Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #118044 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-09-09 00:32 +0200 |
| Last post | 2018-09-09 23:54 +0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 287 — 26 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system
No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2018-09-09 00:32 +0200
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2018-09-09 17:19 +1200
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-09-09 11:26 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2018-11-06 09:14 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-06 23:23 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-09-09 18:17 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-09 11:50 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server anon <noreply@mixnym.net> - 2018-09-10 15:26 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-10 13:34 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-10 16:39 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-10 17:34 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server anon <noreply@mixnym.net> - 2018-09-10 16:56 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2018-09-11 13:34 +1200
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-10 18:39 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2018-09-11 16:35 +1200
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-11 06:51 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2018-09-12 08:41 +1200
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-11 14:42 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Rene Lamontagne <rlamont@shaw.ca> - 2018-09-11 16:51 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-11 14:55 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-11 06:21 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2018-09-12 08:46 +1200
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-11 14:47 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2018-09-12 13:47 +1200
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-12 06:51 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2018-11-06 09:21 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Mark Lloyd <not@mail.invalid> - 2018-11-06 10:48 -0600
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-06 11:59 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server anon <noreply@mixnym.net> - 2018-09-10 20:39 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2018-09-10 23:20 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2018-09-11 16:30 +1200
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-11 14:59 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server ANTant@zimage.com (Ant) - 2018-09-11 17:08 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-12 00:28 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server ANTant@zimage.com (Ant) - 2018-09-11 20:46 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2018-09-12 18:17 +1200
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server ANTant@zimage.com (Ant) - 2018-09-12 19:34 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-13 13:59 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server ANTant@zimage.com (Ant) - 2018-09-13 16:57 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-13 22:39 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Elden <usenet@moondog.org> - 2018-09-14 20:13 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2018-09-15 11:54 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-09-15 08:41 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-15 16:04 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-15 15:55 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2018-11-06 09:24 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server "John Varela" <newlamps@verizon.net> - 2018-11-06 15:53 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-06 12:29 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-06 12:34 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-06 12:51 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-06 12:55 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-06 13:35 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-11-06 11:17 -0800
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-06 17:51 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-11-06 15:05 -0800
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-06 20:00 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-11-06 17:29 -0800
OT: About OS/2 (Was:Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server) Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-07 09:16 -0500
Re: OT: About OS/2 (Was:Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server) SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-07 09:58 -0500
Re: OT: About OS/2 Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-09 19:07 +0000
Re: OT: About OS/2 Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 14:25 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nobody <nobodysaysitalldoesntit@nobo.org> - 2018-11-06 18:14 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-06 20:01 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2018-11-06 19:06 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-06 14:13 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server "John Varela" <newlamps@verizon.net> - 2018-11-07 18:58 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-07 18:04 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Leonard Blaisdell <leoblaisdell@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-07 17:13 -0800
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Dave Yeo <dave.r.yeo@gmail.com> - 2018-11-08 14:58 -0800
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-08 21:19 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-08 21:25 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-07 09:25 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-07 09:33 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-07 10:44 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-07 11:13 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-11-07 08:43 -0800
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-07 11:46 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-07 11:51 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-07 12:05 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-07 12:36 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-07 13:11 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-07 12:41 -0600
