Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #163878 > unrolled thread

PL/I advertising

Started byhancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
First post2016-05-23 16:40 -0700
Last post2016-05-25 15:07 -0700
Articles 20 on this page of 598 — 36 participants

Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers


Contents

  PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-23 16:40 -0700
    Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-24 14:06 -0700
      Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-05-24 14:22 -0700
      Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-24 16:39 -0700
        Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-25 07:47 +0200
          Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-25 15:00 -0700
      Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-25 13:11 +0000
        Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-25 13:30 +0000
          Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-25 16:12 +0000
          Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-25 15:13 -0700
            Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-25 16:19 -0700
              Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-25 16:33 -0700
              Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-26 12:07 -0700
                Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-26 16:22 -0400
                  Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-28 13:17 -0700
                    Re: PL/I advertising Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:29 -0500
                    Re: PL/I advertising mausg@mail.com - 2016-05-29 10:03 +0000
                      Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-29 07:26 -0400
                      Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-29 15:16 +0200
                        Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-31 17:44 -0700
                          Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-31 19:22 -0700
                            Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-01 07:41 +0100
                            Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-01 10:49 +0200
                              Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 06:36 -0400
                              Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
                                Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
                                  Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
                      Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-05-29 15:30 +0100
                        Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-29 23:56 -0700
                    Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-29 07:26 -0400
              Re: PL/I advertising JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 14:24 -0500
            Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 06:54 -0400
          Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 06:50 -0400
          Re: PL/I advertising Larry <lelmore76@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 15:29 -0700
        Re: PL/I advertising JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 08:45 -0500
        Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-05-25 17:58 -0400
          Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-05-25 22:04 -0400
            Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-26 00:31 -0700
            Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-26 10:07 +0200
              Re: PL/I advertising "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-29 17:55 +0100
            Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-05-26 15:57 -0400
              Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-05-26 20:00 -0400
              Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-27 11:55 +0000
                Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-05-27 15:49 +0100
                Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-27 20:28 +0200
                  Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-28 13:18 +0000
                    Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-28 17:53 +0200
                      Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-29 13:38 +0000
                        Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-29 16:33 +0200
                          Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:26 +0000
                            Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-31 18:52 +0000
                              Re: PL/I advertising Michael LeVine <mlevinespmfltr@redshift.com> - 2016-05-31 14:10 -0700
                                Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-01 12:57 +0000
                                  Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
                              Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-31 22:19 -0400
                                Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-01 07:53 +0000
                                  Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-01 12:08 +0200
                                    Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-01 11:10 +0100
                                    Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-01 10:22 +0000
                                      Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
                                        Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
                                          Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
                                            Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 13:51 -0700
                                            Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
                                              Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
                                                Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-05 14:22 -0700
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:14 -0400
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-06 16:15 +0000
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 14:11 -0700
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-07 02:52 +0000
                                                Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:52 +0000
                                        Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-01 17:03 -0700
                                          Re: PL/I advertising David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 11:31 +0100
                                            Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
                                              Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-02 15:09 +0200
                                                Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-03 16:41 +0200
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-03 15:49 +0000
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-03 10:06 -0700
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:18 +0200
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-05 23:26 +0200
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
                                                              Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 18:16 +0200
                                                                Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:52 +0000
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:28 -0700
                                              Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:43 +0000
                                                Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-04 11:08 +0100
                                                Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-05 23:14 +0200
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:59 +0000
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:52 +0000
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-05 16:39 +0100
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:12 +0000
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 17:18 -0400
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:53 +0000
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-08 12:09 +0000
                                                              Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 08:26 +0000
                                                                Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
                                                                  Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-17 03:36 +0000
                                                                    Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-17 12:53 +0000
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-05 10:20 -0700
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-06 09:04 -0700
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-06 10:23 -0700
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-07 08:59 -0700
                                                              Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-08 12:25 +0000
                                                                Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-08 15:11 +0000
                                                                  Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-08 15:29 +0000
                                                                  Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
                                                                Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-08 10:34 -0700
                                                                  Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-08 11:13 -0700
                                                                  Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
                                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-09 16:01 +0200
                                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-09 10:39 -0700
                                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-09 10:00 -0700
                                                                  Dynamic adaptive resource management (was: PL/I advertising "Jack Myers" <jmyers@n6wuz.net> - 2016-06-09 08:45 -0700
                                                                    Re: Dynamic adaptive resource management (was: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-09 10:19 -0700
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-07 08:36 -0700
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 18:17 +0200
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-06 15:06 -0700
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 23:39 +0000
                                                              Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-07 10:05 +0000
                                                                Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-07 10:14 +0000
                                                                  Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-07 10:18 +0000
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-07 12:24 +0200
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:32 -0400
                                                              Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-07 22:41 +0000
                                                              Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-08 11:54 -0700
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:23 -0700
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-07 02:52 +0000
                                                Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-04 07:23 -0700
                                                Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:36 -0700
                                                Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 09:58 -0400
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 10:41 -0400
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 12:25 -0400
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-06 09:21 +0100
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 09:40 +0000
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 10:11 +0000
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 10:20 +0000
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 13:09 +0200
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 13:44 +0000
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-06 21:40 +0100
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 21:03 +0000
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 21:00 +0000
                                                              Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-08 06:08 +0100
                                                                Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 08:26 +0000
                                                                  Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-09 09:39 +0100
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:14 -0400
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-07 22:33 +0000
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 20:14 -0400
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 05:50 +0000
                                                              Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-09 07:33 +0100
                                                                Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-17 03:36 +0000
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 09:39 +0000
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-06 12:53 +0000
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 14:19 -0700
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-07 10:02 +0000
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-07 12:19 +0200
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 14:00 -0700
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:54 +0000
                                            Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-02 09:23 -0700
                                              Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-02 15:10 -0400
                                                Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-02 16:41 -0400
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-02 17:58 -0700
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-02 22:31 -0400
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-02 20:37 -0700
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 14:09 -0700
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-03 14:32 -0700
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:18 -0700
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-04 13:57 -0700
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-03 06:59 -0400
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-03 08:33 -0700
                                            Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-02 11:00 -0700
                                        Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
                                          Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
                                            Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
                                              Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
                                                Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
                                Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-01 12:59 +0000
                                  Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-01 17:43 +0000
                                    Re: PL/I advertising Michael LeVine <mlevinespmfltr@redshift.com> - 2016-06-01 13:35 -0700
                                      Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-02 08:13 +0100
                                        Re: PL/I advertising Michael LeVine <mlevinespmfltr@redshift.com> - 2016-06-02 02:13 -0700
                                          Re: PL/I advertising "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-24 11:30 +0100
                                            Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-24 17:55 +0000
                                              Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-24 20:21 -0500
                                                Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-24 18:26 -0700
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising isw <isw@witzend.com> - 2016-06-24 21:01 -0700
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-25 05:42 +0000
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-25 07:38 +0000
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-25 13:10 +0000
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-25 14:32 +0000
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-27 16:07 -0400
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-27 21:17 +0000
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-28 12:16 +0000
                                                              Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-28 08:39 -0400
