mirror-textfiles.com/bbs/CBBS/1991/910606.ch

CBBS(R) 4.0.3b
06/06/91 22:14:47
 Y/N: want CBBS "1st time user" info?^U
?^U
?^U
?n;ward;christensen;odraw;;fullc;piss
 Logging name to disk.
You are caller 221975; next msg =44841; 378 active msgs.
Prev. call 06/05/91 @ 22:28, next msg was 44831
Recording logon for next time.
Use FULL? to check assignments
?^U
?xxxxx
"Mine" command checking for msgs TO you, 
>Function:?dir c:log;dir c:killed;dir summary;type-20 log,ward c;or;*;short
LOG. 5 
SUMMARY. 24 
06/05/91,22:28:17,221949,2,WARD CHRISTENSEN,,
E#44831,
E#44832,
E#44833,
06/05/91,22:46:05,221950,X,WARD CHRISTENSEN,,3
06/06/91,02:30:33,221951,1,RANDY IMAGEN,,5
06/06/91,03:08:42,221952,2,JERRY OLSEN,,
E#44834,
E#44835,16
06/06/91,06:46:47,221953,2,DENNIS STAHL,,4
06/06/91,07:36:26,221954,1,BILL WOLFF,,5
06/06/91,08:05:24,221955,2,COREY CAGLE,Lincroft/NJ,3
06/06/91,08:12:43,221956,2,RICH ELGIN,,
06/06/91,08:32:19,221957,1,RICH TRENKAMP,Chicago/IL,3
06/06/91,09:24:24,221958,2,DON PIVEN,,1
06/06/91,09:33:22,221959,2,MICHAEL SHARTIAG,,2
06/06/91,10:56:37,221960,1,DAVID JOHNSON,,
E#44836,14
06/06/91,11:23:43,221961,2,BILL WOLFF,,2
06/06/91,11:29:24,221962,2,DENNIS STAHL,,1
06/06/91,11:32:32,221963,2,BILL WOLFF,,
E#44837,
E#44838,8
06/06/91,11:59:39,221964,2,BILL WOLFF,,
E#44839,
E#44840,7
06/06/91,12:34:25,221965,2,DENNIS STAHL,,3
06/06/91,14:00:00,221966,3,BOB TILLMAN,OAK LAWN/IL.,5
06/06/91,18:44:07,221967,1,BERNARD GOLDLUST,,3
06/06/91,18:58:59,221968,2,CHARLIE KESTNER,,8
06/06/91,19:25:57,221969,2,PEAK QUINTERO,chicago il,1
06/06/91,19:51:16,221970,9,BEN TEIFELD,,5
06/06/91,20:24:23,221971,1,BILL WOLFF,,1
06/06/91,20:59:42,221972,9,THOM QUICK,,6
06/06/91,21:30:26,221973,1,BILL WOLFF,,10
06/06/91,21:57:07,221974,2,ROBERT LUND,beloit wi,7
06/06/91,22:14:51,221975,2,WARD CHRISTENSEN,,
44831 06/05/91 WARD CHRISTENSEN => TONY ANTONUCCI: "R/XIRCOM"
44832 06/05/91 WARD CHRISTENSEN => BILL WOLFF: "R/MULTITASKING OR TIME SHARING"
44833 06/05/91 WARD CHRISTENSEN => BILL WOLFF: "R/FAT TABLES /REBUILDING"
44834 06/06/91 JERRY OLSEN => MICHAEL SHARTIAG: "R/FAT TABLES /REBUILDING"
44835 06/06/91 JERRY OLSEN => ALL: "SHAREWARE SURVEY"
44836 06/06/91 DAVID JOHNSON => WARD CHRISTENSEN: "R/IRQ CONFLICTS"
44837 06/06/91 BILL WOLFF => JERRY OLSEN: "R/SHAREWARE SURVEY"
44838 06/06/91 BILL WOLFF => JERRY OLSEN: "R/SHAREWARE SURVEY"
44839 06/06/91 BILL WOLFF => WARD CHRISTENSEN: "R/MULTITASKING OR TIME SHARING"
44840 06/06/91 BILL WOLFF => WARD CHRISTENSEN: "R/FAT TABLES /REBUILDING"
 - End of summary - 
 Retrieving flagged msgs: C skips, K aborts.
 Msg 44831 is 03 line(s) on 06/05/91 from WARD CHRISTENSEN
to TONY ANTONUCCI re: R/XIRCOM
 Hopefully my Lantastic upgrade to 4.0 will be free, too!  They say they'll
do a 30-day deal, but I would be slightly more than that - I think they'll
say "purchased in May" will be free - and I got mine about May 6.