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-07 14:23 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 00:33 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-08 09:20 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 10:49 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-11-08 10:13 -0800
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 07:45 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-08 14:12 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 14:22 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 13:22 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 16:30 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 19:00 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 21:52 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 20:10 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 22:16 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 20:18 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-08 21:09 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-11-08 10:06 -0800
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-08 15:00 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-11-08 12:37 -0800
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-08 19:08 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-11-08 16:19 -0800
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 21:52 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 14:31 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-11-09 11:56 -0800
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 15:51 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-09 17:11 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 19:25 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 21:52 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 16:30 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-08 21:12 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-07 17:46 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 00:33 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-08 08:58 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 10:49 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-08 21:03 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 21:52 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-08 22:13 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 20:22 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 20:06 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 22:19 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-09 21:29 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-10 08:38 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-10 09:53 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-10 11:13 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-07 14:19 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-07 13:51 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 00:33 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 07:47 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 10:49 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 09:15 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 11:57 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 11:09 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 13:23 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 12:14 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-11-08 10:10 -0800
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 00:33 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-08 08:48 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-08 09:33 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 10:49 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 11:56 -0600
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 13:23 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-08 21:07 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 21:52 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-08 22:06 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 20:11 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 22:19 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 20:32 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-09 09:54 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-09 11:48 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-09 11:45 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-09 21:35 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-09 12:01 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-09 21:33 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-09 15:13 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-09 22:19 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-09 15:23 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-09 22:29 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-09 15:46 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-09 23:27 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-09 16:50 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-10 00:19 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-09 21:29 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-10 09:40 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-10 11:17 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-09 17:59 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 15:09 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-09 15:20 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 19:41 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-10 00:51 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 21:30 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-10 18:14 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-10 11:17 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-10 18:27 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-09 21:26 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-10 18:22 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-10 18:56 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-11 12:09 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-11 16:08 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-11 16:38 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-11 17:26 