                                                                Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-28 17:23 +0000
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-27 19:25 -0400
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-27 19:28 -0700
                                                              Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-27 23:16 -0400
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-25 07:24 -0500
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-25 07:45 -0700
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-25 08:02 -0700
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-27 16:12 -0400
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-28 12:16 +0000
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-28 10:35 -0700
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-28 14:27 -0400
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-28 12:04 -0700
                                                              Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-28 15:21 -0400
                                                                Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-28 21:13 -0700
                                                                  Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-29 12:49 +0000
                                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-29 08:25 -0700
                                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-29 08:33 -0700
                                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-29 17:42 -0700
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-25 07:31 -0400
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-25 07:02 -0500
                                                Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-25 12:12 +0200
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-25 13:10 +0000
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-25 16:28 +0200
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-26 13:10 +0000
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-27 15:40 -0700
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-28 12:16 +0000
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising Mike Causer <m.r.causer@goglemail.com> - 2016-06-28 22:40 +0100
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-28 22:49 +0000
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-28 20:25 -0500
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-29 10:08 +0000
                                                              Re: PL/I advertising Mike Causer <m.r.causer@goglemail.com> - 2016-06-29 19:27 +0100
                                                                Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-29 18:57 +0000
                                                                Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-29 17:52 -0400
                                                                  Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-29 23:04 +0000
                                                                Re: PL/I advertising mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-30 18:27 +0000
                                                  PDP-10 ZORK [was Re: PL/I advertising] Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-27 16:20 -0400
                                                    Re: PDP-10 ZORK [was Re: PL/I advertising] sidd@situ.com (sidd) - 2016-06-28 00:22 -0400
                                    Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-01 13:47 -0700
                                      Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-02 16:46 +0000
                                    Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-02 16:45 +0000
                                  Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-01 17:42 +0000
                                  Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-01 16:09 -0400
                                    Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-02 12:57 +0000
                                Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:57 +0000
                                  Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-02 15:17 -0400
                                    Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-02 20:44 +0000
                                    Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-02 13:51 -0700
                                      Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-02 22:16 -0400
                                    Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:43 +0000
                                  Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-02 20:24 +0000
                                    Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-02 13:48 -0700
                                      Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-02 20:53 +0000
                                      Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-03 13:25 +0000
                                    Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-03 07:50 +0100
                                      Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 10:36 +0000
                                        Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-03 11:38 +0100
                                          Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 11:25 +0000
                                            Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-03 21:10 +0100
                                          Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 11:28 +0000
                                            Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-03 12:59 +0100
                                            Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-03 05:44 -0700
                                          Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-03 05:40 -0700
                                    Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-03 10:16 +0200
                                      Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
                                        Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-03 07:37 -0700
                                          Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-03 17:16 +0100
                                            Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 17:38 +0000
                                              Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-04 06:16 +0100
                                                Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 07:12 +0000
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-04 08:52 +0100
                                              Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
                                                Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 14:06 +0000
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 14:46 +0000
                                          Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
                                            Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:03 +0200
                                        Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 08:25 -0400
                                          Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-05 17:50 +0000
                                          Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:39 -0700
                                      Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-03 13:30 +0000
                                    Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-03 13:27 +0000
                                    Re: PL/I advertising Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> - 2016-06-05 10:04 +0200
                                      Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 11:47 +0000
                                  Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-02 16:41 -0400
                                  Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 20:20 -0400
                                  Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-03 09:40 +0000
                                    Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
                                      Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 17:40 +0000
                                        Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-04 10:51 +0000
                                          Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-04 15:40 +0100
                                            Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 16:25 +0000
                                              Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-04 17:59 +0100
                                                Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 19:06 +0000
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-04 12:31 -0700
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 14:51 +0000
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 14:50 +0000
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-05 14:13 -0700
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:15 +0000
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-07 13:24 +0000
                                                Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 18:44 +0100
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:14 +0000
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 23:07 +0100
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 22:22 +0000
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:15 +0000
                                    Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-03 16:53 +0000
                                      Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-03 17:16 +0000
                                        Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 17:37 +0000
                                          Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 14:19 -0700
                                            Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 21:21 +0000
                                              Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-03 17:04 -0500
                                                Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-04 10:54 +0000
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 15:03 +0200
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-04 12:08 -0400
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-04 16:28 -0700
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-05 10:29 +0000
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 11:47 +0000
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 08:51 -0400
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 13:06 +0000
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 16:05 +0100
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 15:25 +0000
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 12:11 -0400
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:12 +0000
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-05 06:12 -0700
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 09:45 -0400
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-05 07:42 -0700
                                                              Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 13:24 -0400
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-05 10:01 -0700
                                                              Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 18:48 +0100
                                                              Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 14:29 -0400
                                                                Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-05 14:06 -0700
                                                                  Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
                                                                    Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-06 19:47 -0400
                                                                      Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
                                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-07 07:58 -0700
                                                              Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-06 09:30 +0100
                                                                Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-06 10:13 +0100
                                                                  Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 10:14 +0000
                                                                    Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-06 12:04 +0100
                                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 11:27 +0000
                                                                        Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-06 12:45 +0100
                                                                          Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 11:48 +0000
                                                                  Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 13:08 +0200
                                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 13:29 +0000
                                                                      Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-06 14:57 +0100
                                                                        Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:17 +0000
                                                                        Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 18:21 +0200
                                                                      Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-06 14:55 +0000
                                                                        Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:16 +0000
                                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-06 09:51 -0700
                                                                        Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:14 -0400
                                                                          Re: PL/I advertising Robert Swindells <rjs@fdy2.co.uk> - 2016-06-07 20:59 +0000
                                                                            Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-08 07:26 -0400
                                                                              Re: PL/I advertising Robert Swindells <rjs@fdy2.co.uk> - 2016-06-08 12:00 +0000
                                                                          Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-07 15:33 -0700
                                                                          Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-07 18:08 -0500
                                                                          Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-08 12:40 +0000
                                                                            Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-08 09:45 -0700
                                                                              Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-08 19:06 +0100
                                                                              Re: PL/I advertising JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 18:17 -0500
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:50 -0700
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-05 09:56 -0700
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-05 12:39 +0100
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-05 12:28 +0000
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 16:02 +0100
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-06 09:27 +0100
                                                Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:28 -0700
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 21:02 +0000
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-05 03:04 +0100
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-04 22:42 -0400
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 07:20 +0000
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:11 +0000
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-06 11:13 -0400
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 17:26 -0400
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:07 -0700
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-04 16:28 -0500
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-04 16:39 -0500
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 17:39 -0400
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-04 16:51 -0500
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 22:10 +0000
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 18:21 -0400
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 23:02 +0000
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-04 23:57 -0700
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 07:20 +0000
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-05 09:25 +0100
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
