2 and DeScribe! I'm sure I
>>>can convince them! In fact, I'm going to get on the phone right now and
>>>tell them!
>> 
>>>Wayne
>> 
>> 
>> You could read the word files if you weren't married to a 12 year old dead
>> word processor.  I have no trouble with MS word files using Lotus Smart
>> Suite.   If you came out of the age of retired software, you could stop
>> whining.

>Fat lot of good being able to read Word 95 files!

WRONG.  Now do come back when know what you are talking about -- and you
clearly don't.






 I have Smartsuite, in
>fact the wordprocessor part is the ONLY app on the PC I have running
>OS/2. Other than being able to convert all the documents I made with it
>to RTF so I can use OpenOffice to edit and print them it's totally
>useless and out of date as far as file formats are concerned. Welcome to
>2006!

On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 00:09:37 +0000, letoured wrote:

> In <ejutqa$6bm$1@aioe.server.aioe.org>, on 11/21/2006 
>    at 02:09 PM, Wayne <rondonjin@yahoo.com> said:
> 
> 
> 
>>On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 12:57:19 +0000, letoured wrote:
> 
>>>>Darn you're so right! I'm immediately going to take OpenOffice 2 and
>>>>Linux off my son's PC and install OS/2 and DeScribe. And when his school
>>>>calls up and asks why he wasn't able to download and open his schoolwork
>>>>and homework assignments, including presentations, charts and
>>>>spreadsheets from his directory on their server I'll tell them that I
>>>>don't want bloatware on my PCs. I'll tell them to stop using XP and
>>>>Office and use something compatible with OS/2 and DeScribe! I'm sure I
>>>>can convince them! In fact, I'm going to get on the phone right now and
>>>>tell them!
>>> 
>>>>Wayne
>>> 
>>> 
>>> You could read the word files if you weren't married to a 12 year old dead
>>> word processor.  I have no trouble with MS word files using Lotus Smart
>>> Suite.   If you came out of the age of retired software, you could stop
>>> whining.
> 
>>Fat lot of good being able to read Word 95 files!
> 
> WRONG.  Now do come back when know what you are talking about -- and you
> clearly don't.
> 

So, the version of Smartsuite I have here (1.6) opens my son's word,
powerpoint and excel files. I think not! Now back to the loonie geriatric
ward for you and don't stop taking the meds!



-- 
/home/wayne/.pan2/sigfile

Irv Spalten wrote:
> chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
> 
>> Oh!  I forgot to thank DTJ for this "marketing minute".  ;-)
> 
> 
> Bob, it has been awhile since I ventured in here. Amazing how things 
> never change...

Irv ... great to "see" you. "John" recently appeared on USENET and the 
Yahoo group .. and you are correct. Not much has changed. It is more 
difficult, but not impossible, to rehash these things.

Nothing much new, except the components being added to eComStation.

For example, DTJ: I don't see any value in what they are doing (for the 
past six years). Focus on install program and UI updates. (This from a 
guy who said his most recent install experience with OS/2 was so 
difficult, it will likely be his last attempt).

And, of course .. "ed" .. who claims nothing in eComStation cannot be 
obtained from IBM, or freely available from other sources ... or .. is 
completely unnecessary.

And "John" .. "why don't they tell us how many customers they have? Any 
legit organization would do this"?

Amazing... and consistent .. and not without humor to those who can see 
it .. and I can see it.

Regards,
Bob St.John
Serenity Systems International

letoured@nospam.net wrote:
<snip>

>Fat lot of good being able to read Word 95 files!
> 
> 
> WRONG.  Now do come back when know what you are talking about -- and you
> clearly don't.

What he is talking about is filters to exchange documents with current 
versions of MS Office.  These are no longer actively developed for Smart 
Suite .. but they are are for OpenOffice.org.

In fact, Smart Suite for OS/2 is no longer actively developed, but 
OpenOffice.org for eComStation and OS/2 is actively developed. So ... 
the point would seem to be well taken.

I await your off topic and irrelevant ad hominem attack. I know you 
won't dissapoint. You are nothing, if not consistent.

Regards,
Bob St.John
Serenity Systems International

On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 18:33:43 -0600, Bob St.John wrote:

> letoured@nospam.net wrote:
> <snip>
> 
>>Fat lot of good being able to read Word 95 files!
>> 
>> 
>> WRONG.  Now do come back when know what you are talking about -- and you
>> clearly don't.
> 
> What he is talking about is filters to exchange documents with current 
> versions of MS Office.  These are no longer actively developed for Smart 
> Suite .. but they are are for OpenOffice.org.
> 
> In fact, Smart Suite for OS/2 is no longer actively developed, but 
> OpenOffice.org for eComStation and OS/2 is actively developed. So ... 
> the point would seem to be well taken.
> 
> I await your off topic and irrelevant ad hominem attack. I know you 
> won't dissapoint. You are nothing, if not consistent.
> 
> Regards,
> Bob St.John
> Serenity Systems International

Spot on! Some of these classwork/homework assignments are group
assignments and the documents but be editable by all those in
the group to present to the rest of the class. It's no good if
one person is not able to contribute to the project from his
home PC because his/her software is out-of-date.

Wayne



-- 
/home/wayne/.pan2/sigfile

On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 18:33:43 -0600, Bob St.John wrote:

> letoured@nospam.net wrote:
> <snip>
> 
>>Fat lot of good being able to read Word 95 files!
>> 
>> 
>> WRONG.  Now do come back when know what you are talking about -- and you
>> clearly don't.
> 
> What he is talking about is filters to exchange documents with current 
> versions of MS Office.  These are no longer actively developed for Smart 
> Suite .. but they are are for OpenOffice.org.
> 
> In fact, Smart Suite for OS/2 is no longer actively developed, but 
> OpenOffice.org for eComStation and OS/2 is actively developed. So ... 
> the point would seem to be well taken.
> 
> I await your off topic and irrelevant ad hominem attack. I know you 
> won't dissapoint. You are nothing, if not consistent.
> 

The difference between 'normal' folk and 'Ed' is that 'normal' folk
know when to STFU when they're clueless about something. Unfortunately,
that's a concept totally alien to 'Ed' He prolly thinks that just
because he's old and crusty that somehow he's earned the 'right' to
be right about almost everything, even things he knows nothing about.
Somehow, I don't think it works quite like that.

Wayne



-- 
/home/wayne/.pan2/sigfile

On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 22:53:59 UTC, Irv Spalten <ispalten@cfl.rr.com> 
wrote:

-> chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
-> > Oh!  I forgot to thank DTJ for this "marketing minute".  ;-)
-> 
-> Bob, it has been awhile since I ventured in here. Amazing how things 
-> never change...
-> 
-> Irv

Hey Irv.  How the hell are ya?   And actually it has been relatively 
quiet in the c.o.o groups for months since the psychotroll moved on to
harrassing Mac users.  But it appears that the whackocity site may be 
staging a comeback since there is a dearth of used clothing and porn 
sites on the internet.   So maybe that is why we are seeing the 
anti-OS/2 trolls crawling out from under their rocks.  Or it could be 
that eCS 2.0 is on the horizon and these guys can't let a good thing 
happen without crapping their pants. ;-)

Mark 


-- 
From the eComStation of Mark Dodel

 http://www.os2voice.org
 Warpstock 2006, Windsor, Ontario, Canada,  Oct 12-15, 2006 - 
http://www.warpstock.org

In <ek08u6$kfb$1@aioe.server.aioe.org>, on 11/22/2006 
   at 02:25 AM, Wayne <rondonjin@yahoo.com> said:



>On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 18:33:43 -0600, Bob St.John wrote:

>> letoured@nospam.net wrote:
>> <snip>
>> 
>>>Fat lot of good being able to read Word 95 files!
>>> 
>>> 
>>> WRONG.  Now do come back when know what you are talking about -- and you
>>> clearly don't.
>> 
>> What he is talking about is filters to exchange documents with current 
>> versions of MS Office.  These are no longer actively developed for Smart 
>> Suite .. but they are are for OpenOffice.org.
>> 
>> In fact, Smart Suite for OS/2 is no longer actively developed, but 
>> OpenOffice.org for eComStation and OS/2 is actively developed. So ... 
>> the point would seem to be well taken.
>> 
>> I await your off topic and irrelevant ad hominem attack. I know you 
>> won't dissapoint. You are nothing, if not consistent.
>> 

>The difference between 'normal' 

No whiny wayne -->the trouble is your using outdated software and whining
that it won't work -- when the latest versions does.   Now stop playing
asshole in public. 




folk and 'Ed' is that 'normal' folk know
>when to STFU when they're clueless about something. Unfortunately, that's
>a concept totally alien to 'Ed' He prolly thinks that just because he's
>old and crusty that somehow he's earned the 'right' to be right about
>almost everything, even things he knows nothing about. Somehow, I don't
>think it works quite like that.

>Wayne

In <qfKdnUwdEMboBv7YnZ2dnUVZ_rudnZ2d@comcast.com>, on 11/21/2006 
   at 06:33 PM, "Bob St.John" <Serenity.Systems@comcast.net> said:



>letoured@nospam.net wrote:
><snip>

>>Fat lot of good being able to read Word 95 files!
>> 
>> 
>> WRONG.  Now do come back when know what you are talking about -- and you
>> clearly don't.

