🚀 go-pugleaf

In <81615@hydra.gatech.EDU> np4@prism.gatech.EDU (Nick Pomponio) writes:

>Has anyone tried to run the Windows version of Simulink under the OS/2 2.1
>beta?  OS/2 2.1 supposedly runs enhanced-mode Windows applications (i.e.
>Simulink).

If I had it, simulink would be one of the first applications I would try.

>While I'm at it, has anyone tried to run Matlab 4.0 under OS/2 2.0 or 2.1?
>Version 3.5k would run under OS/2 2.0, and I'd like to know about 4.0 in
>order to decide whether to upgrade.  The last time I contacted Mathworks
>about OS/2, they didn't seem interested at all and indicated that I'd be
>on my own.

I have 3.5? where ? is close to k is the upgrade free or reasonable?
We don't have the cash to justify 4.0 out of our budget yet

>-- 
>POMPONIO,NICHOLAS A
>Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
>uucp:	  ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!np4
>Internet: np4@prism.gatech.edu

In article <tadr.727938036@keiko> tadr@doe.carleton.ca (Tom A. D. Riley) writes:
>In <81615@hydra.gatech.EDU> np4@prism.gatech.EDU (Nick Pomponio) writes:
>
>>Has anyone tried to run the Windows version of Simulink under the OS/2 2.1
>>beta?  OS/2 2.1 supposedly runs enhanced-mode Windows applications (i.e.
>>Simulink).
>
>If I had it, simulink would be one of the first applications I would try.

I installed OS/2 2.1 last week.  I started up enhanced mode windows,
double-clicked on matlab-s.exe, and started to take 10000 svd's of
a 4x4 random matrix.  The little hourglass popped up like usual, so I
hit ALT-ESC and was back to the OS/2 desktop with matlab humming away
in the background!  Haven't used it much, so I don't know if there are
any bugs that might pop up, but it looks good so far.

I tried to tell Mathworks about how matlab/simulink would take control
of my machine for 45 minutes+ under windows, and they said that yes it
does hog the cpu and there was not planned a fix for it.  Neither were
they planning to test it under OS/2.  Well, at least OS/2 now has a way
around this feature.  Another thing I didn't like about matlab for
windows is that Ctrl-C doesn't always interrupt it.  I had to reboot my
machine several times when I was debugging an .m file.  Again, OS/2 to
the rescue.

Ken Neighbors
wkn@leland.stanford.edu

P.S.  I'm using an ATI Graphics Ultra with 8514/A drivers.  I've read
that windows may not run in the background with some graphics cards, so
this might not work all the time.

P.P.S  I've been wanting to try a 386 Matlab under OS/2, but I haven't
gotten hold of one yet.

In article <tadr.727938036@keiko> tadr@doe.carleton.ca (Tom A. D. Riley) writes:
>In <81615@hydra.gatech.EDU> np4@prism.gatech.EDU (Nick Pomponio) writes:
>
>>Has anyone tried to run the Windows version of Simulink under the OS/2 2.1
>>beta?  OS/2 2.1 supposedly runs enhanced-mode Windows applications (i.e.
>>Simulink).
>
>If I had it, simulink would be one of the first applications I would try.
>
>>While I'm at it, has anyone tried to run Matlab 4.0 under OS/2 2.0 or 2.1?
>>Version 3.5k would run under OS/2 2.0, and I'd like to know about 4.0 in
>>order to decide whether to upgrade.  The last time I contacted Mathworks
>>about OS/2, they didn't seem interested at all and indicated that I'd be


386-Matlab 3.5k thru 3.5m run under OS/2 2.0 without a significant
performance loss. Under the OS/2 2.1 Beta, I notice a slight performance
increase. It does support Windows 32 bit applications, such as Mathematica
for Windows.

MathWorks has not tested 4.0 with OS/2 2.1 ; the tech support guy who
knew anything about OS/2 was waiting to get a copy. Based on what he said
I've ordered a copy of 4.0 to be used under OS/2 2.1. The release
date he gave me was February 12.

-- 
V. Phaniraj					phaniraj@plains.NoDak.edu
Assistant Professor, Electrical Engineering	phaniraj@ndsuvm1 (BITNET)
North Dakota State University 			(701) 298-1024 (Office)
Fargo, North Dakota, 58105			(701) 237-8677 (FAX)