Hello Jack,

01 Nov 99 06:30, Jack Pfisterer wrote to Eddy Thilleman:

ET>> Numlock should be ON, that's my opinion. I don't need two sets
ET>> of keys for cursor movement.

JP> I quite agree.  The only reason I can imagine for IBM choosing the
JP> opposite default is their obsession with backward compatibility:
JP> This keeps all those XT keyboards working properly :)

Specially because OS/2 doens't run on XT's.

JP> Still don't understand why they have never at least allowed users an
JP> option.

I agree. :)

JP> Just looked around and was pleasantly surprised to find it on Hobbes
JP> in PUB\OS2\UTIL\SYSTEM  It's slightly newer (1995) than my 1994
JP> version.

OK, thanks. I'll download it from there.

  Greetings   -=Eddy=-        email: eddy.thilleman@net.hcc.nl

... Microsoft gives you Broken Windows... OS/2 gives you Castles!
--- GoldED/2 3.0.1