>What he is talking about is filters to exchange documents with current 
>versions of MS Office.  These are no longer actively developed for Smart 
>Suite .. but they are are for OpenOffice.org.


He's full of bullshit claiming that Smartsuite can't import word filed
beyond Word 95.  -->Learn to read booby. 






>In fact, Smart Suite for OS/2 is no longer actively developed, but 
>OpenOffice.org for eComStation and OS/2 is actively developed. So ... 
>the point would seem to be well taken.

>I await your off topic and irrelevant ad hominem attack. I know you 
>won't dissapoint. You are nothing, if not consistent.

>Regards,
>Bob St.John
>Serenity Systems International

In <ek04nm$avi$1@aioe.server.aioe.org>, on 11/22/2006 
   at 01:13 AM, Wayne <rondonjin@yahoo.com> said:



>On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 00:09:37 +0000, letoured wrote:

>> In <ejutqa$6bm$1@aioe.server.aioe.org>, on 11/21/2006 
>>    at 02:09 PM, Wayne <rondonjin@yahoo.com> said:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>>On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 12:57:19 +0000, letoured wrote:
>> 
>>>>>Darn you're so right! I'm immediately going to take OpenOffice 2 and
>>>>>Linux off my son's PC and install OS/2 and DeScribe. And when his school
>>>>>calls up and asks why he wasn't able to download and open his schoolwork
>>>>>and homework assignments, including presentations, charts and
>>>>>spreadsheets from his directory on their server I'll tell them that I
>>>>>don't want bloatware on my PCs. I'll tell them to stop using XP and
>>>>>Office and use something compatible with OS/2 and DeScribe! I'm sure I
>>>>>can convince them! In fact, I'm going to get on the phone right now and
>>>>>tell them!
>>>> 
>>>>>Wayne
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> You could read the word files if you weren't married to a 12 year old dead
>>>> word processor.  I have no trouble with MS word files using Lotus Smart
>>>> Suite.   If you came out of the age of retired software, you could stop
>>>> whining.
>> 
>>>Fat lot of good being able to read Word 95 files!
>> 
>> WRONG.  Now do come back when know what you are talking about -- and you
>> clearly don't.
>> 

>So, the version of Smartsuite I have here (1.6) opens my son's word,
>powerpoint and excel files. I think not! Now back to the loonie geriatric
>ward for you and don't stop taking the meds!

1.6 is old, old.  1.73 is the latest.  Stop using out dated software and
whining about it.  

booby -- have the balls to prove me wrong with facts; post the list of
things in ecs that did not come from IBM and that users of OS2 can't get
without buying ecs.

You won't post one, because there isn't one.  You're still the con-man
that you have always been.









idnbj4VbDxB_7YnZ2dnUVZ_uydnZ2d@comcast.com>, on 11/21/2006 
   at 06:29 PM, "Bob St.John" <Serenity.Systems@comcast.net> said:



>Irv Spalten wrote:
>> chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
>> 
>>> Oh!  I forgot to thank DTJ for this "marketing minute".  ;-)
>> 
>> 
>> Bob, it has been awhile since I ventured in here. Amazing how things 
>> never change...

>Irv ... great to "see" you. "John" recently appeared on USENET and the 
>Yahoo group .. and you are correct. Not much has changed. It is more 
>difficult, but not impossible, to rehash these things.

>Nothing much new, except the components being added to eComStation.

>For example, DTJ: I don't see any value in what they are doing (for the 
>past six years). Focus on install program and UI updates. (This from a 
>guy who said his most recent install experience with OS/2 was so 
>difficult, it will likely be his last attempt).

>And, of course .. "ed" .. who claims nothing in eComStation cannot be 
>obtained from IBM, or freely available from other sources ... or .. is 
>completely unnecessary.

>And "John" .. "why don't they tell us how many customers they have? Any 
>legit organization would do this"?

>Amazing... and consistent .. and not without humor to those who can see 
>it .. and I can see it.

>Regards,
>Bob St.John
>Serenity Systems International

On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 01:57:57 +0000, letoured wrote:

> No whiny wayne -->the trouble is your using outdated software and whining
> that it won't work -- when the latest versions does.   Now stop playing
> asshole in public.

You've been told it doesn't so STFU and crawl back under your rock.



-- 
/home/wayne/.pan2/sigfile

In <ek0bco$pme$1@aioe.server.aioe.org>, on 11/22/2006 
   at 03:07 AM, Wayne <rondonjin@yahoo.com> said:



>On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 01:57:57 +0000, letoured wrote:

>> No whiny wayne -->the trouble is your using outdated software and whining
>> that it won't work -- when the latest versions does.   Now stop playing
>> asshole in public.

>You've been told it doesn't so STFU and crawl back under your rock.

Funny, I've got 1.73 here and it works there whiny wayne.  You're using a
really OLD version.  Up date your copy and stop the bullshit. 

On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 02:24:58 +0000, letoured wrote:

> In <ek0bco$pme$1@aioe.server.aioe.org>, on 11/22/2006 
>    at 03:07 AM, Wayne <rondonjin@yahoo.com> said:
> 
> 
> 
>>On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 01:57:57 +0000, letoured wrote:
> 
>>> No whiny wayne -->the trouble is your using outdated software and whining
>>> that it won't work -- when the latest versions does.   Now stop playing
>>> asshole in public.
> 
>>You've been told it doesn't so STFU and crawl back under your rock.
> 
> Funny, I've got 1.73 here and it works there whiny wayne.  You're using a
> really OLD version.  Up date your copy and stop the bullshit.

Look dipstick. 1.6 and 1.73 (I *obtained* a copy to try) do NOT work on the
Word, Excel and Powerpoint files that my son brings home from school on
his USB thumb drive or those downloaded from his directory. Nearly works
does not count, opens the file but with loss of formatting and using the
wrong fonts does not count. Spews the file out as unrecognised does not
count. Do you get it now? It does not work! OpenOffice 2, on the other
hand, works perfectly, otherwise I'd have been told about it.

As for updating Smartsuite, what the hell for? As soon as I'm done
converting all my Smartsuite files to RTF and then to OpenOffice open
document format I'll have no more need for it. Why waste money on a dead
product? Do the words "Not being actively developed" convey anything to
you?



-- 
/home/wayne/.pan2/sigfile

In <ek0cuc$srb$1@aioe.server.aioe.org>, on 11/22/2006 
   at 03:33 AM, Wayne <rondonjin@yahoo.com> said:



>On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 02:24:58 +0000, letoured wrote:

>> In <ek0bco$pme$1@aioe.server.aioe.org>, on 11/22/2006 
>>    at 03:07 AM, Wayne <rondonjin@yahoo.com> said:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>>On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 01:57:57 +0000, letoured wrote:
>> 
>>>> No whiny wayne -->the trouble is your using outdated software and whining
>>>> that it won't work -- when the latest versions does.   Now stop playing
>>>> asshole in public.
>> 
>>>You've been told it doesn't so STFU and crawl back under your rock.
>> 
>> Funny, I've got 1.73 here and it works there whiny wayne.  You're using a
>> really OLD version.  Up date your copy and stop the bullshit.

>Look dipstick. 1.6 and 1.73 (I *obtained* a copy to try)


You are changing your story wayne!  You didn't have 1.73 until I told it
exists. 

....And gee, I open word files from a school all the time with 1.73.  And I
don't need to go through an intermediate step of RTF -- which is another
old file format that does remove formatting. Thus, maybe its you wayne.  

Now if you want help, stop the whining, and ecs shilling -- collect your
facts and ask for help.  Otherwise go whine somewhere else. 







 do NOT work on
>the Word, Excel and Powerpoint files that my son brings home from school
>on his USB thumb drive or those downloaded from his directory. Nearly
>works does not count, opens the file but with loss of formatting and
>using the wrong fonts does not count. Spews the file out as unrecognised
>does not count. Do you get it now? It does not work! OpenOffice 2, on the
>other hand, works perfectly, otherwise I'd have been told about it.

>As for updating Smartsuite, what the hell for? As soon as I'm done
>converting all my Smartsuite files to RTF and then to OpenOffice open
>document format I'll have no more need for it. Why waste money on a dead
>product? Do the words "Not being actively developed" convey anything to
>you?

On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 11:42:24 +0000, letoured wrote:

>>> Funny, I've got 1.73 here and it works there whiny wayne.  You're using a
>>> really OLD version.  Up date your copy and stop the bullshit.
> 
>>Look dipstick. 1.6 and 1.73 (I *obtained* a copy to try)
> 
> 
> You are changing your story wayne!  You didn't have 1.73 until I told it
> exists. 

Right, so I looked around and found a copy to test it out. Wasn't hard to
find but now I know it doesn't work I don't feel guilty about where I got
it and it doesn't matter now.

> ...And gee, I open word files from a school all the time with 1.73.
And
> I don't need to go through an intermediate step of RTF -- which is
> another old file format that does remove formatting. Thus, maybe its you
> wayne.

