Re: ATT etc. (now: HTML versions | OS/2)

["J. R. Fox" jr_fox@xxxxxxxxxx]

Patricia M Godfrey wrote:

> I believe someone on this list mentioned that OS/2 has a multiboot
> capacity built in?

Yes, it's called Boot Manager, and claims one Primary partition (though this
can be very small). Like a similar feature included with NT-4 and then W2K,
it is _very_ bare bones, compared to something like System Commander (which I
used with good results for many years, but no longer do), though it does get
the essential job done.

> Because I do have to run Win32 apps for clients, and
> am somewhat chary of using third-party boot loaders; of course, with the
> cost of hardware what it is, a second system would be simpler, but then I
> run into desk space and electrical circuit problems.

Understood.

> About those invisible Web pages: don't blame the coders. That happened to
> my abortive page: I set the fonts to be Black on white, with my logo in
> blue on white. Did all the code by the WWW book, including CSS. And
> Netscape insisted on displaying dark blue on BLACK. It showed up OK under
> AOL (at my client's) and IE (on a friend's system)--and I hope I don't
> have to say that I had not used Front Page or any other M$ app to create
> it.

No idea what's going on there. If you play by "the rules," shouldn't a page
display about the same in each browser ? If not, _someone_ is out of
compliance.

Jordan