Msg 44832 is 22 line(s) on 06/05/91 from WARD CHRISTENSEN
to BILL WOLFF re: R/MULTITASKING OR TIME SHARING

  You're confusing multiPROCESSING with multiTASKING.  If you call Randy's
chinet Unix board (312) 283-0559 for guest users, you may be one of maybe
10 users of the system.  Each user may have one or more tasks.  Some people
run background tasks that dump out a msg when someone new calls in, etc.
  No one would deny that this 386 is multiTASKING, for it is running multiple
tasks at once.
  You use the term "time sharing", which merely is an archaic term for
multiple people using the same computer.  Time SLICING is an alternative
to premptive multitasking (in which high priority tasks can interrupt low
priority tasks, and the low priority tasks get control when the high
priority task is in an I/O wait).  Most systems I suspect use a combo
of both - so that while the system tasks might be high priority, every
ordinary user might have the same priority, so to keep one user from
hogging the system (lets say they're doing a compute-intensive job), their
time slice expires and someone else gets a chance.  A time slice might
be a small fraction of a second.  no, IS a small fraction - not TOO small
as the overhead of register saving and restoring would consume too much
CPU time.
  Multi-PROCESSING is MUCH more complicated.  This is when 2 or more processors
work together.  Typically you have special languages and/or special
compilers to produce code that can run on 2 processors at once.  A single
user often can't adequately take advantage of a multi-processing machine.

Msg 44833 is 06 line(s) on 06/05/91 from WARD CHRISTENSEN
to BILL WOLFF re: R/FAT TABLES /REBUILDING

  Both CHKDSK and RECOVER (hex, hex - bad word, bad word!) make
directory entries from the fat, the diff is chkdsk only does so for
fat chains that it can't find in the dir, while recover (shudder, shudder)
sez "OK, you're running me, you must mean you consider your ENTIRE
directory to be trashed, I'll make EVERYTHING I find in the FAT table
into a FILE - even subdirectories!"

Msg 44834 is 12 line(s) on 06/06/91 from JERRY OLSEN
to MICHAEL SHARTIAG re: R/FAT TABLES /REBUILDING

When all else fails, Norton Disk Doctor will attempt to rebuild a FAT.
However, if both copies of the FAT *really* are hopelessly trashed, there
ain't no reliable way to determine the links for specific files....Though
it unfortunately won't help you at this point, several commercial programs
keep detailed data of file links to later "restore" files. (An unreleased
product I've written uses a comparable principle as part of a process to
make a HD entirely inaccessible--"locked out"--for security purposes while
permitting full use of floppies and any other HDs which aren't locked out.
Only by inserting a floppy containing encrypted data and using a password-
protected "restore" program will the HD again be usable. While locked out,
even programs like Norton believe the affected HD isn't a DOS disk and
can't restore it to usable condition.)