No, I'm not changing my story, you are just not reading and
comprehending. Why am I not surprised! A lot of MY PERSONAL files (most)
were done with Smartsuite 1.6 in OS/2. I'm converting them to RTF so that
I can read them with OpenOffice 2 on Linux because OpenOffice cannot read
Smartsuite files.

Now, my son on the other hand, needs to work with his classmates and his
school running windows and the latest version of office and neither
version of Smartsuite can open those files. The ones that were *almost*
successfully opened lost all formatting, had square boxes instead of
punctuation and were in totally the wrong font. So, It would be
irresponsible of me to suggest to my son to run a dead OS and a dead
office program. He's become quite happy and comfortable with Linux
anyway.

> Now if you want help, stop the whining, and ecs shilling -- collect your
> facts and ask for help.  Otherwise go whine somewhere else.

Since when is a Linux user shilling for an OS that's almost as dead
as its parent! Hell, I'm defending a guy in another thread who wants info
on Warp 4 while the eCS salesmen are trying to pick his pockets!

As soon as I'm done with my files, which should be tomorrow after I've
put my stout in the fermenter to be ready for the hols, I won't need
OS/2 anymore! I've been putting off converting MY Smartsuite files for
over a year but now find I need them and then this group will be for
entertainment purposes only, until my stout is fermented and I rack it
off ready for kegging!



-- 
/home/wayne/.pan2/sigfile

In <bsL8h.5996$CR6.924@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>, on 11/21/2006
   at 10:53 PM, Irv Spalten <ispalten@cfl.rr.com> said:

>Bob, it has been awhile since I ventured in here. Amazing how things 
>never change...

Of course they change; most of the m$ shills are now trolling the
Linux news groups. Timmie and the john are a pale remnant of what used
to afflict us.

Welcome back.

-- 
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT  <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>

Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action.  I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail.  Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me.  Do not
reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org

In <qfKdnUwdEMboBv7YnZ2dnUVZ_rudnZ2d@comcast.com>, on 11/21/2006
   at 06:33 PM, "Bob St.John" <Serenity.Systems@comcast.net> said:

>I await your off topic and irrelevant ad hominem attack. I know you 
>won't dissapoint. You are nothing, if not consistent.

C ', if not consistent' ''

-- 
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT  <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>

Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action.  I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail.  Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me.  Do not
reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org

In <ek1f0d$a50$1@aioe.server.aioe.org>, on 11/22/2006
   at 01:15 PM, Wayne <rondonjin@yahoo.com> said:

>Hell, I'm defending a guy in another thread who wants info on Warp 4
>while the eCS salesmen are trying to pick his pockets!

If you mean the john, he'd spend more money with IBM than what
Serenity is charging and get less. The Devil is in the details. Did it
occur to you that you're doing the same thing as le tard? Nobody was
shilling for eCS; they gave honest answers and the john didn't like
them.

-- 
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT  <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>

Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action.  I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail.  Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me.  Do not
reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org

On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 08:00:29 -0500, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote:

> In <ek1f0d$a50$1@aioe.server.aioe.org>, on 11/22/2006
>    at 01:15 PM, Wayne <rondonjin@yahoo.com> said:
> 
>>Hell, I'm defending a guy in another thread who wants info on Warp 4
>>while the eCS salesmen are trying to pick his pockets!
> 
> If you mean the john, he'd spend more money with IBM than what
> Serenity is charging and get less. The Devil is in the details. Did it
> occur to you that you're doing the same thing as le tard? Nobody was
> shilling for eCS; they gave honest answers and the john didn't like
> them.
>

Err, he can't get anything from IBM, he has Warp 4 and eCS 1.0, he
doesn't like eCS and wants to reinstall Warp 4 and get it up to
the latest fixpak. He didn't want eCS sales talk, he wanted a
simple answer to a simple question. You zealots keep missing that
point. In fact, from his posts I see that he has installed Warp
4 on his hardware, something you zealots said would be difficult
to do unless he purchased eCS. Ummmm, say no more!

Wayne



-- 
/home/wayne/.pan2/sigfile

On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 08:00:29 -0500, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote:

>>Hell, I'm defending a guy in another thread who wants info on Warp 4
>>while the eCS salesmen are trying to pick his pockets!
> 
> If you mean the john, he'd spend more money with IBM than what Serenity is
> charging and get less. The Devil is in the details. Did it occur to you
> that you're doing the same thing as le tard? Nobody was shilling for eCS;
> they gave honest answers and the john didn't like them.

I believe that both OS/2 and eCS have their uses. Hell, there are people
here who are still using Warp 3 but no one gets on their back to upgrade
to eCS. It does what they want it to do. I've never liked Ed, I've never
liked TM and I've never liked DTJ and never will. I don't like narrow
minded people, they're a waste of space. But guess what, some of you eCS
guys are becoming just like them. Just you haven't noticed it yet. Time
to step away from the keyboard methinks.

Wayne



-- 
/home/wayne/.pan2/sigfile

In article <45644453$1$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice@news.patriot.net>
    spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid "Seymour J." writes:

> [...]  Timmie and the john are a pale remnant of what used
> to afflict us.

The only ones afflicted are those who allow themselves to be, if
the would-be afflicters are operating at that brain power level.

Grief, Seymour J., when will you stop rising to their bait?  Let
the fools go rot.  "John" went into my killfile very soon, while
the other (r/l)etards are still there.  Give yourself a holiday.
-- 
Andrew Stephenson

Give it up whiny wayne.  I don't have a problem with MS word documents
currently put out by the state and a school where I am on the board. I do
it all with LSS 1.73.  -->Your compliant needs to be sent to the *school.
Not here. 






In <ek1f0d$a50$1@aioe.server.aioe.org>, on 11/22/2006 
   at 01:15 PM, Wayne <rondonjin@yahoo.com> said:



>On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 11:42:24 +0000, letoured wrote:

>>>> Funny, I've got 1.73 here and it works there whiny wayne.  You're using a
>>>> really OLD version.  Up date your copy and stop the bullshit.
>> 
>>>Look dipstick. 1.6 and 1.73 (I *obtained* a copy to try)
>> 
>> 
>> You are changing your story wayne!  You didn't have 1.73 until I told it
>> exists. 

>Right, so I looked around and found a copy to test it out. Wasn't hard to
>find but now I know it doesn't work I don't feel guilty about where I got
>it and it doesn't matter now.

>> ...And gee, I open word files from a school all the time with 1.73.
>And
>> I don't need to go through an intermediate step of RTF -- which is
>> another old file format that does remove formatting. Thus, maybe its you
>> wayne.

>No, I'm not changing my story, you are just not reading and
>comprehending. Why am I not surprised! A lot of MY PERSONAL files (most)
>were done with Smartsuite 1.6 in OS/2. I'm converting them to RTF so that
>I can read them with OpenOffice 2 on Linux because OpenOffice cannot read
>Smartsuite files.

>Now, my son on the other hand, needs to work with his classmates and his
>school running windows and the latest version of office and neither
>version of Smartsuite can open those files. The ones that were *almost*
>successfully opened lost all formatting, had square boxes instead of
>punctuation and were in totally the wrong font. So, It would be
>irresponsible of me to suggest to my son to run a dead OS and a dead
>office program. He's become quite happy and comfortable with Linux
>anyway.

>> Now if you want help, stop the whining, and ecs shilling -- collect your
>> facts and ask for help.  Otherwise go whine somewhere else.

>Since when is a Linux user shilling for an OS that's almost as dead as
>its parent! Hell, I'm defending a guy in another thread who wants info on
>Warp 4 while the eCS salesmen are trying to pick his pockets!

>As soon as I'm done with my files, which should be tomorrow after I've
>put my stout in the fermenter to be ready for the hols, I won't need OS/2
>anymore! I've been putting off converting MY Smartsuite files for over a
>year but now find I need them and then this group will be for
>entertainment purposes only, until my stout is fermented and I rack it
>off ready for kegging!

Hi Wayne

Wayne wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 08:00:29 -0500, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote:
> 
>> In <ek1f0d$a50$1@aioe.server.aioe.org>, on 11/22/2006
>>    at 01:15 PM, Wayne <rondonjin@yahoo.com> said:
>>
>>> Hell, I'm defending a guy in another thread who wants info on Warp 4
>>> while the eCS salesmen are trying to pick his pockets!
>> If you mean the john, he'd spend more money with IBM than what
>> Serenity is charging and get less. The Devil is in the details. Did it
>> occur to you that you're doing the same thing as le tard? Nobody was
>> shilling for eCS; they gave honest answers and the john didn't like
>> them.
>>
> 
> Err, he can't get anything from IBM, he has Warp 4 and eCS 1.0, he
> doesn't like eCS and wants to reinstall Warp 4 and get it up to
> the latest fixpak. He didn't want eCS sales talk, he wanted a
> simple answer to a simple question. You zealots keep missing that
> point. In fact, from his posts I see that he has installed Warp
> 4 on his hardware, something you zealots said would be difficult
> to do unless he purchased eCS. Ummmm, say no more!
> 
> Wayne
> 
> 
> 


This "zealot" suggested eCS as being far easier to install on up to date 
hardware eg amd64 systems and also posted a very useful link to help get 
a Warp4 installation as up to date as possible without spending money.