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-11 18:01 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-11 11:30 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-11 18:53 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-11 12:54 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-11 21:03 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-11 14:52 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-11 22:26 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-11 15:39 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-11 19:26 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-12 02:43 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-11 20:45 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-11 20:43 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-12 09:03 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-12 12:08 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-12 13:40 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-12 18:33 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-13 08:53 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-12 16:35 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-12 14:22 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-12 22:00 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-13 08:51 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-13 23:49 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-13 19:51 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-15 13:22 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-15 09:27 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-15 16:35 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-15 12:09 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-15 17:17 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-15 12:49 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-15 18:01 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-15 13:23 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-15 18:36 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-15 19:01 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-15 14:32 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-15 19:47 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-15 15:52 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-15 21:09 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-15 20:02 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-15 13:49 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-10 09:48 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-10 11:16 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-10 18:20 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-10 18:57 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-11 09:06 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-11 17:11 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-11 17:26 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-09 21:27 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 14:57 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-09 15:21 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-08 14:57 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Rene Lamontagne <rlamont@shaw.ca> - 2018-11-08 15:05 -0600
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 16:30 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Rene Lamontagne <rlamont@shaw.ca> - 2018-11-08 15:35 -0600
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-08 19:09 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-09 14:35 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 16:30 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-08 14:50 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 14:23 -0600
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 16:30 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-08 19:02 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 19:04 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 16:30 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-08 19:39 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 21:52 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 14:50 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> - 2018-11-09 13:19 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-09 17:11 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-09 17:11 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 19:38 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-09 20:08 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 21:33 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-09 22:22 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-10 10:02 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-10 13:55 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 19:47 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-09 20:08 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 21:45 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-09 22:22 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-09 14:53 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-09 10:20 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-09 09:29 -0600
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 15:13 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-08 20:56 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 10:49 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-08 20:57 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-08 09:05 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-11-08 12:35 -0800
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 16:30 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 18:56 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 21:52 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 20:11 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-07 12:41 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-07 13:11 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-07 11:47 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-07 12:31 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-07 13:11 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-07 14:31 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 00:33 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-08 09:11 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-07 17:55 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 00:33 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-12 16:11 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2018-09-12 14:10 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-12 18:35 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 23:54 +0800
