🚀 go-pugleaf

Dave Tholen wrote:
> 
> Craig Witkowski writes:
> 
> > God, I shudder to think that OS/2 may be controlling luggage routing
> > and flight plans! ;)
> 
> Do you also shudder when you think about how OS/2 controls a majority of
> the Automatic Teller Machines in the country?
> 
> Do you also shudder when you think about how OS/2 is used at the Olympics?
> 
> And do you not realize that the application software is likely to be the
> culprit if luggage routing is botched?


Well were is your proof Dave?

Why and hell are you posting this crap in every newsgroup ever made
I don't care which OS is better and neither do the rest of the
people in alt.games.warcraft 

In article <4anm5t$d...@ns3.iamerica.net>,
David Finan  <dfi...@iamerica.net> wrote:
>
>
>Why and hell are you posting this crap in every newsgroup ever made
>I don't care which OS is better and neither do the rest of the
>people in alt.games.warcraft 


	You know--I had decided to stop posting to this thread but got
another extremly rude piece of email today demanding it so it seemed
there was no choice but to continue.  But then I thought--no--why should 
I let that obnoxious bozo cause me to do that?  And now I come across 
your post--here you object to the stream yet contribute to it by posting 
nonsense that's already been posted before.  So for those of you who wish
this thread to die down or cut down on the number of crossposts you 
might thank David personally for stirring things up again.

	So David, use a killfile, a modern threaded newsreader or find a 
hobby.  People may discuss this matter anywhere they so choose.  If anyone
has been getting any harassing email regarding participation in this
thread from anyone I would appreciated it if you'd forward me a copy.

	And what is this game alt.fan.warcrafts about anyway?  What
operating system does it run on???  


				Steve

In article <30CDF7...@cdc.net>, s...@cdc.net says...
>
>Dave Tholen wrote:
>> 
>> Craig Witkowski writes:
>> 
>> > God, I shudder to think that OS/2 may be controlling luggage routing
>> > and flight plans! ;)
>> 
>> Do you also shudder when you think about how OS/2 controls a majority 
of
>> the Automatic Teller Machines in the country?

This can't be right - OS/2 running an ATM? Heck - I'd shoot the manager 
that made that product decision. What an utter frickin waste! Does not 
anyone know how to right a clean concise embedded system? An ATM is a 
fairly stupid machine with a limited function...

Gen...@swcp.com (Gene Gajewski) wrote:
>This can't be right - OS/2 running an ATM? Heck - I'd shoot the manager 
>that made that product decision. What an utter frickin waste! Does not 
>anyone know how to right a clean concise embedded system? An ATM is a 
>fairly stupid machine with a limited function...

ALL of the "automatic ticket tellers" (Guichet Automatique) for the
trains in France are hosted by small 386-PCs running OS/2 1.something.

ALL of the ticket agents run "QuickRail," a user-friendly interface
to the reservations system, under OS/2 1.x.

The ticket agent screens are highly optimized (via user testing)
text-mode interfaces designed to make it possible for a trained
agent to sell tickets as quickly as possible.  The ATMs have
highly-graphical, touch-screen interfaces, for selling tickets by
cash or credit card.  There's one in just about every rail station
in France.  You make your reservations over the phone (or by Minitel),
go to any one of these machines, plug in your credit card and Pfttt!
out come your tickets (reservations and all) for a TGV trip to, say,
Lille or Lyon.  They work pretty well.  Having used them (as a 
consumer, not a tester) I can say that I find them extremely
convienent, and generally a lot less impatient than the agents.

You /do/ occasionally see the "protection fault" screen (where it
dumps the registers to the display) but it's extremely rare.
Response time is usually pretty good, but is bound by the
comms to the reservations system, not by the ATMs.

About the only major decision to make around here is when
to port to 32-bit OS/2, which is going to happen eventually.
We considered Windows, Windows-95, and NT, and about the only
contender for the title of "best future platform" is NT, though
there's no compelling reason to change at the moment.

Windows and Windows 95 were deemed (correctly, in my opinion)
to be basically too transient to invest in.  We're pretty
confident that OS/2 in its current form will be supported by
IBM for it's "true blue" customers for the indefinite future.

And, if all you're interested in is a 32-bit, protected-mode,
security-less OS, it /is/ a better OS than W95 or Windows, and
it runs in a /lot/ less memory than NT.  C'est la vie!

LEB
(SNCF Pricing and Yield Management Group, Paris, France)
--
Larry Baker
(lar...@sdt.com)

In <4aqpuo$4...@sloth.swcp.com>, Gen...@swcp.com (Gene Gajewski) writes:

>This can't be right - OS/2 running an ATM? Heck - I'd shoot the manager 
>that made that product decision. What an utter frickin waste! Does not 
>anyone know how to right a clean concise embedded system? An ATM is a 
>fairly stupid machine with a limited function...
========
 
An ATM might be considered a fairly stupid machine, but it a networked
unattended client that dispenses hundreds of thousands of dollars per day
per machine.
 