I think "zealot" may be a little OTT in some cases...

Regards

Pete

On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 14:13:57 +0000, letoured wrote:

> Give it up whiny wayne.  I don't have a problem with MS word documents
> currently put out by the state and a school where I am on the board. I do
> it all with LSS 1.73.  -->Your compliant needs to be sent to the *school.
> Not here.

State school! What's that? Sounds like it's in a poor state (AKA
condition) My kids go to private international schools here in Tokyo.
If you were on their school board I'd withdraw my kids ASAP! Choice
of one loonie board member or 5 million yen per year in lost tuition
is a no brainer.



-- 
/home/wayne/.pan2/sigfile

On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 14:22:28 +0000, Peter Brown wrote:

> This "zealot" suggested eCS as being far easier to install on up to date
> hardware eg amd64 systems and also posted a very useful link to help get a
> Warp4 installation as up to date as possible without spending money.
> 
> I think "zealot" may be a little OTT in some cases...
> 
> Regards

Hi Pete, sorry, I was getting annoyed that more people were attacking
a guy who didn't want or need to spend money than those willing to
answer his question. Some people forget that others needs are different
from their own. It was also obvious from the start that the OP was not
TM but some posters just couldn't resist the temptation to start a
flame war and accuse him of being said troll. That was uncalled for
and totally unfair.

So, are you one of the good guys? :-)

Wayne

-- 
/home/wayne/.pan2/sigfile

In <ek1mmd$u22$1@aioe.server.aioe.org>, on 11/22/2006 
   at 03:26 PM, Wayne <rondonjin@yahoo.com> said:



>On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 14:13:57 +0000, letoured wrote:

>> Give it up whiny wayne.  I don't have a problem with MS word documents
>> currently put out by the state and a school where I am on the board. I do
>> it all with LSS 1.73.  -->Your compliant needs to be sent to the *school.
>> Not here.

>State school! What's that? Sounds like it's in a poor state (AKA
>condition) My kids go to private international schools here in Tokyo. If
>you were on their school board I'd withdraw my kids ASAP! Choice of one
>loonie board member or 5 million yen per year in lost tuition is a no
>brainer.


I didn't write "state school."  I said the *state *and a *school.  
Perhaps this software problem you have is related to your reading
comprehension problem.

Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote:

>
> the john,
> le tard?
>   the john
>

A friendly, observation, that you are not helping your credibiliy when
you  CONTINUALLY go after me for what I said over a week ago, and use
smarmy comments like this, to mock me, and to take personal pot shots
at me.  It looks for all the world like you are baiting me, and as if
purposely wanting to perpetuate something that is over and done with.
There is nothing good gonna come out of it, so consider just letting it
go.

At the moment, I get to deal with having made a poor choice, but I see
nothing different in what I did, versus what you are foisting upon the
group, and risking here, with your nasty, offensive comments.

Attacks and childish behavior  are on the list of things you are
bashing me for having done. If it is your intention to re-ignite a dead
flame war, then you are taking all the right steps. I don't speak for
anyone else in the group, but it sure looks like you are the one trying
to keep the heat turned up, not me.

I am not adverse to telling you that it makes you look like a hypocrite
to be denigrating me with ignorant comments, while moaning and crying
about what I have said in the past. What I said, and did, is over and
done. Can't be changed. Oh well. Move on. Post something useful and
upbeat. Life is too short.

John

Hi Wayne

Wayne wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 14:22:28 +0000, Peter Brown wrote:
> 
>> This "zealot" suggested eCS as being far easier to install on up to date
>> hardware eg amd64 systems and also posted a very useful link to help get a
>> Warp4 installation as up to date as possible without spending money.
>>
>> I think "zealot" may be a little OTT in some cases...
>>
>> Regards
> 
> Hi Pete, sorry, I was getting annoyed that more people were attacking
> a guy who didn't want or need to spend money than those willing to
> answer his question. Some people forget that others needs are different
> from their own. It was also obvious from the start that the OP was not
> TM but some posters just couldn't resist the temptation to start a
> flame war and accuse him of being said troll. That was uncalled for
> and totally unfair.
> 
> So, are you one of the good guys? :-)
>


I'd like to say 1 of the good guys - but I did ask if he had a friend 
called Tim, so maybe I'm a bad guy  :-)

Another poster also wondered the same.

The OP responded in such a way that it seems other people also wondered.


Guess it is a matter of perspective as to whether I am a "good" or "bad" 
guy in this...

Maybe you ought to read my post and follow up to "Johns" response to see 
what you think.

Regards

Pete



> Wayne
> 

To me, this is simple: SSI embraced and extended OS/2, which IBM almost 
extinguished.

David T. Johnson wrote:
<snip>

-- 
Cheers,
Martin

UNDERSCOREmmiATcentrumDOTcz to email me

Wayne wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 14:22:28 +0000, Peter Brown wrote:
> 
> 
>>This "zealot" suggested eCS as being far easier to install on up to date
>>hardware eg amd64 systems and also posted a very useful link to help get a
>>Warp4 installation as up to date as possible without spending money.
>>
>>I think "zealot" may be a little OTT in some cases...
>>
>>Regards
> 
> 
> Hi Pete, sorry, I was getting annoyed that more people were attacking
> a guy who didn't want or need to spend money than those willing to
> answer his question. 

The same thread was opened here and on Yahoo. In both cases he got 
honest helpful responses. In both threads he was told how to update 
Warp4 and also told that the simplest way to get all the Warp4 updates 
as well as additional software to support current hardware was 
eComStation.  Folks are entitled to that opinion and to make that 
suggestion.

In both cases he took umbrage that people "were selling" eComStation to 
me and he was clear he wasn't buing. He didn't want eComStation, he 
didn't care about eComStation, eComStation was a gravy sucking pig ... 
or words to that effect.  And he is entitled to those opinions.

Imo .. his response was so over the top that some folks felt he was 
simply trying to start a flame war. But in this case, the wood is too 
far gone to burn well. The best time for this particular flame war was 
five years ago.

People will say and do what they want to say and do. Accuracy still 
counts for something, though. For example, "ed" needs to acknowledge 
that Smart Suite is no longer under development. If he wants to say that 
the SS filters for document interchange still work for him ... no one 
needs to argue that point.

But no one can argue the point that to remain current, you should be on 
a supported product which is being actively developed  .. and today, 
that's OpenOffice.org. Some folks had concerns about reading pdf files. 
Lucide is targeted at that requirement.  Both these applications are 
supported by eComStation revenues.

Pretty much every OS/2 user, whether they use eComStation or not, have a 
stake in eComStation because pretty much every OS/2 users wants a 
current office suite and the ability to open pdfs.

Regards,
Bob St.John
Serenity Systems International

chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 22:53:59 UTC, Irv Spalten <ispalten@cfl.rr.com> 
> wrote:
> 
>> chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
>>> Oh!  I forgot to thank DTJ for this "marketing minute".  ;-)
>> Bob, it has been awhile since I ventured in here. Amazing how things 
>> never change...
> 
> I was installing a fixpack the other day...and it set me to wondering 
> how you were!
> 

Doing well. We've had some medical problems, but other than that, doing 
well.

chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 22:53:59 +0000, Irv Spalten wrote:
> 
>> chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
>>> Oh!  I forgot to thank DTJ for this "marketing minute".  ;-)
>> Bob, it has been awhile since I ventured in here. Amazing how things 
>> never change...
>>
>> Irv
> 
> Wow! A blast from the past! (In a good way, of course)
> 
> Hope you're doing well Irv.
> 
> Wayne
> 
> 
> 

Wayne, just dropped by to see 'how it was going'... and I must say I 
wasn't too surprised at all, same old same old.

Irv

chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
> Irv Spalten wrote:
>> chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
>>
>>> Oh!  I forgot to thank DTJ for this "marketing minute".  ;-)
>>
>>
>> Bob, it has been awhile since I ventured in here. Amazing how things 
>> never change...
> 
> Irv ... great to "see" you. "John" recently appeared on USENET and the 
> Yahoo group .. and you are correct. Not much has changed. It is more 
> difficult, but not impossible, to rehash these things.
> 
> Nothing much new, except the components being added to eComStation.
> 
> For example, DTJ: I don't see any value in what they are doing (for the 
> past six years). Focus on install program and UI updates. (This from a 
> guy who said his most recent install experience with OS/2 was so 
> difficult, it will likely be his last attempt).
> 
> And, of course .. "ed" .. who claims nothing in eComStation cannot be 
> obtained from IBM, or freely available from other sources ... or .. is 
> completely unnecessary.
> 
> And "John" .. "why don't they tell us how many customers they have? Any 
> legit organization would do this"?
> 
> Amazing... and consistent .. and not without humor to those who can see 
> it .. and I can see it.
> 
> Regards,
> Bob St.John
> Serenity Systems International

Glad you are still around Bob. Looks like your doing well.