                                                Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 08:25 -0400
                                              Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
                                              Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:05 -0700
                                                Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 20:18 +0000
                                                Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 11:44 +0000
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-07 22:35 +0000
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 05:49 +0000
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-09 07:03 +0000
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-05 17:42 +0000
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:32 -0700
                                              Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 08:25 -0400
                                                Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 13:04 +0000
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 12:11 -0400
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:08 +0000
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-06 11:13 -0400
                                                        Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:13 +0000
                                                          Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-06 10:00 -0700
                                                            Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 18:42 +0000
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-05 17:53 -0400
                                                      Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-06 12:51 +0000
                                                Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:45 -0700
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:32 -0400
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-08 11:53 -0700
                                            Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 22:06 -0400
                                              Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:33 -0700
                                                Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-04 14:00 -0700
                                                Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 17:31 -0400
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-07 13:19 -0700
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-07 15:34 -0700
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-08 00:28 +0200
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 20:10 -0400
                                            Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-04 13:14 +0000
                                              Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 15:39 +0200
                                              Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:01 -0700
                                      Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-03 21:21 +0100
                                  Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-03 11:14 +0100
                                  Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
                                    Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-03 16:45 +0200
                                      Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-03 15:12 -0400
                                        Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-03 12:56 -0700
                                        Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
                                          Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:05 +0200
                                            Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
                                            Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
                                      Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
                                        Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:09 +0200
                                          Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
                                        Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-09 17:27 -0400
                                          Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-10 06:58 -0400
                                          Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-10 11:42 +0000
                                            Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-16 17:07 -0400
                                              Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-17 12:53 +0000
                                    Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
                                      Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
                                        Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
                              Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:52 +0000
                        Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-29 16:41 -0400
                          Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-29 23:44 -0700
                            Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-29 23:50 -0700
                        Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:26 +0000
                          Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-31 16:09 -0400
                          Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
                            Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-01 16:15 +0200
                              Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
                            Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
                              Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-01 13:49 -0700
                                Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 17:34 -0400
                              Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
                                Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:44 +0000
                                  Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 12:47 +0200
                                    Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
                                      Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:23 +0200
                                        Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
                                          Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-05 23:19 +0200
                                            Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
                                              Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 18:12 +0200
                                                Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
                                    Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
                                      Re: PL/I advertising Rob Doyle <radioengr@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 02:15 -0700
                                        Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
                      Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:25 +0000
                        Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-31 18:50 +0000
                          Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
                            Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
                              Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
                                Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-02 15:18 +0200
                                  Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 20:17 -0400
                                Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-02 16:54 +0000
                                  Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-02 16:41 -0400
                                    Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-02 22:20 +0000
                                  Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
                                  Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:44 +0000
                                    Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
                                      Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-04 14:08 +0000
                                        Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
                                          Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
                                            Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-08 12:09 +0000
                                              Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 08:26 +0000
                                                Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-17 03:36 +0000
                                      Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
                                Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 13:56 -0700
                                  Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
                              Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
                        Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-05-31 16:13 -0400
                          Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
                            Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
                              Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-02 16:41 -0400
                                Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-02 19:19 -0400
                                  Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
                                  Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:45 +0000
                                    Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
                                      Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
                                        Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
                                          Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
                                            Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-08 12:09 +0000
                                              Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 08:26 +0000
                                                Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
                                                  Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-17 03:37 +0000
                                                    Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-17 16:52 -0400
                                    Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-09 17:45 -0400
                                Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
                              Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
                                Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
                                  Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
                                    Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:56 +0000
                          Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
                        Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
                          Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
                            Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-02 19:21 -0400
                            Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
                              Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
                                Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
                                  Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:58 +0000
                    Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:18 -0400
                    Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:25 +0000
                      Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:52 +0000
                        Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
                  Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:25 +0000
                    Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
                      Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
                        Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
                        Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-02 09:41 -0700
                      Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
                        Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
                        Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
                          Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
                  Re: PL/I advertising Joe Chisolm <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> - 2016-05-31 13:37 -0500
                    Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-31 12:19 -0700
                      Re: PL/I advertising Joe Chisolm <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> - 2016-05-31 16:29 -0500
                        Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 07:04 -0400
                          Re: Penn Central PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-01 13:15 -0700
                            Re: Penn Central PL/I advertising "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-06-01 15:38 -0500
                              Re: Penn Central PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 13:44 -0700
                                Re: Penn Central PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-03 16:40 -0700
            Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-26 16:22 -0400
              Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-05-26 20:32 -0400
                Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-26 18:50 -0700
                  Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-27 11:01 +0200
                    Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-27 13:36 +0100
                  Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-05-27 15:33 +0000
                    Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-27 16:07 +0000
                      Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-05-27 19:20 +0000
                        Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-27 19:53 +0000
                          Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-27 20:55 +0000
                            Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:18 -0400
                              Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-28 20:25 +0000
                                Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-31 14:39 +0000
                            Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-31 14:37 +0000
                  Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-04 22:28 -0500
                Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-27 10:51 +0200
                  Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-27 06:56 -0400
                    Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-05-27 15:51 +0100
                    Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-27 20:25 +0200
                      Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:18 -0400
                  Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-27 05:43 -0700
                    Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:18 -0400
                      Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-29 05:28 -0700
                        Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-29 15:26 +0200
                        Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-29 11:50 -0400
                    Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-04 22:39 -0500
          Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-26 12:23 +0000
            Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-26 15:56 -0400
          Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-04 22:21 -0500
            Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-05 05:38 -0700
            Re: PL/I advertising "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-29 17:53 +0100
              Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-29 18:58 +0000
                Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-30 07:20 -0700
                  Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-30 14:27 +0000
                    Re: PL/I advertising "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-30 22:29 +0100
                      Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-30 22:22 +0000
        Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-25 15:03 -0700
          Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-25 15:07 -0700