For this kind of security, one doesn't rely on Joe "quick-coder," one goes
with a proven company that ships and supports a proven operating system.

Eric Larson
ela...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu

In article <4aqupk$j...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>, ela...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu 
says...
>
>In <4aqpuo$4...@sloth.swcp.com>, Gen...@swcp.com (Gene Gajewski) writes:
>
>>This can't be right - OS/2 running an ATM? Heck - I'd shoot the manager 
>>that made that product decision. What an utter frickin waste! Does not 
>>anyone know how to right a clean concise embedded system? An ATM is a 
>>fairly stupid machine with a limited function...
>========
> 
>An ATM might be considered a fairly stupid machine, but it a networked
>unattended client that dispenses hundreds of thousands of dollars per day
>per machine.
> 
>For this kind of security, one doesn't rely on Joe "quick-coder," one 
goes
>with a proven company that ships and supports a proven operating system.
>
>Eric Larson
>ela...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu
>
I think OS/2 users have a misconception of why OS/2 runs most of the ATM 
machines today.  The reason for this is because IBM makes about 80% of the 
ATM cards that actually run the thing.  With the card, IBM also provides 
the software.  Now, do you think that IBM would not take advantage of this 
opportunity to use OS/2?  It's no real mystery why OS/2 runs the ATM 
Machines, if another company made the cards then we probably would see 
another company OS running the ATM machines....

					PEACE.....

-- 
The opinions expressed in this message are my own personal views 
and do not reflect the official views of Microsoft Corporation.

ela...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu wrote:

> In <4aqpuo$4...@sloth.swcp.com>, Gen...@swcp.com (Gene Gajewski) writes:

> >This can't be right - OS/2 running an ATM? Heck - I'd shoot the manager 
> >that made that product decision. What an utter frickin waste! Does not 
> >anyone know how to right a clean concise embedded system? An ATM is a 
> >fairly stupid machine with a limited function...
> ========

If you were the programmer, and were the one to "right" the code, we
would be in for trouble!

Curt...


_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
         Curt's High Speed Modem Page:
 http://www.teleport.com/~curt/modems.html
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/

In message <4arsjg$u...@news.microsoft.com> - A-Robru (Robert Russ) writes:
:>
:>In article <4aqupk$j...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>, ela...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu 
:>says...
:>>
:>>In <4aqpuo$4...@sloth.swcp.com>, Gen...@swcp.com (Gene Gajewski) writes:
:>>
:>>>This can't be right - OS/2 running an ATM? Heck - I'd shoot the manager 
:>>>that made that product decision. What an utter frickin waste! Does not 
:>>>anyone know how to right a clean concise embedded system? An ATM is a 
:>>>fairly stupid machine with a limited function...
:>>========
:>> 
:>>An ATM might be considered a fairly stupid machine, but it a networked
:>>unattended client that dispenses hundreds of thousands of dollars per day
:>>per machine.
:>> 
:>>For this kind of security, one doesn't rely on Joe "quick-coder," one 
:>goes
:>>with a proven company that ships and supports a proven operating system.
:>>
:>>Eric Larson
:>>ela...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu
:>>
:>I think OS/2 users have a misconception of why OS/2 runs most of the ATM 
:>machines today.  The reason for this is because IBM makes about 80% of the 
:>ATM cards that actually run the thing.  With the card, IBM also provides 
:>the software.  Now, do you think that IBM would not take advantage of this 
:>opportunity to use OS/2?  It's no real mystery why OS/2 runs the ATM 
:>Machines, if another company made the cards then we probably would see 
:>another company OS running the ATM machines....
:>
:>					PEACE.....
:>
:>-- 
:>The opinions expressed in this message are my own personal views 
:>and do not reflect the official views of Microsoft Corporation.
:>


The dumb just got dumber.

IBM does not even remotely make 80% of the ATMs today.  They don't even make 
their own ATMs and the ATM cards are all made by the banks themselves just 
like a credit card.  

Diebold is the #1 maker of ATMs (they make them for IBM too.)  NCR is the 
other.  And they prefer to use OS/2.

Rgds,

Chris


*>>>Brought to you by Warp Connect and IBM TCP/IP 3.0<<<*
     	***** cro...@kuentos.guam.net *****
       ***>>> TEAM OS/2 <<<>>> TEAM SAILOR MOON <<<***        
"Seiki no Senshi, Sailor Fuku bishoujo senshi, Sailor Venus!"
	"Sanjyo Yo!"---Minako Aino, Code na wa Sailor V!

Robert Russ (A-Robru) wrote:
: In article <4aqupk$j...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>, ela...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu 
: says...
: >
: >An ATM might be considered a fairly stupid machine, but it a networked
: >unattended client that dispenses hundreds of thousands of dollars per day
: >per machine.
: > 
: >For this kind of security, one doesn't rely on Joe "quick-coder," one 
: goes
: >with a proven company that ships and supports a proven operating system.
: >
: >Eric Larson
: >ela...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu
: >
: I think OS/2 users have a misconception of why OS/2 runs most of the ATM 
: machines today.  The reason for this is because IBM makes about 80% of the 
: ATM cards that actually run the thing.  With the card, IBM also provides 
: the software.  Now, do you think that IBM would not take advantage of this 
: opportunity to use OS/2?  It's no real mystery why OS/2 runs the ATM 
: Machines, if another company made the cards then we probably would see 
: another company OS running the ATM machines....