Page 3 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 15 Next page →
| From | Elden <usenet@moondog.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-14 20:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <73topd94fh9e33066gt9duunitp50idkoj@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #118139 |
On Thu, 13 Sep 2018 22:39:09 GMT, SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> wrote: >I don't think anything else of significance has ever been called OS2 >though so both refer to the same operating system, methinks. > >My exposure to OS/2 was fairly limited as I only used it on shoddy >hardware and didn't do much with it but Peter Köhlmann around here in >comp.os.linux.advocacy seems to have very fond memories of it despite its >marketplace failure. I used to run a BBS system on OS/2 back when other sysops were using relatively inferior operating systems. One guy in the area ran a board on an Amiga. (and no, that one may not have been inferior) OS/2 was cool. It ran 16-bit Windows apps better than Windows did. But when Windows 95 came out and 32-bit Windows apps started appearing... I think it was the inability of OS/2 to run the 32-bit apps that may have been the end. -- -=Elden=-
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-15 11:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnpppsnn.qn2.g.kreme@jaka.local> |
| In reply to | #118152 |
In message <73topd94fh9e33066gt9duunitp50idkoj@4ax.com> Elden <usenet@moondog.org> wrote: > On Thu, 13 Sep 2018 22:39:09 GMT, SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> wrote: >>I don't think anything else of significance has ever been called OS2 >>though so both refer to the same operating system, methinks. >> >>My exposure to OS/2 was fairly limited as I only used it on shoddy >>hardware and didn't do much with it but Peter Köhlmann around here in >>comp.os.linux.advocacy seems to have very fond memories of it despite its >>marketplace failure. > I used to run a BBS system on OS/2 back when other sysops were using > relatively inferior operating systems. One guy in the area ran a board > on an Amiga. (and no, that one may not have been inferior) > OS/2 was cool. It ran 16-bit Windows apps better than Windows did. But > when Windows 95 came out and 32-bit Windows apps started appearing... > I think it was the inability of OS/2 to run the 32-bit apps that may > have been the end. OS/2 was brilliant at the time, and the history of its "failure" (not a failure, more sabotage) is an interesting footnote in computer history. The ideas behind its design are the same as how various flavors of desktop Linux are still designed, and also basically how macOS (née OS X) is designed, with a command-line under the GUI After screwing over OS/2, Microsoft used a lot of those ideas for securing Windows NT, which then evolved into Windows 2000, XP, 7, and even Windows 10. (Windows 2000 was NT 5.0 and XP was NT 5.1, Vista was NT 6.0 and, confusingly, Windows 7 was NT 6.1. Windows 8 was NT 6.2 and then they reset everything with Windows 10 (NT 10.0). -- Why is it so damn hot in here, and why are we all in a handbasket?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-15 08:41 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <V57nD.65113$oM2.5257@fx07.iad> |
| In reply to | #118154 |
On 2018-09-15 07:54, Lewis wrote: > In message <73topd94fh9e33066gt9duunitp50idkoj@4ax.com> Elden <usenet@moondog.org> wrote: >> On Thu, 13 Sep 2018 22:39:09 GMT, SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> wrote: > >>> I don't think anything else of significance has ever been called OS2 >>> though so both refer to the same operating system, methinks. >>> >>> My exposure to OS/2 was fairly limited as I only used it on shoddy >>> hardware and didn't do much with it but Peter Köhlmann around here in >>> comp.os.linux.advocacy seems to have very fond memories of it despite its >>> marketplace failure. > >> I used to run a BBS system on OS/2 back when other sysops were using >> relatively inferior operating systems. One guy in the area ran a board >> on an Amiga. (and no, that one may not have been inferior) > >> OS/2 was cool. It ran 16-bit Windows apps better than Windows did. But >> when Windows 95 came out and 32-bit Windows apps started appearing... >> I think it was the inability of OS/2 to run the 32-bit apps that may >> have been the end. > > OS/2 was brilliant at the time, and the history of its "failure" (not a > failure, more sabotage) is an interesting footnote in computer history. >[...] +1 -- Wolf K kirkwood40.blogspot.com Complexity is not a condition to be tamed, but a lesson to be learned. (James Bridley, 2018)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-15 16:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <R3anD.19888$mJ1.14197@fx24.iad> |
| In reply to | #118154 |
On Sat, 15 Sep 2018 11:54:31 +0000, Lewis wrote: > In message <73topd94fh9e33066gt9duunitp50idkoj@4ax.com> Elden > <usenet@moondog.org> wrote: >> On Thu, 13 Sep 2018 22:39:09 GMT, SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> wrote: > >>>I don't think anything else of significance has ever been called OS2 >>>though so both refer to the same operating system, methinks. >>> >>>My exposure to OS/2 was fairly limited as I only used it on shoddy >>>hardware and didn't do much with it but Peter Köhlmann around here in >>>comp.os.linux.advocacy seems to have very fond memories of it despite >>>its marketplace failure. > >> I used to run a BBS system on OS/2 back when other sysops were using >> relatively inferior operating systems. One guy in the area ran a board >> on an Amiga. (and no, that one may not have been inferior) > >> OS/2 was cool. It ran 16-bit Windows apps better than Windows did. But >> when Windows 95 came out and 32-bit Windows apps started appearing... I >> think it was the inability of OS/2 to run the 32-bit apps that may have >> been the end. > > OS/2 was brilliant at the time, and the history of its "failure" (not a > failure, more sabotage) is an interesting footnote in computer history. > > The ideas behind its design are the same as how various flavors of > desktop Linux are still designed, and also basically how macOS (née OS > X) is designed, with a command-line under the GUI > > After screwing over OS/2, Microsoft used a lot of those ideas for > securing Windows NT, which then evolved into Windows 2000, XP, 7, and > even Windows 10. > > (Windows 2000 was NT 5.0 and XP was NT 5.1, Vista was NT 6.0 and, > confusingly, Windows 7 was NT 6.1. Windows 8 was NT 6.2 and then they > reset everything with Windows 10 (NT 10.0). I kind of feel bad for IBM trusting Microsoft the way that they did. They should have known that the guys at the helm (particularly Gates) could not be trusted and that they had their own agenda. Had OS/2 become as important as IBM expected it to, they could have remained a gigantic player in the desktop computing field regardless of the fact that they lost their hold on the hardware. Instead, they lost both hardware (despite their efforts to lock it down) and software and was already irrelevant by around 1996. Does anyone else ever imagine what today's computing would have been like had their BIOS never been reverse-engineered and the third-parties never taken IBM's authority away from the PC platform? -- SilverSlimer FSF Contributor / EFF Member / Free speech advocate Absolute centrist, proud Catholic
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-15 15:55 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <oX9nD.19886$mJ1.3025@fx24.iad> |
| In reply to | #118152 |
On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 20:13:15 -0700, Elden wrote: > On Thu, 13 Sep 2018 22:39:09 GMT, SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> wrote: > >>I don't think anything else of significance has ever been called OS2 >>though so both refer to the same operating system, methinks. >> >>My exposure to OS/2 was fairly limited as I only used it on shoddy >>hardware and didn't do much with it but Peter Köhlmann around here in >>comp.os.linux.advocacy seems to have very fond memories of it despite >>its marketplace failure. > > I used to run a BBS system on OS/2 back when other sysops were using > relatively inferior operating systems. If I remember correctly, most BBSs I connected to back in the day (I started late in 1991 on a 2400 baud modem and Microsoft Works of all things to connect... discovered Telix a little later) seemed to use Desqview. I couldn't imagine anyone setting up a computer JUST to run a BBS though considering how expensive hardware was back then. > One guy in the area ran a board > on an Amiga. (and no, that one may not have been inferior) I recall connecting to an Amiga BBS at some point when I truly knew nothing about platform differences. What I remember was that they used .lzh (if I remember correctly) for compression of their downloadable programs and that the text colours were all off. > OS/2 was cool. It ran 16-bit Windows apps better than Windows did. But > when Windows 95 came out and 32-bit Windows apps started appearing... I > think it was the inability of OS/2 to run the 32-bit apps that may have > been the end. The fact that OS/2 also lacked any kind of useful software out of the box didn't help. While Windows 3.1 and 95 offered you a rudimentary word processor, calendar and Internet connectivity software, most OS/2 packages didn't even have the latter. Of course, my memory might be foggy and I welcome Peter's input on this. -- SilverSlimer FSF Contributor / EFF Member / Free speech advocate Absolute centrist, proud Catholic
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-06 09:24 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <proto-35A90E.09245806112018@news.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #118139 |
In article <hGBmD.28709$XG2.22226@fx16.iad>, SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> wrote: > My exposure to OS/2 was fairly limited as I only used it on shoddy > hardware and didn't do much with it but Peter Köhlmann around here in > comp.os.linux.advocacy seems to have very fond memories of it despite its > marketplace failure. OS/2 — half an operating system? -- Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greed. Me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "John Varela" <newlamps@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-06 15:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <51W5y0sPNk52-pn2-kWXePT73Ugym@localhost> |
| In reply to | #119176 |
On Tue, 6 Nov 2018 14:24:58 UTC, Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> wrote: > In article <hGBmD.28709$XG2.22226@fx16.iad>, > SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> wrote: > > > My exposure to OS/2 was fairly limited as I only used it on shoddy > > hardware and didn't do much with it but Peter K├Âhlmann around here in > > comp.os.linux.advocacy seems to have very fond memories of it despite its > > marketplace failure. > > OS/2 ÔÇö half an operating system? I abandoned DOS for OS/2 in the 1980s. I had to have TCP/IP to access the department computer and Netware to access the corporate computers. DOS forced me to swap out config.sy -- John Varela
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-06 12:29 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nckED.1299847$4S3.1098076@fx47.iad> |
| In reply to | #119176 |
On 2018-11-06 9:24 a.m., Walter Bushell wrote: > In article <hGBmD.28709$XG2.22226@fx16.iad>, > SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> wrote: > >> My exposure to OS/2 was fairly limited as I only used it on shoddy >> hardware and didn't do much with it but Peter Köhlmann around here in >> comp.os.linux.advocacy seems to have very fond memories of it despite its >> marketplace failure. > > OS/2 — half an operating system? Its name derives from the PS/2 and was meant to suggest that it would work best on PS/2 devices which, I assume, IBM expected to have dominate the computer space. Looking back, the PS/2, as sturdy as it was, could not have dominated a space in which computers like the Amiga and the Atari ST could do more for a lot less money. -- SilverSlimer Proud recipient of special entitlements Fierce adversary of equal rights, improved productivity and error-reduction
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-06 12:34 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <061120181234479589%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #119184 |