Page 9 of 30 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 … 30  Next page →


#164778

From"J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com>
Date2016-06-07 20:14 -0400
Message-ID<MPG.31c12d89aa765cb98a22f@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#164743
In article <1103128578.486933494.507992.peter_flass-
yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>, peter_flass@yahoo.com says...
> 
> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> > On Sun, 5 Jun 2016 12:25:13 -0400
> > Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> The
> >> ideal is that you should be able to walk into an office with shared PCs,
> >> sit down at any of them, and instantly have "your" system available.  
> > 
> > 	How long ago was it that Xerox did exactly that ? You didn't even
> > have to log in.
> > 
> 
> Somewhat later IBM tried it with "Workspace on Demand" (WSOD), one final
> attempt to mKe OS/2 relevant.  I think it was aimed at their salesforce
> who, about then, were losing their desks and working mostly in the field or
> from home.
> 
> I still haven't figured out why this idea didn't become popular.

That was the intent of the Windows registry--there was a piece with the 
user specific, non-hardware-specific settings, another with the user-
specific, hardware-specific settings, another with the non-user-specific 
hardware-specific settings, and so on, so a user goes to a new machine, 
there's one file with all his settings that need to be applied to that 
machine, two if it is a match for the hardware on any other machine that 
he's used.  Conceptually it was brilliant.  But there was no mechanism 
for forcing developers to put their settings in the right locations and 
the while thing turned into a collosal mess.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#164832

Fromusenet@only.tnx (Questor)
Date2016-06-09 05:50 +0000
Message-ID<57590380.8547831@nntp2.rawbw.com>
In reply to#164778
On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 20:14:57 -0400, "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com>
wrote:
>In article <1103128578.486933494.507992.peter_flass-
>yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>, peter_flass@yahoo.com says...
>> 
>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> > On Sun, 5 Jun 2016 12:25:13 -0400
>> > Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> The
>> >> ideal is that you should be able to walk into an office with shared PCs,
>> >> sit down at any of them, and instantly have "your" system available.  
>> > 
>> > 	How long ago was it that Xerox did exactly that ? You didn't even
>> > have to log in.
>> Somewhat later IBM tried it with "Workspace on Demand" (WSOD), one final
>> attempt to mKe OS/2 relevant.  I think it was aimed at their salesforce
>> who, about then, were losing their desks and working mostly in the field or
>> from home.
>> 
>> I still haven't figured out why this idea didn't become popular.
>
>That was the intent of the Windows registry--there was a piece with the 
>user specific, non-hardware-specific settings, another with the user-
>specific, hardware-specific settings, another with the non-user-specific 
>hardware-specific settings, and so on, so a user goes to a new machine, 
>there's one file with all his settings that need to be applied to that 
>machine, two if it is a match for the hardware on any other machine that 
>he's used.  Conceptually it was brilliant.  But there was no mechanism 
>for forcing developers to put their settings in the right locations and 
>the while thing turned into a collosal mess.

I'm not sure that was the intent of the registry.  It isn't a simple text file,
so a specialized program is needed -- one that runs under Windows.  And
you don't want to make a mistake changing the registry, or you might well
brick the machine.  Many of the settings get read during startup, so for
all the changes to take effect you have to re-boot Windows.  That might be
an effective way to carry over preferences and settings if you're giving a user
a new machine, but it's not a practical solution to customize the environment
each time a different user sits down. 

I've never liked the registry.  It makes it harder to work on or repair Windows,
and it introduces its own problems.  I've worked at more than one company where
when serious problems with Windows arise, the preferred solution is to simply
re-image the machine rather than attempt to fix them.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#164833

FromAhem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
Date2016-06-09 07:33 +0100
Message-ID<20160609073358.40e27206d00bb1e9ed51e94f@eircom.net>
In reply to#164832
On Thu, 09 Jun 2016 05:50:12 GMT
usenet@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:

> I've worked at more than one company where
> when serious problems with Windows arise, the preferred solution is to
> simply re-image the machine rather than attempt to fix them.