But most banks are buying the ATMs and could give a flying rip what is on the
machine, as long as it works. If OS/2 was not up to the task, I think IBM
would write another OS. (ATMOS/2? :) ) I think that is meaningful that IBM
trusts their software that much, and it hasn't burned them yet. Makes me
think that 80% of the market isn't just because of the initials IBM.

: 					PEACE.....

: -- 
: The opinions expressed in this message are my own personal views 
: and do not reflect the official views of Microsoft Corporation.


Just the opinion of another Linux user... (In no way affiliated with MS, or
IBM)

--
||| Craig Maloney  | Phone: [313] 390-8096   | Automotive Safety Center |||
||| Opinions expressed are my own.           | Ford Motor Company       |||
||| "...Just shake your head as the world just nods away." -Echolyn     |||
||| "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."         |||
|||               -- Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943               |||

In article <4avm52$d...@lehi.kuentos.guam.net>, cro...@kuentos.guam.net 
says...

>You must be very stupid to say this.
>
>Rgds,
>
>Chris
>
>




Chris, If you have nothing to say about the topic being discussed, then 
shut up and sit down before your mommy unplugs your computer, ok?


Regards,

Robert Russ (A-Robru) wrote:
: In article <4aqupk$j...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>, ela...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu 
: says...
: >
: >In <4aqpuo$4...@sloth.swcp.com>, Gen...@swcp.com (Gene Gajewski) writes:
: >
: >>This can't be right - OS/2 running an ATM? Heck - I'd shoot the manager 
: >>that made that product decision. What an utter frickin waste! Does not 
: >>anyone know how to right a clean concise embedded system? An ATM is a 
: >>fairly stupid machine with a limited function...
: >========
: > 
: >An ATM might be considered a fairly stupid machine, but it a networked
: >unattended client that dispenses hundreds of thousands of dollars per day
: >per machine.
: >
: >Eric Larson
: >ela...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu
: >
: I think OS/2 users have a misconception of why OS/2 runs most of the ATM 
: machines today.  The reason for this is because IBM makes about 80% of the 
: ATM cards that actually run the thing.  With the card, IBM also provides 
: the software.  Now, do you think that IBM would not take advantage of this 
: opportunity to use OS/2?  It's no real mystery why OS/2 runs the ATM 
: Machines, if another company made the cards then we probably would see 
: another company OS running the ATM machines....
: 
: 					PEACE.....
: 
: -- 
: The opinions expressed in this message are my own personal views 
: and do not reflect the official views of Microsoft Corporation.

And I bet that Mr. Gates is jealous as hell.  When can we expect
the MS Money System card?  Probably do as well as the MS Sound System.

Mark <prefer Unix, myself> S.
-- 
mar...@neosoft.com
A bad day of sailing beats a great day of work!

ma...@neosoft.com () wrote:

>Robert Russ (A-Robru) wrote:
>: In article <4aqupk$j...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>, ela...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu 
>: says...
>: >
>: >In <4aqpuo$4...@sloth.swcp.com>, Gen...@swcp.com (Gene Gajewski) writes:
>: >
>: >>This can't be right - OS/2 running an ATM? Heck - I'd shoot the manager 
>: >>that made that product decision. What an utter frickin waste! Does not 
>: >>anyone know how to right a clean concise embedded system? An ATM is a 
>: >>fairly stupid machine with a limited function...
>: >========
>: > 
>: >An ATM might be considered a fairly stupid machine, but it a networked
>: >unattended client that dispenses hundreds of thousands of dollars per day
>: >per machine.
>: >
>: >Eric Larson
>: >ela...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu
>: >
>: I think OS/2 users have a misconception of why OS/2 runs most of the ATM 
>: machines today.  The reason for this is because IBM makes about 80% of the 
>: ATM cards that actually run the thing.  With the card, IBM also provides 
>: the software.  Now, do you think that IBM would not take advantage of this 
>: opportunity to use OS/2?  It's no real mystery why OS/2 runs the ATM 
>: Machines, if another company made the cards then we probably would see 
>: another company OS running the ATM machines....
>: 
>: 					PEACE.....
>: 
>: -- 
>: The opinions expressed in this message are my own personal views 
>: and do not reflect the official views of Microsoft Corporation.

>And I bet that Mr. Gates is jealous as hell.  When can we expect
>the MS Money System card?  Probably do as well as the MS Sound System.

>Mark <prefer Unix, myself> S.
>-- 
>mar...@neosoft.com
>A bad day of sailing beats a great day of work!

Gads it's nice to see that their are others who see through all the
smoke and dust that so many sales people make. Remember, there are
really three classes of people in the world. Hippies, Hillbillies and
Sales People.... Just ask em' "What are you??"

Grin...
Cheers, Jeff