Irv

chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 22:53:59 UTC, Irv Spalten <ispalten@cfl.rr.com> 
> wrote:
> 
> -> chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
> -> > Oh!  I forgot to thank DTJ for this "marketing minute".  ;-)
> -> 
> -> Bob, it has been awhile since I ventured in here. Amazing how things 
> -> never change...
> -> 
> -> Irv
> 
> Hey Irv.  How the hell are ya?   And actually it has been relatively 
> quiet in the c.o.o groups for months since the psychotroll moved on to
> harrassing Mac users.  But it appears that the whackocity site may be 
> staging a comeback since there is a dearth of used clothing and porn 
> sites on the internet.   So maybe that is why we are seeing the 
> anti-OS/2 trolls crawling out from under their rocks.  Or it could be 
> that eCS 2.0 is on the horizon and these guys can't let a good thing 
> happen without crapping their pants. ;-)
> 
> Mark 
> 
> 

Doing well Mark, thanks

Irv

chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
> In <bsL8h.5996$CR6.924@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>, on 11/21/2006
>    at 10:53 PM, Irv Spalten <ispalten@cfl.rr.com> said:
> 
>> Bob, it has been awhile since I ventured in here. Amazing how things 
>> never change...
> 
> Of course they change; most of the m$ shills are now trolling the
> Linux news groups. Timmie and the john are a pale remnant of what used
> to afflict us.
> 
> Welcome back.
> 

Well, to me it hasn't seemed to change, maybe the cast of characters, 
but the banter (negative side) has not at all... if nothing else, they 
just don't give up, do they?

Irv

In <ctCdnYAV6crrB_nYnZ2dnUVZ_u-dnZ2d@comcast.com>, on 11/22/06 
   at 12:41 PM, "Bob St.John" <Serenity.Systems@comcast.net> said:

>But no one can argue the point that to remain current, you should be on 
>a supported product which is being actively developed  .. and today, 
>that's OpenOffice.org. Some folks had concerns about reading pdf files. 
>Lucide is targeted at that requirement.  Both these applications are 
>supported by eComStation revenues.

Topic change - how do I set up Lucide to read these files?  Do I copy the
dll files to my plugins directory?  I have the Lucide directory in my
path, and the latest beta, but the docs don't seem to include instructions
on installing the plugins.

I would assume I have to delete the current pdf reader dll in the plugins
directory.


Alan

-- 

----------------------------------------------------------------------
 ** Please use address alanh77[at]comcast.net to reply via e-mail. **

Posted using registered MR/2 ICE Newsreader #564 and eComStation 1.21
  
   BBS - The Nerve Center Telnet FidoNet 261/1000 tncbbs.no-ip.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Alan

nobody@junk.min.net wrote:
> In <ctCdnYAV6crrB_nYnZ2dnUVZ_u-dnZ2d@comcast.com>, on 11/22/06 
>    at 12:41 PM, "Bob St.John" <Serenity.Systems@comcast.net> said:
> 
>> But no one can argue the point that to remain current, you should be on 
>> a supported product which is being actively developed  .. and today, 
>> that's OpenOffice.org. Some folks had concerns about reading pdf files. 
>> Lucide is targeted at that requirement.  Both these applications are 
>> supported by eComStation revenues.
> 
> Topic change - how do I set up Lucide to read these files?  Do I copy the
> dll files to my plugins directory?  I have the Lucide directory in my
> path, and the latest beta, but the docs don't seem to include instructions
> on installing the plugins.
> 
> I would assume I have to delete the current pdf reader dll in the plugins
> directory.
> 
> 
> Alan
> 


If talking about the plugins supplied with Lucide then they should be in 
the Lucide directory with the executable - at least that is where the 
wpi package installs them to.

Regards

Pete

Hi

Peter Brown wrote:
> Hi Alan
> 
> nobody@junk.min.net wrote:
>> In <ctCdnYAV6crrB_nYnZ2dnUVZ_u-dnZ2d@comcast.com>, on 11/22/06    at 
>> 12:41 PM, "Bob St.John" <Serenity.Systems@comcast.net> said:
>>
>>> But no one can argue the point that to remain current, you should be 
>>> on a supported product which is being actively developed  .. and 
>>> today, that's OpenOffice.org. Some folks had concerns about reading 
>>> pdf files. Lucide is targeted at that requirement.  Both these 
>>> applications are supported by eComStation revenues.
>>
>> Topic change - how do I set up Lucide to read these files?  Do I copy the
>> dll files to my plugins directory?  I have the Lucide directory in my
>> path, and the latest beta, but the docs don't seem to include 
>> instructions
>> on installing the plugins.
>>
>> I would assume I have to delete the current pdf reader dll in the plugins
>> directory.
>>
>>
>> Alan
>>
> 
> 
> If talking about the plugins supplied with Lucide then they should be in 
> the Lucide directory with the executable - at least that is where the 
> wpi package installs them to.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Pete


Should also have said that you can setup Lucide as a Helper App for a 
browser but remove the nparos2*.dll file from the browser plugins 
directory first.

Regards

Pete

On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 18:16:08 +0000, Peter Brown wrote:

> Hi Wayne
>> So, are you one of the good guys? :-)
>>
> 
> 
> I'd like to say 1 of the good guys - but I did ask if he had a friend 
> called Tim, so maybe I'm a bad guy  :-)
> 
> Another poster also wondered the same.
> 
> The OP responded in such a way that it seems other people also wondered.
> 
> 
> Guess it is a matter of perspective as to whether I am a "good" or "bad" 
> guy in this...
> 
> Maybe you ought to read my post and follow up to "Johns" response to see 
> what you think.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Pete
> 
> 
> 
>> Wayne
>>

Hi Pete,

Actually, at this stage of the game the whole thing is beginning to
stink and I think it ought to be buried :-) Life's too short for
this!

Wayne



-- 
/home/wayne/.pan2/sigfile

Where is that list great thing in ecs that you can only get by buying ecs
there booby?

You're real good at spreading bullshit and lies.  Now where are the facts? 
You've been running for years from producing the list booby.   -->Its
because you haven't added anything to OS2. 

And... I never said anything about more development of SS.   I said it
works now with word files. Nothing more. Nothing less.   And considering
your development curve, the kid will be out of school before you ever
finish another bloated open office version.






In <ctCdnYAV6crrB_nYnZ2dnUVZ_u-dnZ2d@comcast.com>, on 11/22/2006 
   at 12:41 PM, "Bob St.John" <Serenity.Systems@comcast.net> said:



>Wayne wrote:
>> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 14:22:28 +0000, Peter Brown wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>>This "zealot" suggested eCS as being far easier to install on up to date
>>>hardware eg amd64 systems and also posted a very useful link to help get a
>>>Warp4 installation as up to date as possible without spending money.
>>>
>>>I think "zealot" may be a little OTT in some cases...
>>>
>>>Regards
>> 
>> 
>> Hi Pete, sorry, I was getting annoyed that more people were attacking
>> a guy who didn't want or need to spend money than those willing to
>> answer his question. 

>The same thread was opened here and on Yahoo. In both cases he got 
>honest helpful responses. In both threads he was told how to update 
>Warp4 and also told that the simplest way to get all the Warp4 updates 
>as well as additional software to support current hardware was 
>eComStation.  Folks are entitled to that opinion and to make that 
>suggestion.

>In both cases he took umbrage that people "were selling" eComStation to 
>me and he was clear he wasn't buing. He didn't want eComStation, he 
>didn't care about eComStation, eComStation was a gravy sucking pig ... 
>or words to that effect.  And he is entitled to those opinions.

>Imo .. his response was so over the top that some folks felt he was 
>simply trying to start a flame war. But in this case, the wood is too 
>far gone to burn well. The best time for this particular flame war was 
>five years ago.

>People will say and do what they want to say and do. Accuracy still 
>counts for something, though. For example, "ed" needs to acknowledge 
>that Smart Suite is no longer under development. If he wants to say that 
>the SS filters for document interchange still work for him ... no one 
>needs to argue that point.

>But no one can argue the point that to remain current, you should be on 
>a supported product which is being actively developed  .. and today, 
>that's OpenOffice.org. Some folks had concerns about reading pdf files. 
>Lucide is targeted at that requirement.  Both these applications are 
>supported by eComStation revenues.

>Pretty much every OS/2 user, whether they use eComStation or not, have a 
>stake in eComStation because pretty much every OS/2 users wants a 
>current office suite and the ability to open pdfs.

>Regards,
>Bob St.John
>Serenity Systems International

In <Gt39h.9941$y92.1238@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>, on 11/22/2006 
   at 09:40 PM, Irv Spalten <ispalten@cfl.rr.com> said:



>chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties: > In
><bsL8h.5996$CR6.924@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>, on 11/21/2006 >    at 10:53
>PM, Irv Spalten <ispalten@cfl.rr.com> said:
>> 
>>> Bob, it has been awhile since I ventured in here. Amazing how things 
>>> never change...
>> 
>> Of course they change; most of the m$ shills are now trolling the
>> Linux news groups. Timmie and the john are a pale remnant of what used
>> to afflict us.
>> 
>> Welcome back.
>> 

>Well, to me it hasn't seemed to change, maybe the cast of characters, 
>but the banter (negative side) has not at all... if nothing else, they 
>just don't give up, do they?


Well we have the integrity to keep correcting the lies, half-truths and
hyperbole.  But hey, perhaps you can get old booby to spring the list if
all the great things in ecs that the OS2 user can only get by buying ecs
-- thus *proving me wrong with *facts.  