	The three Rs of Windows problem solving Retry, Reboot, Reinstall.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN                                      | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#165368

Fromusenet@only.tnx (Questor)
Date2016-06-17 03:36 +0000
Message-ID<57637043.4985248@nntp2.rawbw.com>
In reply to#164833
On Thu, 9 Jun 2016 07:33:58 +0100, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
wrote:
>On Thu, 09 Jun 2016 05:50:12 GMT
>usenet@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:
>
>> I've worked at more than one company where
>> when serious problems with Windows arise, the preferred solution is to
>> simply re-image the machine rather than attempt to fix them.
>
>The three Rs of Windows problem solving Retry, Reboot, Reinstall.

In the early days (Windows 3.1), fixing a broken Windows installation was
easier, often through restoring a corrupted file or editing an .INI file.  This
was in large part due to it being still based on MS-DOS.  When Windows moved
away from this model with 9X and NT and Microsoft increasingly deprecated the
command line, it became harder to repair.  The fact that "safe mode" boots with
minimal graphics support and no networking indicates the many problems in those
areas.  In the early days of NT, I took a couple of the courses that are
supposed to prepare one for the MSCE exams.  Lots of modules about installing
and configuring the myriad of options; very little practical trouble-shooting.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#164645

FromHuge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid>
Date2016-06-06 09:39 +0000
Message-ID<drkuluF9h2tU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#164600
On 2016-06-05, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:

[58 lines snipped]

> You should be able to take out an old PC and drop in a new one in a few
> minutes with no disruption to the user. 

Good luck with that.

-- 
Today is Boomtime, the 11th day of Confusion in the YOLD 3182
                  I don't have an attitude problem.
    If you have a problem with my attitude, that's your problem.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#164658

Fromscott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
Date2016-06-06 12:53 +0000
Message-ID<Tme5z.2326$wy2.246@fx39.iad>
In reply to#164645
Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> writes:
>On 2016-06-05, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>[58 lines snipped]
>
>> You should be able to take out an old PC and drop in a new one in a few
>> minutes with no disruption to the user. 
>
>Good luck with that.

I can walk into any office in the building, log in to a workstation
and have my complete environment at my fingertips.   NIS + NFS.  Replacing
a workstation is effortless.   Of course, it's not windblows.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#164756

Fromusenet@only.tnx (Questor)
Date2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Message-ID<57573478.21052872@nntp2.rawbw.com>
In reply to#164600
On Sun, 5 Jun 2016 12:25:13 -0400, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>> In article <1452431295.486826780.164716.peter_flass-
>> yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>, peter_flass@yahoo.com says...
>>> 
>>> Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
>>>> On 2 Jun 2016 12:09:40 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>> DEC didn't.  When TOPS-10 was running, each and every user had
>>>>> the experience of having his/her own PC.  that is what
>>>>> timesharing is supposed to do.  If it wasn't for DEC's
>>>>> timesharing experience, the PC business would be much later.
>>>> 
>>>> I once attended a talk by Gorden Bell.  He related how his experience (and Ken
>>>> Olsen's) using the Whirlwind at MIT inspired them to create the PDP-1 and later
>>>> use the timesharing model on the PDP-10.  But even he wasn't delusional enough
>>>> to suggest that DEC was somehow responsible for bringing about the PC business.
>>>> That may be a comforting flight of fancy for you, but it has little basis in
>>>> reality.
>>>> 
>>>> DEC neither invented nor perfected timesharing.  I, like many thousands of
>>>> other people, wanted a computer before we even used one, let alone experienced
>>>> timesharing ala DEC.  Many of us even tried to build our own.  (Or in my case,
>>>> at least a piece of one.)  Thanks in part to Moore's Observation, there has been
>>>> a clear trend of building smaller, less expensive, yet more powerful computers.
>>>> In retrospect, the emergence of the PC seems inevitable.
>>>> 
>>>> If anything DEC retarded the PC business.  Ken Olsen famously underestimated the
>>>> desirability of the home computer.  Nor did they foresee the popularity of PCs
>>>> in business.  DEC didn't lead that market, they trailed it.  Then they tried to
>>>> play catch-up and failed.  And it did nothing to advance that business by
>>>> pushing its vision of timesharing into the 1980s.
>>>> 
>>>> At best, DEC is but one thread in a tapestry -- and its a thread that the
>>>> founders tried unsuccessfully to snip.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> For many reasons I think use of PCs in business was a bad choice.  It's led
>>> to uncontrolled use of spreadsheets written by amateurs for critical
>>> applications.  It's greatly helped the spread of viruses.  It's led to a
>>> constant cycle of churning replacing equipment, patching software, and
>>> installing new and often incompatible versions.
>>> 
>>> A lot of hype about the cloud is all about trying to reverse some of  this
>>> mess with everyone running software installed and maintained once on the
>>> cloud.
>> 
>> Using "the cloud" doesn't prevent any of that "churning"--you still need 
>> a PC to use the cloud (unless of course you are going to tell your data 
>> analysts who currently have four screens or more to do it all on their 
>> cell phones).
>> 
>> Those "amateurs" are often experts at some field other than programming 
>> who became frustrated at the inability of the IT department to deliver 
>> code that did what they needed when they needed it.  How does the cloud 
>> address this?  The cloud still depends on somebody writing the code to 
>> do whatever is needed and if the in-house IT department isn't adequately 
>> responsive why would a third-party IT department do any better?
>> 
>
>You should be able to take out an old PC and drop in a new one in a few
>minutes with no disruption to the user.  In addition to data and
>applications stored remotely the user's desktop should be elsewehere.  The
>ideal is that you should be able to walk into an office with shared PCs,
>sit down at any of them, and instantly have "your" system available.  
>
>I haven't kept up, so I don't know how closely current systems correspond
>to this model.  The PC would function similar to a Xterm.

Given that premise, why use a PC?  Why not a diskless workstation, or an
actual Xterm?

I've worked at several companies that did implement most of your suggestion,
but there are many potential flies in the ointment.

