🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <28i1g7$54b@access.digex.net>,
kbennett@access.digex.net (Keith R. Bennett) writes:
>
>Following is a letter I wrote to IBM and sent to their technical
>support Internet address (cset2@vnet.ibm.com):

This is not a formal response to your letter, just my opinion.

I think part of the problem may be that the above id is perceived as
a technical contact for all IBM products.   It's not -- it's for the
C Set ++ (and C Set/2) compiler.

If you have a question or problem with C Set ++, and receive you receive
an unsatisfactory answer, by all means complain -- to the cset2 id, or
to me if you wish.

If, however, you have a problem filling listboxes, or getting semaphores
to work, or anything else concerning OS/2... you're simply asking the
wrong people.  This is not to say we don't want to help -- I fully
agree with the need to provide technical support to OS/2 developers.
It's just that the people who man that ID don't know the answer to
many of _the_OS/2_questions_ that are asked of them.

I think the focus of your letter should been asking OS/2 support to
provide better internet access (they already offer technical support
on compuserve), instead of venting your ire on a product that already
does (C Set ++).      -tim