In article <nckED.1299847$4S3.1098076@fx47.iad>, SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> wrote: > >> My exposure to OS/2 was fairly limited as I only used it on shoddy > >> hardware and didn't do much with it but Peter Köhlmann around here in > >> comp.os.linux.advocacy seems to have very fond memories of it despite its > >> marketplace failure. > > > > OS/2 ⤲ half an operating system? > > Its name derives from the PS/2 and was meant to suggest that it would > work best on PS/2 devices which, I assume, IBM expected to have dominate > the computer space. > > Looking back, the PS/2, as sturdy as it was, could not have dominated a > space in which computers like the Amiga and the Atari ST could do more > for a lot less money. no they couldn't. those were toys. what killed it was that microsoft forced windows everywhere, often illegally.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-06 12:51 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <IwkED.534647$MK2.144959@fx35.iad> |
| In reply to | #119185 |
On 2018-11-06 11:34 a.m., nospam wrote: > In article <nckED.1299847$4S3.1098076@fx47.iad>, SilverSlimer > <silver@slim.er> wrote: > >>>> My exposure to OS/2 was fairly limited as I only used it on shoddy >>>> hardware and didn't do much with it but Peter Köhlmann around here in >>>> comp.os.linux.advocacy seems to have very fond memories of it despite its >>>> marketplace failure. >>> >>> OS/2 ⤲ half an operating system? >> >> Its name derives from the PS/2 and was meant to suggest that it would >> work best on PS/2 devices which, I assume, IBM expected to have dominate >> the computer space. >> >> Looking back, the PS/2, as sturdy as it was, could not have dominated a >> space in which computers like the Amiga and the Atari ST could do more >> for a lot less money. > > no they couldn't. those were toys. 1) Could you write essays and do spreadsheets on the Amiga or the Atari ST? 2) Could you edit graphics and make banners? 3) Could you play games in addition to doing useful work? They might have served as a console to many people, but both computers could still be as useful as a PS/2 was. > what killed it was that microsoft forced windows everywhere, often > illegally. Windows was a non-factor when the PS/2 line was killed off. The reverse engineering of the BIOS and the creation of the compatible PC did a lot more than Windows could ever hope to do. The introduction of EISA as an answer to MCA was pretty much the last nail in the coffin of the PS/2 if not OS/2. What you're suggesting is only somewhat true of OS/2 but you can't deny that Windows, while technically worse than OS/2, was more than enough for regular users and often a much more interesting product. For crying out loud, OS/2 banked on its Windows 3.1 compatibility to sell copies and had little to no software written directly for it. Why would you need OS/2 to run Windows 3.1 when you can just install Windows 3.1? -- SilverSlimer Proud recipient of special entitlements Fierce adversary of equal rights, improved productivity and error-reduction
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-06 12:55 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <061120181255515444%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #119186 |
In article <IwkED.534647$MK2.144959@fx35.iad>, SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> wrote: > > what killed it was that microsoft forced windows everywhere, often > > illegally. > > Windows was a non-factor when the PS/2 line was killed off. yes it was. > The reverse > engineering of the BIOS and the creation of the compatible PC did a lot > more than Windows could ever hope to do. The introduction of EISA as an > answer to MCA was pretty much the last nail in the coffin of the PS/2 if > not OS/2. What you're suggesting is only somewhat true of OS/2 but you > can't deny that Windows, while technically worse than OS/2, was more > than enough for regular users and often a much more interesting product. > For crying out loud, OS/2 banked on its Windows 3.1 compatibility to > sell copies and had little to no software written directly for it. Why > would you need OS/2 to run Windows 3.1 when you can just install Windows > 3.1? in other words, windows was a factor.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-06 13:35 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ialED.541198$SN2.432505@fx38.iad> |
| In reply to | #119187 |
On 2018-11-06 11:55 a.m., nospam wrote: > In article <IwkED.534647$MK2.144959@fx35.iad>, SilverSlimer > <silver@slim.er> wrote: > >>> what killed it was that microsoft forced windows everywhere, often >>> illegally. >> >> Windows was a non-factor when the PS/2 line was killed off. > > yes it was. > >> The reverse >> engineering of the BIOS and the creation of the compatible PC did a lot >> more than Windows could ever hope to do. The introduction of EISA as an >> answer to MCA was pretty much the last nail in the coffin of the PS/2 if >> not OS/2. What you're suggesting is only somewhat true of OS/2 but you >> can't deny that Windows, while technically worse than OS/2, was more >> than enough for regular users and often a much more interesting product. >> For crying out loud, OS/2 banked on its Windows 3.1 compatibility to >> sell copies and had little to no software written directly for it. Why >> would you need OS/2 to run Windows 3.1 when you can just install Windows >> 3.1? > > in other words, windows was a factor. Only on OS/2's demise, not on the PS/2's. -- SilverSlimer Proud recipient of special entitlements and fierce adversary of equal rights Minds: @silverslimer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-06 11:17 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <prspcq$5re$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #119188 |