One large, well-known tech company with tens of thousands of employees was
planning a migration from Windows to Windows NT.  They identified over fifty
different user groups, each of which required a different mix of applications.
There were hundreds of different applications in use across the whole company.

Some third-party applications can be run over a network; some can't.  Some can,
but they still need certain .DLLs installed locally.  That opens up the issue of
DLL conflicts and version skews.  And most applications store their settings and
preferences locally.  When that used to be done almost exclusively in .INI
files, some clever network login scripting could take care of it.  But in later
versions of Windows, applications put those items in the Registry.

The roots of the PC as a standalone, single-user machine still result in plenty
of "gotchas" even as the enterprise computing model has returned to networked,
centrally-administered computers.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#164611

FromCharlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
Date2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
Message-ID<nj1o203no0@news6.newsguy.com>
In reply to#164568
On 2016-06-05, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:

> For many reasons I think use of PCs in business was a bad choice.  It's
> led to uncontrolled use of spreadsheets written by amateurs for critical
> applications.  It's greatly helped the spread of viruses.  It's led to a
> constant cycle of churning replacing equipment, patching software, and
> installing new and often incompatible versions.

In other words, nirvana for virus writers, security consultants, and
hardware and software manufacturers and salesdroids.  If you're one
of them, what's not to like?

> A lot of hype about the cloud is all about trying to reverse some of this
> mess with everyone running software installed and maintained once on the
> cloud.

Nirvana for those controlling the cloud.

-- 
/~\  cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ /  I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
 X   Top-posted messages will probably be ignored.  See RFC1855.
/ \  HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored.  Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#164712

Fromhancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Date2016-06-06 14:19 -0700
Message-ID<0b8d9e07-41c7-490a-9d6c-ed6116631e37@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#164611
On Sunday, June 5, 2016 at 1:36:06 PM UTC-4, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

> In other words, nirvana for virus writers, security consultants, and
> hardware and software manufacturers and salesdroids.  If you're one
> of them, what's not to like?

For reasons I simply do not understand, when the PC came out, it
became an _emotional_ thing for its users, far more than just a tool.

In the old days, people bragged about the model of their car and
the engine size and horsepower.  In the early PC days, people bragged
about their machine size and CPU type.  People spent big bucks to be
the first on their block with the newest CPU, regardless of what
work they wanted to get done with it.  The convenience stores sold
a variety of PC magazines next to the TV Guide and Enquirer.

The PC industry of course loved that, encouraged it, and has been
milking it ever since.  There are no whimpers about old PC software
failing to run on a newer machine; indeed, other users will criticize
you if your hardware or software is old.  

In contrast, in the mainframe world we routinely run old programs,
and sometimes extremely old programs.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#164721

FromHuge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid>
Date2016-06-07 10:02 +0000
Message-ID<drnke6FptbrU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#164712
On 2016-06-06, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, June 5, 2016 at 1:36:06 PM UTC-4, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> In other words, nirvana for virus writers, security consultants, and
>> hardware and software manufacturers and salesdroids.  If you're one
>> of them, what's not to like?
>
> For reasons I simply do not understand, when the PC came out, it
> became an _emotional_ thing for its users, far more than just a tool.

It has peed me off for some time that users at work refer to the
machine on the desk as "their" PC. It's not *their* PC - it belongs
to their employers. So, no, you may not install games & other shit on it,
use it to access Farcebook & Twatter and generally fuck with it in ways
of which your employer does not approve.


-- 
Today is Pungenday, the 12th day of Confusion in the YOLD 3182
                  I don't have an attitude problem.
    If you have a problem with my attitude, that's your problem.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#164731

Fromjmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Message-ID<PM000534AE83640923@aca202b4.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to#164712
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Sunday, June 5, 2016 at 1:36:06 PM UTC-4, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> In other words, nirvana for virus writers, security consultants, and
>> hardware and software manufacturers and salesdroids.  If you're one
>> of them, what's not to like?
>
> For reasons I simply do not understand, when the PC came out, it
> became an _emotional_ thing for its users, far more than just a tool.

That wasn't new.  TOPS-10 users got attached to their machines, too.

A TOPS-10 system was going to be scrapped at a a university; this
was around 1985.  I was sent the last GRIPE file which had
many, many entries written by users saying goodbye to the PDP-10.
I read it at a TOPS-10 monitor meeting and could not stop weeping.
Even the manly males were weeping by the time I read the last one.
I don't know if the GRIPEs are on the net but it's a good read if
you can find it.

/BAH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#164735

FromMorten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid>
Date2016-06-07 12:19 +0200
Message-ID<enji2d-2j1.ln1@sambook.reistad.name>
In reply to#164712
In article <0b8d9e07-41c7-490a-9d6c-ed6116631e37@googlegroups.com>,
 <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>On Sunday, June 5, 2016 at 1:36:06 PM UTC-4, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> In other words, nirvana for virus writers, security consultants, and
>> hardware and software manufacturers and salesdroids.  If you're one
>> of them, what's not to like?
>
>For reasons I simply do not understand, when the PC came out, it
>became an _emotional_ thing for its users, far more than just a tool.
[snip, new is better etc]

>In contrast, in the mainframe world we routinely run old programs,
>and sometimes extremely old programs.

On *n*x too. I regularly run 30 year old programs that I wrote, or
co-wrote.

-- mrr

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#164709

Fromhancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Date2016-06-06 14:00 -0700
Message-ID<2b6fab24-e88e-499e-b86f-503a186e3f0f@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#164568
On Sunday, June 5, 2016 at 9:58:16 AM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:

> For many reasons I think use of PCs in business was a bad choice.  It's led
> to uncontrolled use of spreadsheets written by amateurs for critical
> applications.  It's greatly helped the spread of viruses.  It's led to a
> constant cycle of churning replacing equipment, patching software, and
> installing new and often incompatible versions.
 
