🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <kdYSz0E6AhyF092yn@momeraths.org>,
Sysop <MarchHare@momeraths.org> wrote:
>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.

Again, it is not seperately available as a product of its own....unless
you want to overpay for the DevCon junk, it isn't there....

>
>>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.

That's more money than it is worth.  I rather wait for the next VAC++
upgrade....

>
>>>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's $100 more than the product for someone needing just the DTK.

>
>>
>>>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.

I have the SI and and don't need to buy it every year again and
again.....and I am comparing, and the comparision shows that the DevCon
is useless.

>
>>
>>>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.

Actually, less overhead, codewise it is supposed to be more efficient in
terms of CPU...

>
>>>>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!

SDK is not DevCon.  Devcon supposedly is the counterpart of Microsoft's
Technical Connection for developers, a useful service, unlike DevCon.

>
>>>>>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.

Seeing the problem and accepting it is the first step to find a
solution.  I have no way about grabbing IBM by the ear to lead to
solutions.  I am doing my part in identifying and brining out the
problems.  OS/2 is not my product....the platform I still use.

>
>>>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.

;) Now another twist of yours.  I said it is not available as a seperate
product for purchase, and it is not.

>
>...
>
>>>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.

Best Regards,

Mustafa Soysal

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mustafa Soysal               (313) 741-1844 Voice                      TeamOS/2
MISTIK Systems               (313) 741-1937 Fax          Author of UnTieCom(tm)
PO Box 7064                                        Authorized Motorola Reseller
Ann Arbor, MI 48107-7064, USA                            os2@mistik.express.net
               Online catalog:  http://www.express.net/mistik/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------