🚀 go-pugleaf

Lines: 249

In article <5i7278$a7c@client3.news.psi.net>,
os2@mistik.express.net (Mustafa Soysal MS57) wrote:
>In article <QwaRz0E6AxHd092yn@momeraths.org>,
>Sysop <MarchHare@momeraths.org> wrote:
>>Lines: 128
>
>Sysop, I am getting sick and tired of your random cut and pastes, please
>mark where you are cutting text out....and don't cut out the context
>please...

Nothing random about it.  You are just too damned stupid to follow the 
ellipses.  Why should I have to quote entire paragraphs of your 
meaningless crap because you are too dense to follow?

...

>No, you are the one twisting, you have removed the entire part with your
>fallacies.

Like I said, you're too stupid to follow an intelligent path of 
conversation.  I would tell you to go back and read it again, but your 
poor brain still can't follow what I put in front of your face three 
times.  I have not once, nor do I intend to, complain about having to 
get an updated Toolkit through the DevCon.  I don't know why you insist 
on saying otherwise, other than the fact that you obviously like to just
piss people off.

If anything, you're taking me out of context by saying _I_ was 
complaining that the Toolkit was _not_ available separately.

>>that you cannot get the Toolkit separately, since it is a crock.  I'm 
>
>You cannot get the Toolkit seperately.
>
>>_not_ complaining about DevCon, you are.  Besides, there is a Toolkit 
  ^^^^!!
>
>I am not complaining about Devcon, the fatcs mentioned about Devcon are
>just a sideeffect because it doesn't contain much worthy of purchasing
>it.  The issue was that someone was looking for a developers kit, and I
>said it is not available seperately, it comes with the compiler (VAC++).
>You or somebody else said, no it is available seperately, it is on
>Devcon.  That is not "seperately" as a product.  When OS/2 2.0 was
>around, the developers toolkit was a seperate product as well as
>optionally integrated with CSet/2.  That product has disappeared.

Yet, it is still available separately from VAC++ and separately from 
C-Set.

>What is part of Devcon might even be just the DTK betas.

Sure, that is why the DevCon Toolkit has Merlinized features :)

>>available with Watcom, but admittedly dated.  It is not a matter of 
>
>Same with VAC++.  It is outdated.  I don't like upgrading the entire
>cmpiler just to be able to write code for Merlin's new features.

So don't.  Susbcribe to DevCon and get an updated Toolkit.

>>requiring the separate DevCon Toolkit, unless I want something Warp 
>>specific or just want something more up to date.  Even the following 
>>statement shows that _I_ am not complaining about it.
>
>You are lost in space...

Again, you are too stupid to read what I wrote.

>>>>doesn't come with the compiler.  As far as I'm concerned it is available
>>>>separately from the compiler, which is a good thing, IMO.  I can use any
>>>
>>>As I said, it is not.  It is available if you purchase Devcon, you can't
>>>purchase it by itself which would cost a lot less.
>>
>>I honestly doubt that it would cost less.  Novell is another company 
>
>The last availability when it was around did cost less, it used to be
>something like $120.-

Note that I paid ~$220 for DevCon, if memory serves me correct.

>
>>that packages things together in their CD's to lower costs for 
>>distribution.  Some companies, such as Compaq, even distribute entire 
>
>BS.  IBM moved a bunch of things to DevCon in order to skim the
>developers.  The Software Installer used to be anotehr product of its
>own.  Devcon just contains a bunch of dead bodies you would not pay for
>otherwise, thats all.

So, I get the Software Installer, the Toolkit, an updated EPM (yes, I 
know you can ftp it, but now I don't have to tie up my modem) and get to
see what some other developers have cooked up, all for ~$220, including 
shipping and handling.  Compare this to any other purchase you make in 
the computer world.

>
>>program suites on CDROM, and you call them up to get the program key to 
>>unlock it.  There is a certain economy of scale in not having to package
>>and mail separate items.
>
>Yeah right, that's why Devcon would cost more than the DTK when it was
>around.

And, how much would all of the items be separately?  I wager all 
together a lot more.  I'd bet the shipping and handling, the extra 
packaging and the time to pay employees would triple the price.

  They also did the same kind of kill and sell with junk to
>HPFS386.  You can't get it unless you pay $1K+ for Lan Server Advanced.
>IBM did this to sell their LanServer junk.  HPFS386 used to cost about
>$130 as a product of its own.  As such, it could have redeemed a lot of
>the HPFS problems of OS/2 Warp or Merlin, and I certainly would have
>bought it to fix instability of OS/2 due to filesystem problems.

Perhaps it would, perhaps it would not.  I myself would not mind seeing 
Warp come out of the box with HPFS386, but it does introduce higher 
overhead.

