cs_b144@ux.kingston.ac.uk (Ian Stickland) (05/21/91)
Hello everyone,
I have only just discovered this conference and have a few
questions/points I'd like to raise. I apologise if any of them have been
dealt with before, but stuff gets archived off pretty quickly round here.
OS/2 2.0
Reading what has been said about OS/2 2.0 I have a few questions on the
subject.
As a developer, I'm interested in the tools that we will have to write
OS/2 2.0 programs with. Currently I use Microsoft C6.0, what would I
use for OS/2 2.0? C6 currently only supports 8086/88 and 286 machines
doesn't it?? If this is so, does it mean that IBM or Microsoft will
be providing a new C compiler. I have heard rumours that Microsoft
supply a 386 version of C5.1 with their version of the OS/2 2.0 SDK. Does
this mean we'll be plunged back into the dark ages of no stand-alone
multi-threaded DLL support again?? I hope not.
The IBM OS/2 Toolkit (Version 1.2)
Price!! It's a bit steep, 566 pounds (no pound sign on this damn
keyboard) Even with discount it's still expensive. Also, I don't
think it's very good value. The Dialog and Icon editors are
invaluable, but apart from them, and the language bindings, it
doesn't provide a developer with a particularly useful set of tools.
Microsoft provide a message spy with the windows 3 SDK, why can't
IBM provide a 'PM spy', you IBM'ers out there can't tell me that
such a tool does not exist. For PM programmers it's an absolute must.
I have a Microsoft version of the above that is rather old now that
I got on a PM programming course about two years ago.
IBM Communications Manager 1.3
Why oh why oh why is this program *STILL* a character based effort.
It is so annoying for the screen to go black when you start it up.
On a more serious note though, it would be so much more useful to
make it a PM application, the configuration screens are a nightmare!
Also it would be extremely useful to have something like subsystem
management on the PM screen with your PM application that uses APPC
for example, rather than have to switch screen groups, make some change
and then flick back to PM to see what the result was...
Also, after you have changed a configuration file, why can't CM tell
you whether orr not you have to restart the comms session or CM itself.
I know that I have to do one of the options listed!! what I want to know
is WHICH ONE!!!!
Configuration
Thankfully printer configuration is a lot better in 1.3, but one small
aspect seems to have got worse. I no longer seem able to connect a
printer to the port 'none'. It's disappeared from the list of ports!!
has it moved somewhere else?? It would also be nice to be able to
specify 'file' as a port, so that a print file could be created as in
Windows 3.
(More comparisons with Windows 3... sigh) If you want to change your
screen display or mouse under OS/2, you have to delve into the
config.sys and do-it-yourself. This really isn't on is it?? Why can't
IBM provide a utility similar to the Windows 3 (god I hate that name)
setup utility.
One interesting 'feature' I came across was whilst upgrading the
display in the PS/2 I was using from VGA to 8514/A. The control panel
had saved it's screen size and position in OS2.INI and consequently
would only come up on the larger display with the VGA size making it
totally unusable. Seeing as how you can't edit the OS2.INI file there
was not a lot I could do as even my backup copy had this in it. In the
end I had to restore the ORIGINAL file from the install diskettes losing
all my various info and definitions. :FLAME ***VERY IRRITATING***
:FLAME OFF. I know IBM has OS2.INI editors for 'IBM internal use only',
how about making them available to the rest of the world??
Don't get me wrong (Larry), I LIKE OS/2. It was the first operating system
I had any contact with on PC's (PS/2's to be more precise) and I have a
huge soft spot for it. It dismays me however to see Microsoft succeed with
Windows 3 purely because it's pretty and has had all the loose ends tied up.
(Gross sweeping statement, I know...) If IBM spent some time on 'prettying'
OS/2 up in the same fashion then people might not slag it off quite so much.
If anyone else out there feels the same, SAY SO. If enough people put their
opinions up perhaps (big perhaps this) IBM might listen and make the changes.
If IBM is to become the market/user driven company it claims it is, then it
should be listening intently to places such as this.
Just for the record, the U.S. don't have the monopoly on appauling response
times from dealers for OS/2 upgrades, I've been waiting for about five weeks
now for mine, and my sponsors BOC have been waiting even longer for their
1.2/1.3 Toolkit upgrade. So far they've been sent EE 1.3 5.25" instead!! I
can't quite see how you could mistake the toolkit upgrade for the above
package, but you get surprised every day in this business. I agree totally
with the point made by someone else that IBM should maintain a 'registered'
user list and send upgrades automatically, or at least notification of
upgrades to users. Come on IBM what's your official response.....
Well, I'm sure I've annoyed some people with my comments, but if you don't say
anything you don't get anywhere, so lemme have it...!!!
Cheers,
Ian Stickland.
P.S. What editors do you lot use. I use LPEX by IBM and I think it's FAB.
(Hard to believe I know, the guys responsible for it in Winchester,
ENGLAND, did a great job....)