> A lot of hype about the cloud is all about trying to reverse some of  this
> mess with everyone running software installed and maintained once on the
> cloud.

While I agree there are the problems you mention, I think the
economics of the PC were an extremely powerful inducement.

Before PC's, a lot of small applications were either done by hand
or as secondary runs on the company's mainframe.  The cost of
custom developing a small application wasn't often justified for
the limited volume of transactions.

However, the PC brought along easy-to-use canned products, such
as spreadsheets and databases as well as specialty products.  
That allowed end users to do a lot of their own work far more cost 
effectively than the data processing department.   

In addition, the PC also doubled as a word processing, email
unit, and mainframe terminal, all of which were of value.

However, I do think PCs, via Windows, became _too_ automated,
allowing viruses and other problems to emerge.  Also, the
PC industry was brilliant, just like GM, in having planning
obsolescence and encouraging customers to scrap their PCs far
too soon.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#164755

Fromusenet@only.tnx (Questor)
Date2016-06-07 20:54 +0000
Message-ID<57573430.20981129@nntp2.rawbw.com>
In reply to#164568
On Sun, 5 Jun 2016 09:58:15 -0400, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>For many reasons I think use of PCs in business was a bad choice.  

I don't see those problems as being a result of PCs.


>It's led to uncontrolled use of spreadsheets written by amateurs for critical
>applications.  

Mis-use of data will occur whether it is on one person's PC, the departmental
mini, or the corporate mainframe.  ("If you torture the data long enough, it
will confess to anything.")  I think those tools would have emerged regardless
of the platform.


>It's greatly helped the spread of viruses.

One of many examples of the PC world failing to learn the lessons already
learned from mainframes and minicomputers, specifically protecting from
malicious (or incompetent) actors.  It also stems from the PCs origins as a
standalone, single user machine.


>It's led to a
>constant cycle of churning replacing equipment, patching software, and
>installing new and often incompatible versions.

I do not see this as a PC issue per se.  The computer industry seems to have
hypnotized their customers into getting onto the never-ending upgrade treadmill.
Once you get on, it is difficult to envision that there is any way to get off
it.


>A lot of hype about the cloud is all about trying to reverse some of  this
>mess with everyone running software installed and maintained once on the
>cloud.

As others have pointed out, the PC revolution was in large part about
individuals gaining total control of their data and computing.  Now the trend
has turned the other way, as many people don't really care, and/or don't want
the responsibility of doing everything themselves.  And perceived convenience,
which often precludes all other considerations.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#164324

FromAnne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Date2016-06-02 09:23 -0700
Message-ID<87wpm7tv8n.fsf@garlic.com>
In reply to#164304
David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> writes:
> IBM already had VM/CMS since 1972 (and CP/67 before) which had no
> Batch. It is a pure personal computing environment. You could do
> single step debugging of your OS, patch the OS, most anything. Much
> closer to a modern personal computing environment than anything DEC
> offered except perhaps stand-alone PDP-11's.
>
> The trouble is that as such it removes control from Central IT/DP
> departments. IBM's marketing was top-down. They sold to the
> board. They wanted to sell control. VM/CMS didn't fit that model BUT
> PROFS runs in VM/CMS so they needed it for PROFS.
>
> DEC's marketing was "bottom up", they sold to the techy people, the
> designers and innovators. For them it was natural.
>
> Of course when the PC came along I don't think either camp realized
> how paradigm changing it was.
>
> In summary I think to look at IBM as a monolith selling MVS is very
> narrow minded. It had many divisions and sold many things. I remember
> when I first used an IBM phone system on one of the IBM1800 based
> "PABX's" it sold in the UK I was awestruck at the facilities available
> compared to the ones I had been used to.
>
> The selectric typewriter with exchangeable fonts is a work of
> mechanical genius.
>
> Its a pity about the "light pen" a mouse is much easier to use, but
> perhaps touch screens and gestures are a similar paradigm...
>
> .. but of course the sadest thing of all is that DEC rejected the idea
> of a personal computer, when really that was what they had built their
> business on...

re:
http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#35 PL/I advertising
http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#41 PL/I advertising

PROFS trivia ... the group gathered a bunch of stuff internal inside IBM
... including a very early version of the internal VMSG. Later when the
VMSG author attempted to offer them a much enhanced version ... they
tried to get him terminated (since they had already taken credit for
it). Everything quieted down when he demonstrated that every PROFS email
in the world carried his initials in a non-displayed field. After that,
the VMSG author only shared the source with me and one other person.

as previously mentioned the technology used for the internal network
(developed at the ibm cambridge science center ... along with virtual
machine cp67/cms and other stuff) was also used for the corporate
sponsored BITNET (and EARN in europe). From just about the beginning
the internal network was larger than arpanet/internet from just
about the beginning until sometime in the mid-80s
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#internalnet
and BITNET/EARN was also larger than internet for some time
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#bitnet
bitnet(/earn)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BITNET

-- 
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#164345

FromDan Espen <despen@verizon.net>
Date2016-06-02 15:10 -0400
Message-ID<niq0bn$s5e$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#164324
Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> writes:
> PROFS trivia ... the group gathered a bunch of stuff internal inside IBM
> ... including a very early version of the internal VMSG. Later when the
> VMSG author attempted to offer them a much enhanced version ... they
> tried to get him terminated (since they had already taken credit for
> it). Everything quieted down when he demonstrated that every PROFS email
> in the world carried his initials in a non-displayed field. After that,
> the VMSG author only shared the source with me and one other person.

What a dysfunctional company.
Their software shows it.