I've been asking for 5 years and booby (and his shills like dogel) are
still afraid to post it.  Its a behavior that is very much like bush and
his right wing kooks who lie to make wars they and theirs won't fight in. 




>Irv

Here in comp.os.os2.advocacy,
Irv Spalten <ispalten@cfl.rr.com> spake unto us, saying:

>chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
>
>> Oh!  I forgot to thank DTJ for this "marketing minute".  ;-)
>
>Bob, it has been awhile since I ventured in here. Amazing how things 
>never change...

Oops, I missed some stuff.  Hi, Irv.  :-)

This group is scary, and not too relevant these days.  Too bad.  I'd
love to argue about technical stuff here, but it ain't happening.

-- 
 -Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Mableton, GA USA
    Mainframe/Unix bit twiddler by day, OS/2+Linux+DOS hobbyist by night.
       WARNING: I've seen FIELDATA FORTRAN V and I know how to use it!
                   The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.

chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
> Here in comp.os.os2.advocacy,
> Irv Spalten <ispalten@cfl.rr.com> spake unto us, saying:
> 
>> chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
>>
>>> Oh!  I forgot to thank DTJ for this "marketing minute".  ;-)
>> Bob, it has been awhile since I ventured in here. Amazing how things 
>> never change...
> 
> Oops, I missed some stuff.  Hi, Irv.  :-)
> 
> This group is scary, and not too relevant these days.  Too bad.  I'd
> love to argue about technical stuff here, but it ain't happening.
> 

Hi Richard.

This place is almost like if a tree falls in a forest does it make a 
noise? OS/2 (from IBM) hasn't changed much since I left. I sort of 
wonder if everyone that really cared about, used, uses, or developed for 
it, left these OS/2 NG's, would the mentally ill still be in here trying 
to drag someone into a nonsense discussion and then declare themselves 
right? I suspect so. All they have left is to start arguments that they 
can't back up and continue to make preposterous claims that they can't 
prove or request proof about something that doesn't exist. Then they 
declare they've won... and they haven't stopped doing this yet... 
tenacious at best is all they are. Really sad.

Irv

In <hJ49h.42331$TH3.8028@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net>, on 11/22/06 
   at 11:05 PM, Peter Brown <losepeteSPAM-ME-NOT@ntlworld.com> said:

Hi, Peter,

>> Topic change - how do I set up Lucide to read these files?  Do I copy the
>> dll files to my plugins directory?  I have the Lucide directory in my
>> path, and the latest beta, but the docs don't seem to include instructions
>> on installing the plugins.
>> 
>> I would assume I have to delete the current pdf reader dll in the plugins
>> directory.

>If talking about the plugins supplied with Lucide then they should be in 
>the Lucide directory with the executable - at least that is where the 
>wpi package installs them to.

Yes, I saw that, but I don't see them listed in about:plugin.  Wouldn't
that mean Firefox and Seamonkey aren't seeing them?


Alan

-- 

----------------------------------------------------------------------
 ** Please use address alanh77[at]comcast.net to reply via e-mail. **

Posted using registered MR/2 ICE Newsreader #564 and eComStation 1.21
  
   BBS - The Nerve Center Telnet FidoNet 261/1000 tncbbs.no-ip.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------

On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 17:45:27 -0500, nobody@junk.min.net wrote:

>>If talking about the plugins supplied with Lucide then they should be in 
>>the Lucide directory with the executable - at least that is where the 
>>wpi package installs them to.
>
>Yes, I saw that, but I don't see them listed in about:plugin.  Wouldn't
>that mean Firefox and Seamonkey aren't seeing them?

I guess it's a bit confusing: As of now, Lucide is USING plugins to add file
type support (like pdf, jpg etc.) but it's NOT a plugin to mozilla or firefox
(yet - it seems to be planned for a version 2.0, see:
http://svn.netlabs.org/lucide/query?status=new&status=assigned&status=reopened
&milestone=2.0+and+further).

Hope this helps
Andreas

PS.: For use in Firefox, you can set it up as helper apps, so that the pdf
docs are downloaded and displayed outside the browser window.

-- 

Andreas Ludwig
Vancouver, BC
using PMINews 2 on eCS 1.2R German!

Bob St.John wrote:

> Irv ... great to "see" you. "John" recently appeared on USENET and the
> Yahoo group ..


Geez Bob, why do you make such false  statements? I have been a member
of that Yahoo group since before you even had an ecomstation to sell.
What exactly is your motivation for trying to put me down, with lies
and false innuendo?

> And "John" .. "why don't they tell us how many customers they have? Any
> legit organization would do this"?

Bob, here again, you have put forth false comments, and are attributing
them to me, even tho I never said any such a thing. What is your
obsession and hatred of me, that you stoop to making things up, and
telling others that I said them?

In addition, you elsewhere accused me of saying ecomstation was "a
gravy sucking pig" which is  a completely false statement that you made
up. I never said any such thing, and I publicly challenged you to show
where I said that, because I am more than willing  to apologize if I
did inadvertantly say such thing, but you didn't, you won't, you
haven't, and you can't, because I never said it.

So far, you have put forth three completely made up statements and you
have purposely, and wrongly attributed them to me, and although I know
you delight in  putting others down, and are excited to be able to try
to make me out to be someone I am not, I am just unable to see why you
are trying so very hard to make up stuff, and shove it onto the group
as if I  had actually said it. I have said a few things I  ought not to
have, but still you can't help but make up stuff, and just toss it onto
the fire? What is the point in that?

Can't you see the hypocrisy in declaring "he's a troll, he's a troll!"
and then putting up posts that contain total lies, that you claim I put
forth? I think that rather makes you the instigator, and the
perpetutor, of the flame war, which kind of makes you a troll as well.

Everything you have said about me, and every comment you have "quoted,"
is a lie. You made up the words, and put them in quotes, and are
telling people that I said them.

I have been around working with, and defending OS/2 probably longer
than you, and without people like me fighting for it for so long, you
might not have had a chance to take it on and continue to make money
selling it. Just because you do not recall 'seeing me' does not give
you the right to proclaim I just "showed up" for you are wrong to imply
that. What is your motivation when it comes to working so  hard  to try
and put someone else down?

I'm not a troll, I have always been an OS/2 supporter (except for brief
moments in time when people behave like assholes, and piss me off) even
if your super memory does not recall seeing me, but you make it hard
for me to just  leave it alone, when I see that you are making up
words, and attributing them to me, apparently for no reason other than
to make yourself into some super special guy, among your good buddies
here. I would think a businessman would be embarassed to be caught
lying and making false accusations in a public forum where he also
attempts to sell his product.

Not a real classy thing  to do..... You may want to reconsider your
position, and put forth an apology for what you have done.

John

John wrote:
> Bob St.John wrote:
> 
> 
>>Irv ... great to "see" you. "John" recently appeared on USENET and the
>>Yahoo group ..
> 
> 
> 
> Geez Bob, why do you make such false  statements? I have been a member
> of that Yahoo group since before you even had an ecomstation to sell.
> What exactly is your motivation for trying to put me down, with lies
> and false innuendo?

Uh ... because you recently appeared with a "want back in", indicating a 
previous departure. If you want to claim you were "resurfacing" .. fine. 
Regardless, your appearance and questions were recent.

>>And "John" .. "why don't they tell us how many customers they have? Any
>>legit organization would do this"?
> 
> 
> Bob, here again, you have put forth false comments, and are attributing
> them to me, even tho I never said any such a thing. What is your
> obsession and hatred of me, that you stoop to making things up, and
> telling others that I said them?

If there is an obsession .. one only has to google the number of your 
postings and compare them to mine. Someone may be obsessed around here, 
but it isn't me. Regarding the 'tell us how many customers', what 
prompted you to write this? (posted on 11/20/06 01:29 PM)
------------------------------
John wrote:
<snip>
 >
 > Most companies report their sales. I did not demand that they do so. I
 > note that most car makers put forth that info rather regularly, M$
 > will be happy to tell you  how many users of XP there are, I can find
 > out how much power the electric companies sell, and it is no secret
 > how many computers Dell sells, so why do you claim  that a properly
 > run company would not give out such numbers? and why does it make me
 > Tim, because  I would like to know what I am investing in? SSI may be
 > a private company, and of course not required to give out such
 > information, but speculating on what those numbers might be, hardly
 > qualifies one as a troll.
-------------------------------

Btw, in response to your rhetorical .. does that make me Tim or a troll 
.... anyone reading your postings has formed an opinion on that.
 >
> 
> In addition, you elsewhere accused me of saying ecomstation was "a
> gravy sucking pig" which is  a completely false statement that you made
> up. I never said any such thing, and I publicly challenged you to show
> where I said that, because I am more than willing  to apologize if I
> did inadvertantly say such thing, but you didn't, you won't, you
> haven't, and you can't, because I never said it.

I believe the quote was "gravy sucking pig, or words to that effect". 
Again, readers are welcome to determine if your opinions posted about 
eComStation can be paraphrased to fit the gravy sucking pig tag.

