Hmmmm... 'View in Browser' is grayed out when I select Options | General Preferences | Helpers... Could you clarify this in the next issue? I've also had some problems keeping PMView as my browser. When I run CheckIni, I sometimes find that the entries are corrupted in some manner and I end up having to delete them and then re-enter them. As nice as NS/2 is, it still has a ways to go to match the stability and lack of bugs that WE had. Sigh.
The "View in Browser" option will only be available for those types of data that Navigator can interpret: GIFs, JPGs, Text and HTML files. We agree that Navigator isn't as tight as WebEx was!
- editor
I thought that this story was fantastic. I hope to read some more like this in some coming issues.
Just wanted to say how much I enjoyed your OS/2001 story. Nice job.
I've just browsed through this article and downloaded what I hope are the essentials to play these games.
I never owned an Atari, but my very first game I played when I was learning the IBM PC was Windmill Software's DIGIDUG! I sat until 0300 on a borrowed XT with MCGA and even today, those little dwarves still trick me!
Now I know that Microsoft have bought out a package under Return Of Arcade that is meant to emulate the old video games, but it is nothing like the Digdug I used to play. Could you ask some kind people to see if it's possible to port the Windmill game of Digdug to OS/2? Also (greedy aint I?) how 'bout Moonbugs as well?
Please let me know your thoughts.
There is a Digdug for the Atari, but if I remember it's not very good compared to the arcade version. There may be a Digdug for the Coleco Vision or the Sega Master/Game Gear systems. I think Digdug may have been a Coleco game at the arcade, but I'm not sure who made it. Anyway, look at the Stella home page for more info on Darrell's ports of these game systems.
I'm one of those who didn't have an Atari 2600, but my friends did. I may be late, but I'm gonna play now. The article mentions some Pac-Man games for OS/2. Where can I find them, and what the best one. Also, do you know of any C64 emulators for OS/2.
John, check out the OS/2 e-Zine! pacman review for a look at a few of them.
I like MakMan. It plays like the arcade did as far as I remember (it's been a long time since I saw the arcade version and I wasn't allowed to put very many quarters down it when I was a kid). As for a C64 emulator, I think there may be a DOS one that runs under OS/2, but I'm not sure. Darrel Spice has ported a Colecovision and a Sega Master System/Game Gear emulator to OS/2, and there's also a GameBoy emulator (I haven't taken the time to set it up, it requires XFree86 to run). There's also a Mac emulator, but it's commercial, I believe.
I find the problem with most marketing is it is too glitzy... and not enough substance.
I therefor propose that a comparative fact sheet be published that simply (and accurately) compares the way Win95/WinNT work and the way OS/2 works.
Forget the hype about Voice Navigation (it's a great thing, but mostly useful to those who are disabled or very unknowing about computers), it is also a big advantage for people like legal secretaries. Also forget Lotus... I have yet to see them do squat for OS/2 other than the initial Warp 4.0 Works 96.
Now Apple is getting on our wagon and let's support them all we can. There are a lot of Mac users that will come over to OS/2 when they know how the OOUI works... so much like a Mac.
BTW... Mac is sacrificing the musician market with their new hardware... Where will all those MIDI maniacs go?... You've got it.
We, the end-users, know what a real investment is... it's not measured in $100,000 or Million dollar amounts... it's measured in putting our entire careers and business futures on the chopping block... to be competitive in markets IBM and the Corporate suits have never treaded in... too scary!
The bos kickers (major warehousing distributors) care about selling hardware... what the heck... they will sell more in 18 months to the same people (a myth but it makes them feel secure). What OS will go into the new boxes?... You've got it... the one the end user is comfortable with.
Years ago I was a Sales Engineer for the major Engineering Supply Co in the world. We all went thru Xerox's Advanced Professional Selling Skills course... guess what the bottom line is? Know your product and your competition. ASK the customer what their needs are, and then fulfill their needs... Simple... Happens to work!
Maybe we can work with IBM and help them learn the market they lost by default 10 years ago. They sure have good hardware and are STILL the leader in new technology. Who knows more about the Internet than IBM & AT&T? Sure isn't Gates and his minions.
We are already there... we just need to take it to the market intelligently.
After my introduction to OS/2 V3.0 in April 1995, I bought my first substantial software in December 1995. It was DeScribe, and they had a pocket to run Mesa 2x as well. The WP around Perth W.A. at the time was the ubiquotous MS Word 6, and I was able to demonstrate (and still can) that DeScribe ran rings around it, in speed, robustness and features that were actually of some use to people.