-- 
Dan Espen

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#164353

FromPeter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com>
Date2016-06-02 16:41 -0400
Message-ID<1588316387.486592373.026043.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#164345
Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote:
> Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> writes:
>> PROFS trivia ... the group gathered a bunch of stuff internal inside IBM
>> ... including a very early version of the internal VMSG. Later when the
>> VMSG author attempted to offer them a much enhanced version ... they
>> tried to get him terminated (since they had already taken credit for
>> it). Everything quieted down when he demonstrated that every PROFS email
>> in the world carried his initials in a non-displayed field. After that,
>> the VMSG author only shared the source with me and one other person.
> 
> What a dysfunctional company.
> Their software shows it.
> 

Some is very good (JES2), and a lot is very, very bad.

-- 
Pete

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#164374

FromAnne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Date2016-06-02 17:58 -0700
Message-ID<87twhbozph.fsf@garlic.com>
In reply to#164353
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
> Some is very good (JES2), and a lot is very, very bad.

re:
http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#35 PL/I advertising
http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#41 PL/I advertising
http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#43 PL/I advertising
http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#44 PL/I advertising
http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#45 PL/I advertising

we use to have a joke about really good products had originally been
developed at datacenter ... frequently customer datacenters ... but also
some internal datacenters (like ibm cambridge science center) ... before
being turned over to type-1 development group for maintenance. JES2
started out before being renamed (JES2 messages can still have their
HASP ids).

posts mentioning HASP, JES, NJE/NJI
http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#hasp

Original HASP networking support use to have letters "TUCC" in cols
68-71.  It did have a problem, nodeid definitions used empty entries in
the 255 HASP table (not occupied by psuedo device definitions) ... which
tended limited a HASP to around 160 node definitions. It also intermixed
network information in the header with job control information ... this
resulted in HASP/JES systems at one release level would crash a HASP/JES
at a different release level (with slightly different header format),
which would also bring down the OS360/MVS operating system.

The networking support from the IBM cambridge science center had
none of those problems
http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#545tech

The cambridge software was also well layered ... so it was easily
possible to write drivers that talked to other systems ... including
JES/NJI. This was in large part responsible for the internal network
passing 255 nodes early on (a JES node with 160 node limit also had
shortcoming that it would trashcan any traffic where it didn't have
table entry for either the origin node or the destination node ... so
internal network had to relegate HASP/JES to boundary nodes).

Eventually there was a large library of internal NJI VNET/RSCS drivers
to help keep MVS system systems from crashing. The VNET/RSCS drivers had
custom code to reformat JES headers to the format specificly required by
the (boundary node) MVS/JES system that was on the other end of the
wire. Even internal locations that were strictly MVS/JES ... would still
have gateway VM370/RSCS node for networking ... to get around problem of
having to keep all MVS/JES systems in the local area always at the same
exact release level.

There was one other issue which almost prevented JES2 from ever shipping
its NJI networking support. After 23Jun1969 unbundling announcement, it
required (application) software to be charged for. Pricing requirements
was that price charged per copy had to cover the infrastructure costs
for that copy plust the aggregate number of sales had to cover the
original development costs. Lots of IBM operations had hard time
adapting to the requirement. Typically IBM did three price (low, medium
and low) customer forecasts with the forecasted size times the price had
to also cover the original development costs. It turns out JES2
networking (and other os360/MVS products) had no price forecast that met
the requirements.

On the other hand ... the strategic IBM direction was heading in the
direction that vm370 should be killed and no new products could be
announced. However, the JES2 group did some slight of hand bookkeeping,
it turns out that the legal requirement allowed that organization meet
the requirement. VM370/RSCS networking could be announced at $30/month
and still meet the requirements (but that was never going to happen
because of efforts trying to kill off VM370 product). However, a merged
MVS/JES network with VM370/RSCS networking could be announced for
something like $600/month/copy (in effect, the excess profit made off
the VM370/RSCS customers would subsidize JES networking).

As an aside, eventually in the 80s, JES2 networking was enhanced to
support up to 999 nodes (instead of the empty slots left over in the
255 entry psuedo device table) ... but by that time, the internal
network had already passed 1000 nodes.
http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#internalnet


-- 
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#164376

FromDan Espen <despen@verizon.net>
Date2016-06-02 22:31 -0400
Message-ID<niqq6i$as1$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#164353
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:

> Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote:
>> Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> writes:
>>> PROFS trivia ... the group gathered a bunch of stuff internal inside IBM
>>> ... including a very early version of the internal VMSG. Later when the
>>> VMSG author attempted to offer them a much enhanced version ... they
>>> tried to get him terminated (since they had already taken credit for
>>> it). Everything quieted down when he demonstrated that every PROFS email
>>> in the world carried his initials in a non-displayed field. After that,
>>> the VMSG author only shared the source with me and one other person.
>> 
>> What a dysfunctional company.
>> Their software shows it.
>> 
>
> Some is very good (JES2), and a lot is very, very bad.

Can't think of anything good about JES2.

Clearly, IBM has too many meetings when developing large
software products.
They could use less corporate mindset and more pride of
work.

On the other hand, the software on the IBM System 34 was
first rate.


-- 
Dan Espen

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#164379

FromQuadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
Date2016-06-02 20:37 -0700
Message-ID<4a7e9a3d-2ad6-4aa1-98f9-c2fd820f380e@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#164376
On Thursday, June 2, 2016 at 8:31:47 PM UTC-6, D_J_E wrote:

> Clearly, IBM has too many meetings when developing large
> software products.
> They could use less corporate mindset and more pride of
> work.

No doubt this also applied to hardware projects. In the past; I don't think 
today's IBM is the same as yesterday's IBM.

"Less corporate mindset and more pride of work" would have allowed IBM avoid 
being beaten by "34 people, including the janitor" when the 6600 came out.

However, to be fair, the 6600 apparently did have reliability problems, and 
thus IBM would have had to put a few more staff on their project to get a 
product with which they would be willing to be associated.

John Savard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 9 of 30 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 … 30  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers


csiph-web