>>>Those who bought the IBM compiler with the developers kit included
>>>cannot upgrade it by simply upgrading the developers kit since there is
>>>no such upgrade.  You have to buy Devcon to copy something off it.  Then
>>>there is the question of compatibilities etc.  Now that is what I
>>>complained about.
>>
>>So, you have to buy DevCon to upgrade the Toolkit.  Big deal, so does 
>
>I didn't think you would get it...

You're right, I don't.  Either you want to upgrade, or you don't.  You 
cannot have it both ways.

>>everyone else.  Like I said before, there honestly is little reason that
>>anyone _has_ to upgrade in the first place.  Buy a subscription, get the
>>upgrade, don't renew it right away, but wait until you feel the urge 
>>again.
>
>Paying each time $240 or so for junk.

Since it comes with the updated Toolkit, it hardly makes it junk.  Of 
course, if all you want to do is complain...

...

>>The Watcom compiler is still on the market.  I still get ads urging me 
>>to upgrade.  Smalltalk is a separate language and compiler.  Java 
>
>Visualage is a series of compilers supporting different languages on
>OS/2.  A lot of the code of the system is the same.

Yes, _series_, with separately priced parts.  It has its advantages, if 
you want all of the parts.

>>started as a separate language and compiler.  I bought Watcom for the 
>>C/C++.  If I need something else, I'll buy something else.
>>
>>...
>
>Oh finally, one place where you marked your editing...

Yes, the only place I cut anything out that time.  Of course, you don't 
cannot seem to comprehend anything anyone is telling you, anyhow, so I 
don't know why I bother.

...

>That's what you get on Devcon....nothing useful.
>
>>There aren't any guarantees when it comes to programming, but basing 
>>your work on a beta is just asking for problems.
>
>And why would someone pay a high subscription rate for a CD just to ask
>for problems?

High subscription?  You really should quit taking drugs if you call $220
"high".  The Novell SDK is ~$340!

>>>>It's all irrelevant anyhow, especially since it is in the .apps 
>>>>newsgroup. You just don't get it, do you?  Take your advocacy bullshit 
>>>>to the .advocacy group.
>>>
>>>Actually, you are the one advocating OS/2....I am pointing out
>>>realities...
>>
>>Actually, I'm advocating a certain amount of whining be confined to an 
>>advocacy group.  That's what it is there for.  After all, if only 
>
>No, advcacy groups are for promoting OS/2.  Critisim or anchoring IBM to
>the OS/2 realities is not advocacy.

Oh, now this is rich!

>>pro advocates visited the advocacy group, it would be a little 
>>one-sided and boring.  I read apps to ask questions/give advice/make 
>
>;) Believe me, that's what the advocacy groups are for, to get these
>people off the groups where current users are trying to find out about
>problems and solutins.

And the solutions you are proposing?  I see you complain a lot, but very
little in useful advice.

>>comments about applications.  If you really want to blow off steam about
>>IBM, maybe you should take it there.  Twisting words about not being 
>>able to upgrade your Toolkit, when in fact you can, just doesn't belong 
>>here.  Even more, whining about IBM hardware has nothing to do with 
>>apps.
>
>Again, you are attemting to twist your way out.  Someone needed a
>toolkit, and asked where he can buy it.  I said he cannot buy it as a
>product, it comes with the compiler.  You were clueless enough to claim
>the opposite...and added it was part of Devcon...That's why this thread
>is here.  Being part of Devcon beta's does not mean DTK is a  "seperate
>product", because there is no such product.  It has been discontinued
>long time ago.

There is no attempt to twist my way out.  You just simply lied when you 
said he cannot get it, other than to get it with the compiler.  In fact,
you seem to have a lot of trouble telling the truth during this entire 
thread.

...

>>real reason you need to upgrade?  For the silly notebook feature? 
A
>>newer SOM?  If your program doesn't use these features, don't bother. 
>>If it does, then upgrade it and uncheck the beta box when you install 
>>it.  Quite a few companies these days include betas in their SDK 
>>releases.  Please, tell me why IBM should do it differently.
>
>What's the use of telling you or IBM anything, both of you seem to be
>from the same breed...

In a way, I guess you are right.  It doesn't matter what you say, since 
you are so busy lying that you can't even keep it straight.  But, hey, 
this wouldn't be half so amusing if you were actually a good liar.

BTW - I took the liberty of cutting out redundant signature blocks 
without an ellipses.  I suppose that is part of my "random cut and 
paste", no doubt?

John
-- 
//------------------------------------------------------------------------
// momerath@apk.net                    sevot yhtils eht dna ,gillirb sawT`
// MarchHare@momeraths.org                 ebaw eht ni elbmig dna eryg diD
//                                           ,sevogorob eht erew ysmim llA
//                                            .ebargtuo shtar emom eht dnA
                     In case of stupidity, break glass.