On 2018-11-06 10:35 AM, SilverSlimer wrote: > On 2018-11-06 11:55 a.m., nospam wrote: >> In article <IwkED.534647$MK2.144959@fx35.iad>, SilverSlimer >> <silver@slim.er> wrote: >> >>>> what killed it was that microsoft forced windows everywhere, often >>>> illegally. >>> >>> Windows was a non-factor when the PS/2 line was killed off. >> >> yes it was. >> >>> The reverse >>> engineering of the BIOS and the creation of the compatible PC did a lot >>> more than Windows could ever hope to do. The introduction of EISA as an >>> answer to MCA was pretty much the last nail in the coffin of the PS/2 if >>> not OS/2. What you're suggesting is only somewhat true of OS/2 but you >>> can't deny that Windows, while technically worse than OS/2, was more >>> than enough for regular users and often a much more interesting product. >>> For crying out loud, OS/2 banked on its Windows 3.1 compatibility to >>> sell copies and had little to no software written directly for it. Why >>> would you need OS/2 to run Windows 3.1 when you can just install Windows >>> 3.1? >> >> in other words, windows was a factor. > > Only on OS/2's demise, not on the PS/2's. > > Without OS/2, there wasn't really any good reason to buy a PS/2...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-06 17:51 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <tVoED.288811$XG2.47778@fx16.iad> |
| In reply to | #119192 |
On 2018-11-06 2:17 p.m., Alan Baker wrote: > On 2018-11-06 10:35 AM, SilverSlimer wrote: >> On 2018-11-06 11:55 a.m., nospam wrote: >>> In article <IwkED.534647$MK2.144959@fx35.iad>, SilverSlimer >>> <silver@slim.er> wrote: >>> >>>>> what killed it was that microsoft forced windows everywhere, often >>>>> illegally. >>>> >>>> Windows was a non-factor when the PS/2 line was killed off. >>> >>> yes it was. >>> >>>> The reverse >>>> engineering of the BIOS and the creation of the compatible PC did a lot >>>> more than Windows could ever hope to do. The introduction of EISA as an >>>> answer to MCA was pretty much the last nail in the coffin of the >>>> PS/2 if >>>> not OS/2. What you're suggesting is only somewhat true of OS/2 but you >>>> can't deny that Windows, while technically worse than OS/2, was more >>>> than enough for regular users and often a much more interesting >>>> product. >>>> For crying out loud, OS/2 banked on its Windows 3.1 compatibility to >>>> sell copies and had little to no software written directly for it. Why >>>> would you need OS/2 to run Windows 3.1 when you can just install >>>> Windows >>>> 3.1? >>> >>> in other words, windows was a factor. >> >> Only on OS/2's demise, not on the PS/2's. >> >> > > Without OS/2, there wasn't really any good reason to buy a PS/2... Nah, I don't believe that's correct. Despite the fact that the PS/2 introduced technologies which didn't catch on at first (PS/2 ports) or at all (MCA), it doesn't change the fact that those technologies were very good in general. Additionally, PS/2 computers were remarkably sturdy despite their high cost. You can still find videos on Youtube of people opening up PS/2s from three decades ago which work as well as they could. -- SilverSlimer Proud recipient of special entitlements and fierce adversary of equal rights Minds: @silverslimer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-06 15:05 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <prt6nq$si2$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #119194 |
On 2018-11-06 2:51 PM, SilverSlimer wrote: > On 2018-11-06 2:17 p.m., Alan Baker wrote: >> On 2018-11-06 10:35 AM, SilverSlimer wrote: >>> On 2018-11-06 11:55 a.m., nospam wrote: >>>> In article <IwkED.534647$MK2.144959@fx35.iad>, SilverSlimer >>>> <silver@slim.er> wrote: >>>> >>>>>> what killed it was that microsoft forced windows everywhere, often >>>>>> illegally. >>>>> >>>>> Windows was a non-factor when the PS/2 line was killed off. >>>> >>>> yes it was. >>>> >>>>> The reverse >>>>> engineering of the BIOS and the creation of the compatible PC did a >>>>> lot >>>>> more than Windows could ever hope to do. The introduction of EISA >>>>> as an >>>>> answer to MCA was pretty much the last nail in the coffin of the >>>>> PS/2 if >>>>> not OS/2. What you're suggesting is only somewhat true of OS/2 but you >>>>> can't deny that Windows, while technically worse than OS/2, was more >>>>> than enough for regular users and often a much more interesting >>>>> product. >>>>> For crying out loud, OS/2 banked on its Windows 3.1 compatibility to >>>>> sell copies and had little to no software written directly for it. Why >>>>> would you need OS/2 to run Windows 3.1 when you can just install >>>>> Windows >>>>> 3.1? >>>> >>>> in other words, windows was a factor. >>> >>> Only on OS/2's demise, not on the PS/2's. >>> >>> >> >> Without OS/2, there wasn't really any good reason to buy a PS/2... > > Nah, I don't believe that's correct. Despite the fact that the PS/2 > introduced technologies which didn't catch on at first (PS/2 ports) or > at all (MCA), it doesn't change the fact that those technologies were > very good in general. Additionally, PS/2 computers were remarkably > sturdy despite their high cost. You can still find videos on Youtube of > people opening up PS/2s from three decades ago which work as well as > they could. > But "their high cost" was the problem.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-06 20:00 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <lOqED.487189$oM2.421608@fx07.iad> |
| In reply to | #119195 |
On 2018-11-06 6:05 p.m., Alan Baker wrote: > On 2018-11-06 2:51 PM, SilverSlimer wrote: >> On 2018-11-06 2:17 p.m., Alan Baker wrote: >>> On 2018-11-06 10:35 AM, SilverSlimer wrote: >>>> On 2018-11-06 11:55 a.m., nospam wrote: >>>>> In article <IwkED.534647$MK2.144959@fx35.iad>, SilverSlimer >>>>> <silver@slim.er> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> what killed it was that microsoft forced windows everywhere, often >>>>>>> illegally. >>>>>> >>>>>> Windows was a non-factor when the PS/2 line was killed off. >>>>> >>>>> yes it was. >>>>> >>>>>> The reverse >>>>>> engineering of the BIOS and the creation of the compatible PC did >>>>>> a lot >>>>>> more than Windows could ever hope to do. The introduction of EISA >>>>>> as an >>>>>> answer to MCA was pretty much the last nail in the coffin of the >>>>>> PS/2 if >>>>>> not OS/2. What you're suggesting is only somewhat true of OS/2 but >>>>>> you >>>>>> can't deny that Windows, while technically worse than OS/2, was more >>>>>> than enough for regular users and often a much more interesting >>>>>> product. >>>>>> For crying out loud, OS/2 banked on its Windows 3.1 compatibility to >>>>>> sell copies and had little to no software written directly for it. >>>>>> Why >>>>>> would you need OS/2 to run Windows 3.1 when you can just install >>>>>> Windows >>>>>> 3.1? >>>>> >>>>> in other words, windows was a factor. >>>> >>>> Only on OS/2's demise, not on the PS/2's. