Fwd: Reducing disk usage?

[Lance Hegamin]

On Tue, 9 Mar 1999 20:42:42 -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>On Tue, 9 Mar 1999 20:35:14 -0800, Lance Hegamin wrote:
>
>>>    As opposed to what, Word, where they don't let you see the control codes?
>
>>The control codes are the very arrogance of which I speak!
>
>    So you don't want to see why your formatting is screwed up?  Odd, that
>suggests you don't want to get work done.

When I used WimP, the control codes got in the way, especially the need
to have them on to see what was screwed up.  I'm not going to say more,
as it would be counter productive and possibly personal!

>
>>>    Funny, all of those are compatible.
>
>>Completely?  Or only partially?  Without conversion?  Without having to
>>remember to save in a special format?
>
>    Applix and Star Office both load and save Word format, among others.

Transparently?  And everything is done the same way -- keystrokes, etc.

>
>>None that I can recall.  And lately, I've had more reboots with one of
>>my OS/2 boxes than I've had with 'doze.
>
>    Liar.

Strange.  I'm looking around and don't see you here, so I can't tell
how you'd know.  I've had system lockups with OS/2, requiring the CAD
combination.  I've had to kill programs in WIN98, but never a reboot,
in this same period of time.  YMMV.

I consider that a personal attack, BTW.


>

>>>    Now, plese, define "works".
>
>>Applications I can use and not have to relearn keystrokes for each
>>different site at which I may have an assignment.  Applications I can
>>be productive in.  The application should SUPPORT the assignment, not
>>be an ends of its own.
>
>    Then you're looking at the wrong platform, bub, because Windows isn't
>it.  Ge, each place I go to I have the same keystrokes because I can define
>the editor I use instead of have to learn a new internal one.

Editor?  I was speaking of a word processor.

Applications
>that support the assignment...  You mean like, say, IE being intergrated to
>lock out Netscape?  Oh, wait, that is an ends of its own.  *plonk*
>

No comment.

And please note I am not a 'doze lover, I had to be dragged and kicked
over to it from OS/2.  But if OS/2 and Linux are where the market is,
is there a Linux version of PMMail?  And why is there a  'doze version?
 Perhaps they know something about the market we don't?  And why is the
author of another well know OS/2 e-mail client considering a WIN98
version?  Isn't the bottom line who buys the product, not,
unfortunately, how good it is?

But I suspect we are off topic, and this is it for me.

EOT

>- --
>         Steve C. Lamb         | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
>         ICQ: 5107343          | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
>- -------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: PGPsdk version 1.0 (C) 1997 Pretty Good Privacy, Inc
>
>iQA/AwUBNuX4QXpf7K2LbpnFEQJuXACg7bT3TzdI/l5bCd6/GQqXGiX4hyEAoIlF
>hRRJYiySZ1LhtXECTQgO04Gg
>=kvGT
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

L G Hegamin
(LHegamin@mediaone.net)