The 'gravy sucking pig' is borrowed from comedian Steve Martin who 
claimed that one of the cheers he led in school was "Die, die, you 
graving sucking pig". If anyone deserves an apology, it would be to 
Steve Martin for borrowing his term without proper attribution.

So .. John, don't you recognize or understand sarcasm?

I've snipped the rest because I'm sure it is a Tim-like diatribe, 
without contributing anything new to the discourse, which has already 
run its course. You may, can, will have the last word because, like 
"ed", it's apparently you cannot help yourself.

But for all your postings, some quite long .. you really haven't 
contributed anything that hasn't been posted (and refuted) over the 
years. And eComStation keeps motoring along ...

Regards,
Bob St.John
Serenity Systems International

In <naqvjroqr.j99bge0.pminews@news.individual.net>, on 11/24/06 
   at 05:50 PM, "Andreas Ludwig" <Andi710@web.de> said:

>>Yes, I saw that, but I don't see them listed in about:plugin.  Wouldn't
>>that mean Firefox and Seamonkey aren't seeing them?

>I guess it's a bit confusing: As of now, Lucide is USING plugins to add
>file type support (like pdf, jpg etc.) but it's NOT a plugin to mozilla
>or firefox (yet - it seems to be planned for a version 2.0, see:
>http://svn.netlabs.org/lucide/query?status=new&status=assigned&status=reopened
>&milestone=2.0+and+further).

I am now un-confused.  Thank you.


Alan

-- 

----------------------------------------------------------------------
 ** Please use address alanh77[at]comcast.net to reply via e-mail. **

Posted using registered MR/2 ICE Newsreader #564 and eComStation 1.21
  
   BBS - The Nerve Center Telnet FidoNet 261/1000 tncbbs.no-ip.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Bob St.John wrote:

>
> But for all your postings, some quite long .. you really haven't
> contributed anything that hasn't been posted (and refuted) over the
> years. And eComStation keeps motoring along ...

Curious that I never said anything derogatory nor did I attack
ecomstation as your lies seem to indicate. Mostly, it was your cronies
and kissass ecomstation lovers that have made me realize I have zero
interest in it anymore.

Throughout all the bullshit your buddies tossed at me, I stated that I
tried it, and I might one day if I need it. Count on that not happening
Bob.

Regardless of your absolute desire to diss me and to hate me, I was
actually just looking for some help to get back to where I wanted to
be, and you and your moronic, self-serving, wolves managed to drag it
all down to the point where, basically, fuck ecomstation, and most of
all, fuck you.

John

letoured@nospam.net wrote:

> There is no future for ecs.  Its dead.

And OS/2 isn't??!?!

> Now stop the wishful thinking.

You first.

In <1164925284.282328.277190@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>, on 11/30/2006 
   at 02:21 PM, cmbass_us@yahoo.com said:




>letoured@nospam.net wrote:

>> There is no future for ecs.  Its dead.

>And OS/2 isn't??!?!

non sequitur. 

....Not to mention the fact that you ecs shills miss the entire point. 


>> Now stop the wishful thinking.

>You first.

I wasn't wishing.  I was stating a fact.  

letoured@nospam.net wrote:
> In <1164925284.282328.277190@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>, on 11/30/2006 
>    at 02:21 PM, cmbass_us@yahoo.com said:
> 
>>letoured@nospam.net wrote:
> 
> 
>>>There is no future for ecs.  Its dead.
> 
> 
>>And OS/2 isn't??!?!
> 
> 
> non sequitur.

Not really, since a non sequitur is generally an illogicial conclusion 
or a statement that does not follow logically from what preceded it. 
This would seem to be a counterpoint phrased as a question, possibly a 
rhetorical question.
> 
> ...Not to mention the fact that you ecs shills miss the entire point. 

Well .. it wasn't much of a point, was it? eComStation is preparing a 
new release and has described some of the updates which will follow the 
new release. eComStation is moving forward with new features and 
functions, and related benefits. Clearly eComStation has a future.

Perhaps the most relevant point is .. a user can still buy eComStation 
and its new releases.that does not follow logically from what preceded it.

  >>>Now stop the wishful thinking.
> 
> 
>>You first.
> 
> 
> I wasn't wishing.  I was stating a fact.  

No. You were stating an opinion. The facts demonstrated that your 
opinion was/is erroneous.

Anticipating your statement that no one has ever posted a list of 
features which have not come from IBM, this has been done several times. 
I recently posted a link which leads to the user to a subset of features 
comparing Warp 4, MCP, and eComStation.

So, that information is publicly available. Folks have been making this 
info available over a period of time. Perhaps you weren't paying attention?

Regards,
Bob St.John
Serenity Systems International

Holy cow!  I haven't looked at this newsgroup in a year or so and Ed has
still not been institutionized!

Bob St.John wrote:
[snip]
> 
>> Extend:
>> We will enhance the desktop and delight the user with new features, an 
>> improved install, and a more beautiful desktop.
> 
> The appearance of the desktop is largely a matter of personal taste. 
> Even so, I think the attention paid to the appearance of the desktop is 
> appropriate. One of the issues which was often raised by users in 2000 
> was that the Warp4 product looked dated.

Even if that were really true (which is isn't), it didn't matter.  A 
'dated desktop appearance' is an extremely minor issue compared with all 
of the other obstacles to using OS/2.

> 
> And, through Serenity Systems International, additional features, 
> drivers, and applications have been delivered.

IBM provided all a long list of critical drivers that were absolutely 
essential to using OS/2, including the video driver from scitech that 
prompted this thread.  Now IBM has ended their contract with Scitech and 
the scitech OS/2 video driver is 'dead'.  During the last 5 years 
'Serenity Systems International' has provided only one driver, the 
little-used and no longer distributed, borrowed from linux, read-only 
ntfs.ifs driver.

> 
>> Extinguish:
>> We will still sell OS/2 to you and you can run it on a virtual pc 
>> (with a really nice desktop) rather than on its own hardware which 
>> will not need updated video/printer/usb/audio/nic/ide drivers that 
>> were funded by IBM because you will be able to run it on the emulated 
>> vpc hardware.
> 
> Because this is titled "Extinguish" ... I'll make the leap and infer 
> that DTJ is claiming that supporting OS/2 in a VM application is 
> essentially the same as taking OS/2 out behind the barn and strangling it.

Here's the news excerpts referenced previously:

News:
16 November 2006
"SciTech Software, Inc. today announced that it has ceased further 
development of its SNAP device driver technology..."

10 October 2006
"We have engaged Win4Lin to develop support for eComStation as a
guest."

27 April 2006
"SSI intends to continue to expand support through its relationship with 
SciTech. Not because something went away ... nothing did. But because we 
want to continue to add value to our product and better support the user. "

You claimed in April to have a 'relationship' with Scitech that allowed 
you to expand support.  Then in October you claimed to have 'engaged' 
Win4lin.  Then in November, Scitech ends further develpment of its SNAP 
OS/2 video driver.  Apparently your 'relationship' with Scitech didn't 
involve actually paying sufficient money to keep an absolutely essential 
video driver project alive even while you deemed the development of 
running ecs as a guest on win4lin worthy of money.  Failing to fund a 
critical video driver while instead spending money on running ecs as a 
guest on a vpc extinguishes the OS.  There is no point in running the OS 
as a guest on a vpc other than as a migration tool.

> 
> The problem with this thinking is that it ignores that more is being 
> invested and more work is being performed to support eComStation 
> directly on hardware than as a guest in a VM. ACPI, additional NIC 
> support, improved hardware detection, and work to add "native" hardware 
> support continues in 2007.

Running eCS 'directly on hardware' will require an updated video driver. 






-- 
Posted with OS/2 Warp 4.52
and Sea Monkey 1.5a


David T. Johnson wrote:

>Posted with OS/2 Warp 4.52

Give it up, already.

On Tue, 26 Dec 2006 15:46:58 UTC, "David T. Johnson" 
<djohnson@isomedia.com> wrote:
> IBM provided all a long list of critical drivers that were absolutely 
> essential to using OS/2, including the video driver from scitech that 
> prompted this thread.  Now IBM has ended their contract with Scitech and 
> the scitech OS/2 video driver is 'dead'.  During the last 5 years 
> 'Serenity Systems International' has provided only one driver, the 
> little-used and no longer distributed, borrowed from linux, read-only 
> ntfs.ifs driver.
Cough, ACPI, Cough.  Tried running an Athlon 64 X2 or Core2duo with 
MCP recently?

Cheers,

Paul.

Paul Smedley wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Dec 2006 15:46:58 UTC, "David T. Johnson" 
> <djohnson@isomedia.com> wrote:
>> IBM provided all a long list of critical drivers that were absolutely 
>> essential to using OS/2, including the video driver from scitech that 
>> prompted this thread.  Now IBM has ended their contract with Scitech and 
>> the scitech OS/2 video driver is 'dead'.  During the last 5 years 
>> 'Serenity Systems International' has provided only one driver, the 
>> little-used and no longer distributed, borrowed from linux, read-only 
>> ntfs.ifs driver.
> Cough, ACPI, Cough.  Tried running an Athlon 64 X2 or Core2duo with 
> MCP recently?

I am writing this on an Athlon X2 4200+ system.

