Re: Nota Bene and OS/2 -Reply

[Robert Holmgren holmgren@xxxxxxxx]

** Reply to note from xywrite@xxxxxxxx Mon, 27 Sep 1999 14:04:32 -0400

> I downloaded the demo, and had the same results you did - it would not
> install under OS/2. My guess is that its a Windows 95 executable.
 
> I installed it under NT, and it worked fine. I returned to OS/2, and
> tried to run Nota Bene, but got error messages saying some DLL files
> were missing. A little snooping discovered the DLL files in my
> winnt\system subdirectory. I copied them to the os2\mdos\winos2\system
> subdirectory, but when I tried to run NB I got a "Call to undefined
> dynalink" error message.

> This is odd, because the information on the NB website clearly says
> that NB will run under Windows 3.1 Maybe the installation program
> that comes with the full package would work under OS/2.

I don't know about the demo, but the full versions -- the pre-release, v5.0,
and the latest (9/99) v5.002 -- all work fine for me under Win-OS/2. I
don't think they need anything more than Win32s v1.25 (if even that). What
_doesn't_ work, clearly, is the SETUP program, and I suspect that the problem there
is that silly InstallShield, the purpose of which I have never understood,
except to realize (again and again) that it's a total pain ITA. Anyway, I
installed under NT, then rebooted OS/2, and experience no problems. Well, actually
there's a SYS3175 in PMSHELL.EXE when I close the parent Win-OS/2 session after
having used NB (as opposed to other Win16 programs); but I see no consequent damage
anywhere. (The pre-release trapped five or ten times during startup, so there's
been progress.) I even installed it (using NT) on an HPFS drive (using PINBALL.SYS
to enable NT to read HPFS -- there's a link to PINBALL at XyWWWeb). Regrettably,
because it's running under Win31, and Win31 only understands 8.3 filenaming, no
luck on long filenames...

v5.002 fixes a lot of niggling little bugs. I play with it intermittently,
and maybe I'll get around to a more extensive report. Someday. But I think NB is
a lot smoother than XyWin, and I could probably live with it long-term. Certain
hardcoded keystrokes are still a problem (can't be overridden by KBD file,
AFAIK, and amazingly enough the glaring customization issues, which I think many
of us would encounter in the first hour of use, are scarcely ever tackled on the NB
maillist); plus NB has deliberately made Speedos impossible to use, which
ticks me off; but ... I can live with it, when I need a GUI WP. The real story
here is that, in contrast to TTG, NB wants to do business -- with us, specifically!
Hey! Unfortunately, NB has a long history of being utterly unresponsive in the
various electronic fora -- no msgs in the NB maillist, no replies to Emails,
although they do answer the telephone. Still, they may be pliant under polite,
persistent pressure. And 99 bucks is a deal, IMO, for a living, developing,
supported program (none of this dead-end beta BS). I told them I was a XyWrite AND
an NB 3.0 registered user -- and got socked for $299 late last year -- had to BEG
for an "NB User" rate because v3.0 is dead meat. It's like a bloody airline: one
day you fly to London for $99, next day its $1600. Charming.

-----------
Robert Holmgren
holmgren@xxxxxxxx
-----------