Msg 44835 is 16 line(s) on 06/06/91 from JERRY OLSEN
to ALL re: SHAREWARE SURVEY

I've  received  an assignment for a national computer  magazine  article
focusing  on  shareware incentives: What  motivates  registration;  what
hinders  it?  Your reactions will be reflected in  the  article.  Please
indicate what incentives "strongly motivate," "strongly hinder," "mildly
motivate,"  or "mildly hinder" registration. Secondly, I will  interview
shareware publishers offering the "best" and "worst" incentives. If  you
have  candidates  for either category, please provide  address/phone  if
handy; otherwise, name of software product. Lastly, I plan to  interview
shareware  users  with more extensive opinions on the subject.  (If  you
prefer to remain anonymous for purposes of the article, please say so.)
     You  may  leave  responses to all or a part of the  above  here.  A
public  or  private message may be left to me on The Advocate BBS,  312-
939-4411,  faxed  to 312-939-3300 or mailed to J.W. Olsen;  Suite  1816,
1130  S.  Michigan Ave.; Chicago, IL 60605.  For those who are  able,  a
convenient and more thorough questionnaire is available on The Advocate,
or in response to a fax/mail request. Thanks.

Msg 44836 is 05 line(s) on 06/06/91 from DAVID JOHNSON
to WARD CHRISTENSEN re: R/IRQ CONFLICTS

Bummer!  Don't have any suggestions then.  I know the feeling, tho, as I
am out of IRQ's myself (am running an XT).  My scanner and HD take up the
"free" IRQ's.  So far, I haven't come across the further need of another
IRQ, and hopefully won't.  In any case, good luck with your search for a
resolution!

Msg 44837 is 22 line(s) on 06/06/91 from BILL WOLFF
to JERRY OLSEN re: R/SHAREWARE SURVEY

Hi Jerry! What peaks my interest in a shareware product is good support after
the fee has been paid, like having hard bound copy of the manual (at least
laser printed soft bound) is a big plus. This right here a big incentive to
send in the money. Of course the product has to be good in the first place.

I have also heard from an author (name and address available on request) that
didn't pressure at all, except added a plea to support his No-Dose and coffee
fund with no fee mentioned. He told me the response was so overwhelming that
he wouldn't have never believed it otherwise. I must also admit that the
software was a PC Boss clone that worked really well and had taken him a week
I believe to produce it.

What can authors do to improve response? Well I would say send out crippled
versions as shareware. Have almost everything intact, but leave a key feature
out that one won't need to be tested to feel the product out. For example, a
word processor with a spelling checker, can have the spelling checker go
through the motions, but never updates the file. That way, you get the feel of
the product while no expense on your part. Perhaps even to save the producer
the trouble of mailing out an uncrippled version. Why not just mail out a
password to unlock the crippled version to registered.

CONT...

Msg 44838 is 16 line(s) on 06/06/91 from BILL WOLFF
to JERRY OLSEN re: R/SHAREWARE SURVEY

...CONT

This part has nothing to do with the above, but brings me to the great worth
of shareware. I have been burned a number of times buying a product, but never
give it a test run because I had no way to do so without buying the product
first. Then after I opened the package and ran it, I learned that it wasn't
what I expected and wanted to return the product. Well you know the story, you
can't and you're stuck with it. Pure junk! I even have written to a well known
company and get nothing but a run around. I was even suppose to receive a free
book with the purchase of the product and never even received it. The only
thing I got was a coupon for a discount on an upgrade. Which I never wanted in
the first place. Now I hardly ever purchase software without at least first
test run, unless the price is so good it is worth the risk. I know I have made
a lot less purchases after I learn this lesson. On the other hand, shareware
producers have got some of that money now that I think of it. <BW>


Msg 44839 is 05 line(s) on 06/06/91 from BILL WOLFF
to WARD CHRISTENSEN re: R/MULTITASKING OR TIME SHARING

Thanks for your response. I guess that only leaves one more question.
What would you call the type of system which switches between different
applications, but the one running has the full attention of the computer.
Usually this kind of setup switches applications by hitting a hot key by
the user. I call this "partition tasking." What would you call this? <BW>

Msg 44840 is 01 line(s) on 06/06/91 from BILL WOLFF
to WARD CHRISTENSEN re: R/FAT TABLES /REBUILDING

Ahh... okay! I stand corrected. Thanks. <BW>
No dup. chars.
>Function:?