-- 
Posted with OS/2 Warp 4.52
and Sea Monkey 1.5a

David T. Johnson wrote:

<snip>

> Failing to fund a 
> critical video driver while instead spending money on running ecs as a 
> guest on a vpc extinguishes the OS.

In no way. Running away from the product (OS/2) as the vendor (IBM) 
extinguishes the os. Now go and complain to IBM as hard as you complain 
about SSI and eCS here, then come back.

-- 
Cheers,
Martin

UNDERSCOREmmiATcentrumDOTcz to email me

MMI wrote:
> David T. Johnson wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> 
>> Failing to fund a critical video driver while instead spending
>> money on running ecs as a guest on a vpc extinguishes the OS.
> 
> 
> In no way. Running away from the product (OS/2) as the vendor (IBM) 
> extinguishes the os. Now go and complain to IBM as hard as you
> complain about SSI and eCS here, then come back.

Don't feed the troll. He is postulating that SSI does not fund video
driver development. That would be incorrect. Also that support for an 
important environment is somehow bad for the OS.  Imo, also incorrect.

In the ecomstation newsgroup there is an interesting posting by a user 
who tested the latest eComStation beta successfully in the beta of 
Microsoft VPC 2007. I don't see MS ever supporting this, but I see value 
in the fact that OS/2 is runs well on something which will support VISTA.

In fact, at Warpstock in Ontario, two MS employees gave a pretty 
impressive demo of VPC runnin OS/2 on a beta of VISTA and commented that 
neither the guest or host OSs were "supported". Good demo, though.

To me, this simply adds value for the end user because in increases 
their options and flexibility. And one of the primary motivations the 
user has for running OS/2 as a guest in another OS is support for new 
hardware and technologies. This would seem to be just the opposite of 
extinguishing the OS.

Regards,
Bob St.John
Serenity Systems International

Bob St.John wrote:
> MMI wrote:
>> David T. Johnson wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> Failing to fund a critical video driver while instead spending
>>> money on running ecs as a guest on a vpc extinguishes the OS.
>>
>>
>> In no way. Running away from the product (OS/2) as the vendor (IBM) 
>> extinguishes the os. Now go and complain to IBM as hard as you
>> complain about SSI and eCS here, then come back.
> 
> Don't feed the troll.

Troll?  You've reached a new BSJ low.

> He is postulating that SSI does not fund video
> driver development. That would be incorrect.

Really?  What *OS/2* video driver development is 'SSI' funding?


> Also that support for an 
> important environment is somehow bad for the OS.  Imo, also incorrect.

Apparently by 'an important environment' you mean 'running OS/2 as a 
guest on virtual pc' although the specific virtual pc guest you admitted 
to funding was win4lin:

http://www.win4lin.com/

> 
> In the ecomstation newsgroup there is an interesting posting by a user 
> who tested the latest eComStation beta successfully in the beta of 
> Microsoft VPC 2007. I don't see MS ever supporting this, but I see value 
> in the fact that OS/2 is runs well on something which will support VISTA.

The value of OS/2 is its strength as system software.  Running OS/2 as 
an application within VPC 2007 on Vista would use Vista as system 
software, however good or bad that might be.  The only 'value' that 
would have from an OS/2 perspective would be as a migration aid to run 
os/2 software on vista which would extinguish OS/2.


> 
> In fact, at Warpstock in Ontario, two MS employees gave a pretty 
> impressive demo of VPC runnin OS/2 on a beta of VISTA and commented that 
> neither the guest or host OSs were "supported". Good demo, though.

There is nothing impressive about running OS/2 on VPC 2007, especially 
so considering that it isn't even supported.  OS/2 on VPC 2004 was 
actually supported and VPC 2004 is now a free download.  Running an 
unsupported guest means that the 'additions' for mouse integration and 
folder sharing are not available which would make using the guest more 
difficult than it otherwise would be.

> 
> To me, this simply adds value for the end user because in increases 
> their options and flexibility. And one of the primary motivations the 
> user has for running OS/2 as a guest in another OS is support for new 
> hardware and technologies. This would seem to be just the opposite of 
> extinguishing the OS.

Only you could say that failing to fund a critical video driver 
increases options and flexibility.  The primary motivation that the user 
has for running OS/2 as a guest is that THAT'S THE ONLY WAY THEY CAN RUN 
IT thanks to a complete absence of hardware support.  That is not an 
increase in 'options and flexibilty'.  The only significant reason to 
run OS/2 as a guest is as a migration aid to use familiar applications 
on another platform.  Even that use would be a short term thing due to 
the absence of any future new OS/2 printer drivers which would be needed 
to actually print something from the OS/2 guest.
-- 
Posted with OS/2 Warp 4.52
and Sea Monkey 1.5a


MMI wrote:
> David T. Johnson wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> 
>> Failing to fund a critical video driver while instead spending money 
>> on running ecs as a guest on a vpc extinguishes the OS.
> 
> In no way. Running away from the product (OS/2) as the vendor (IBM) 
> extinguishes the os.

Both extinguish the OS.  At least IBM kept OS2/ecs going until 2006. 
How many years will BSJ keep it going after IBM has bailed?  I predict 
*zero*.  You can come back here a year from now and post about all the 
drivers and hardware support that BSJ has provided in 2007 to prove me 
wrong.  <laugh>

> Now go and complain to IBM as hard as you complain 
> about SSI and eCS here, then come back.
> 
IBM is gone.  Gone.  Gone.  All we have left is...BSJ...and he is a 
mighty thin reed to lean on.

-- 
Posted with OS/2 Warp 4.52
and Sea Monkey 1.5a

David T. Johnson wrote:

>> He is postulating that SSI does not fund video
>> driver development. That would be incorrect.
> 
> Really?  What *OS/2* video driver development is 'SSI' funding?

That would indeed be some interesting news.

> the absence of any future new OS/2 printer drivers which would be needed 
> to actually print something from the OS/2 guest.

Paul Smedley is working on a port of CUPS, which should be a good 
long-term solution.

In <EPidnZIpjZbXFgvYnZ2dnUVZ_s2vnZ2d@comcast.com>, on 12/30/2006
   at 09:49 AM, "Bob St.John" <Serenity.Systems@comcast.net> said:

>In the ecomstation newsgroup there is an interesting posting by a
>user  who tested the latest eComStation beta successfully in the beta
>of  Microsoft VPC 2007. I don't see MS ever supporting this, but I
>see value  in the fact that OS/2 is runs well on something which will
>support VISTA.

If I need windoze to run a new release of eCS then I will immediately
start converting everything to Linux. I might be able to live with eCS
as a guest on Linux.

-- 
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT  <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>

Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action.  I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail.  Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me.  Do not
reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org

On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 04:07:31 UTC, "David T. Johnson" 
<djohnson@isomedia.com> wrote:

> Paul Smedley wrote:
> > On Tue, 26 Dec 2006 15:46:58 UTC, "David T. Johnson" 
> > <djohnson@isomedia.com> wrote:
> >> IBM provided all a long list of critical drivers that were absolutely 
> >> essential to using OS/2, including the video driver from scitech that 
> >> prompted this thread.  Now IBM has ended their contract with Scitech and 
> >> the scitech OS/2 video driver is 'dead'.  During the last 5 years 
> >> 'Serenity Systems International' has provided only one driver, the 
> >> little-used and no longer distributed, borrowed from linux, read-only 
> >> ntfs.ifs driver.
> > Cough, ACPI, Cough.  Tried running an Athlon 64 X2 or Core2duo with 
> > MCP recently?
> 
> I am writing this on an Athlon X2 4200+ system.
> 
Running in SMP mode?  If so, you must have just about the only 
motherboard on the planet that runs with IBMs SMP driver...

-- 
Cheers,

Paul.

Paul Smedley wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 04:07:31 UTC, "David T. Johnson" 
> <djohnson@isomedia.com> wrote:
> 
>> Paul Smedley wrote:
>>> On Tue, 26 Dec 2006 15:46:58 UTC, "David T. Johnson" 
>>> <djohnson@isomedia.com> wrote:
>>>> IBM provided all a long list of critical drivers that were absolutely 
>>>> essential to using OS/2, including the video driver from scitech that 
>>>> prompted this thread.  Now IBM has ended their contract with Scitech and 
>>>> the scitech OS/2 video driver is 'dead'.  During the last 5 years 
>>>> 'Serenity Systems International' has provided only one driver, the 
>>>> little-used and no longer distributed, borrowed from linux, read-only 
>>>> ntfs.ifs driver.
>>> Cough, ACPI, Cough.  Tried running an Athlon 64 X2 or Core2duo with 
>>> MCP recently?
>> I am writing this on an Athlon X2 4200+ system.
>>
> Running in SMP mode?  If so, you must have just about the only 
> motherboard on the planet that runs with IBMs SMP driver...
> 

Yes, it runs in SMP mode.  This was discussed in the "AMD Athlon 64 X2" 
thread in comp.os.os2.setup.misc group back in Februay, 2006.  The 
motherboard is an ASUS A8V Deluxe.  I don't know if it's the only one 
that works or not.



-- 
Posted with OS/2 Warp 4.52
and Sea Monkey 1.5a