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Without OS/2, there wasn't really any good reason to buy a PS/2... >> >> Nah, I don't believe that's correct. Despite the fact that the PS/2 >> introduced technologies which didn't catch on at first (PS/2 ports) or >> at all (MCA), it doesn't change the fact that those technologies were >> very good in general. Additionally, PS/2 computers were remarkably >> sturdy despite their high cost. You can still find videos on Youtube >> of people opening up PS/2s from three decades ago which work as well >> as they could. >> > > But "their high cost" was the problem. Agreed. I never owned a PS/2 myself but my uncle did and it was my first exposure to a PC. I bought the eventual PS/1 which taught me the basics even though it wasn't a very good PC. -- SilverSlimer Proud recipient of special entitlements and fierce adversary of equal rights Minds: @silverslimer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-06 17:29 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <prtf4u$17q3$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #119197 |
On 2018-11-06 5:00 PM, SilverSlimer wrote: > On 2018-11-06 6:05 p.m., Alan Baker wrote: >> On 2018-11-06 2:51 PM, SilverSlimer wrote: >>> On 2018-11-06 2:17 p.m., Alan Baker wrote: >>>> On 2018-11-06 10:35 AM, SilverSlimer wrote: >>>>> On 2018-11-06 11:55 a.m., nospam wrote: >>>>>> In article <IwkED.534647$MK2.144959@fx35.iad>, SilverSlimer >>>>>> <silver@slim.er> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>> what killed it was that microsoft forced windows everywhere, often >>>>>>>> illegally. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Windows was a non-factor when the PS/2 line was killed off. >>>>>> >>>>>> yes it was. >>>>>> >>>>>>> The reverse >>>>>>> engineering of the BIOS and the creation of the compatible PC did >>>>>>> a lot >>>>>>> more than Windows could ever hope to do. The introduction of EISA >>>>>>> as an >>>>>>> answer to MCA was pretty much the last nail in the coffin of the >>>>>>> PS/2 if >>>>>>> not OS/2. What you're suggesting is only somewhat true of OS/2 >>>>>>> but you >>>>>>> can't deny that Windows, while technically worse than OS/2, was more >>>>>>> than enough for regular users and often a much more interesting >>>>>>> product. >>>>>>> For crying out loud, OS/2 banked on its Windows 3.1 compatibility to >>>>>>> sell copies and had little to no software written directly for >>>>>>> it. Why >>>>>>> would you need OS/2 to run Windows 3.1 when you can just install >>>>>>> Windows >>>>>>> 3.1? >>>>>> >>>>>> in other words, windows was a factor. >>>>> >>>>> Only on OS/2's demise, not on the PS/2's. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Without OS/2, there wasn't really any good reason to buy a PS/2... >>> >>> Nah, I don't believe that's correct. Despite the fact that the PS/2 >>> introduced technologies which didn't catch on at first (PS/2 ports) >>> or at all (MCA), it doesn't change the fact that those technologies >>> were very good in general. Additionally, PS/2 computers were >>> remarkably sturdy despite their high cost. You can still find videos >>> on Youtube of people opening up PS/2s from three decades ago which >>> work as well as they could. >>> >> >> But "their high cost" was the problem. > > Agreed. I never owned a PS/2 myself but my uncle did and it was my first > exposure to a PC. I bought the eventual PS/1 which taught me the basics > even though it wasn't a very good PC. > Hence my statement: without OS/2, there was not sufficient reason to pay the high cost of the PS/2.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-07 09:16 -0500 |
| Subject | OT: About OS/2 (Was:Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server) |
| Message-ID | <8tCED.328729$9O2.222590@fx03.iad> |
| In reply to | #119199 |
On 2018-11-06 20:29, Alan Baker wrote: > > Hence my statement: without OS/2, there was not sufficient reason to pay > the high cost of the PS/2. OS/2 was ahead of its time, too. Still is IMO. It used a VM to run Windows better than MS-DOS did. Linux would be the winner of the OS wars if that facility was baked into its kernel: Imagine being able to run any OS under Linux.... But wishing doesn't make pigs fly. -- Wolf K kirkwood40.blogspot.com "Gentics is not genealogy." (Gragham Coop, Ph.D.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-07 09:58 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: OT: About OS/2 (Was:Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server) |
| Message-ID | <z4DED.287273$fE2.226059@fx30.iad> |
| In reply to | #119203 |
On 2018-11-07 9:16 a.m., Wolf K wrote: > On 2018-11-06 20:29, Alan Baker wrote: >> >> Hence my statement: without OS/2, there was not sufficient reason to >> pay the high cost of the PS/2. > > OS/2 was ahead of its time, too. Still is IMO. It used a VM to run > Windows better than MS-DOS did. Linux would be the winner of the OS wars > if that facility was baked into its kernel: Imagine being able to run > any OS under Linux.... > > But wishing doesn't make pigs fly. Nor does it produce rational Wolf K posts. :) -- SilverSlimer Proud recipient of special entitlements and fierce adversary of equal rights Minds: @silverslimer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-09 19:07 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: OT: About OS/2 |
| Message-ID | <ps4pel.9k8.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #119203 |
Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> On 2018-11-06 20:29, Alan Baker wrote:
> >
> > Hence my statement: without OS/2, there was not sufficient reason to pay
> > the high cost of the PS/2.
>
> OS/2 was ahead of its time, too. Still is IMO. It used a VM to run
> Windows better than MS-DOS did. Linux would be the winner of the OS wars
> if that facility was baked into its kernel: Imagine being able to run
> any OS under Linux....
Yeah, similar to HP's 9000 Series 500 systems of the early eighties
which had a micro-kernel [1] on top of which one could run HP-UX (HP's
version of UNIX) or (IIRC) BASIC Language System.
Later we moved to using some crap made at Berkeley University [2]! :-)
[1] The micro-kernel's name was 'SUN Operating System', many years
before Sun had their OS of the 'same' name ('SunOS').
[2] Just kidding. BSD was much, much better than (AT&T's) System III
which we had before.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 15 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system
csiph-web