Well, we all know what happened. There was the Frequent Flyer then the end. Every so often I go back to the Web Page and muse on how things could have been, if a decent product like this had been given a fair go (a bit like visiting an empty Avernus over a freezing Helliconia.).
Since then, I have bought 2 other substantial OS/2 products, Mesa 2.1.6. and DBExpert 2.0.2. I have downloaded Clearlook, but just cannot find it within me to abandon DeScribe, not only for emotional reasons, but because for my applications, it just can't be beat. I even surreptitiously sneak it onto my Win '95/96/9x computer at work, and put out better docs than Word7!
My ISP, Colin tried to console me by saying "well, someone will by waht's left of DeScribe and its code, and it will rise from the ashes under a different name." But it hasn't happened, and the way the computer world is going it may never will.
If you are like me, your computing experience started with DOS, the Disk Operating System. In this, the father of modern operating systems such as Windows 95, Windows NT, and OS/2, the rule was that you terminate one program and then proceed to the next. It took me a while to learn DOS.
I had no teacher, nor did I know other people with experience in PCs to help me when I had a question. Books such as "DOS for Dummies" were my only guide.
I worked this way for over a year, running Word Perfect for DOS to write a letter, shutting it down and starting Quicken for DOS to keep my bank accounts in order. Shutting that down and going to CHKDSK or DEFRAG to run maintenance. Very orderly. One thing at a time.
Soon, I found out about Windows 3.1, and it promised things I had never really thought about. It promised a better way to work, which it delivered on, and the ability to do many things at one time. I was soon running Word Perfect 6 for Windows, Quicken for Windows, wonderful Translator apps in French, Italian, and Spanish, and all manner of interesting programs that I found both useful and fun. The promise to run more than one app at a time was fulfilled, but not as well as might have been expected. Far too often I found myself rebooting as a result of a mysterious ailment known as a GPF.
One day, as I looked through a software catalogue, I saw something very interesting. It was called IBM OS/2 Warp version 3. What was it? Why would I want it? What the heck did 32 bit mean? By this time, I was anxiously awaiting Windows 95, which promised to end my GPF problems, yet here was an OS, at version 3 no less, that not only promised to cure my GPF problems, but assured far better multi-tasking than I had ever seen. I saw that the price was quite reasonable, and so decided to buy it. How bad could it be? It would run my current cache of apps, and would even improve their performance in many ways.
The experience proved to be a good one, and I have used OS/2 ever since. Though I have tried Windows 95, I found my GPF problems still there, though renamed. I eventually got rid of Windows 95, and even my use of win-OS/2 is severely limited to the occasional game of Ms PacMan (Chomp.) So what is the point? The point, as I have recently noticed, are my computing habits.
I still tend to switch off Lotus WordPro 96 for OS/2 before going to Electronic Teller for OS/2. I still turn off KWQ Mail before connecting to the net. I still sit and wait for one download to end in Netscape/2 before switching to a new page. Get the picture? My old DOS habits somehow still linger, and this magnificent bit of technology we call IBM OS/2 Warp version 4 sits in idle wonder at my inability to take full advantage of its power. How long will I hold on to these old habits of mine? I don't know, but when I finally give OS/2 the full test, I am sure it will be more than up to the task.
On the survey results the more than 5 years gets a higher result than I would have thought. Perhaps to help clarify the question you could include the dates that each revision of OS/2 was made "gold" and became available. For instance I started using OS/2 sometime in the spring following the release of version 2.0. I thought that was only 4 to five years ago, and that is what I reported -- I could have been mistaken though and a little help might have come in handy to report that information more accuratly.
I find it a little disheartening that there were not very many new OS/2 users. We have got to get the word out if Warp is to be there for the many years that people way they will use it.
I read OS/2 e-Zine! every month, and I think it is a great magazine with good articles and opinions. Especially I like to read 'Chris' Rant'.
But I think you need a 'Short News' column. You have some of it in the Beta File. What I need is some more general news about what happens in the OS/2-community. For example I read in the article called "A Clear Look at Sundial Systems" that IBM and Apple will not continue developing OpenDoc. It would have been nice to read more about this somewhere else in the magazine. I think the journalist should ask IBM "What will you give us instead?" and "Will we now have to use some M$ technology instead like OLE ?"
A great suggestion. We do post regular news snippets in our "Announcements" section of the News Folder. Also, expect to see a regular column similar to what you describe above in future issues.
- editor
Thanks for the news. I love the Links game and had no idea that it was coming out for OS/2. This is great and exactly what Warp needs. Hey ISV's, please follow suit!
Copyright © 1997 - Falcon Networking