Rod, at 07:22 on Sat, Apr 15 1995, you wrote to Bill Grimsley ...

Christ Rod, what started as a 100 line message has since progressed into a
three message tome, which I have put back together again.  Pity about brain
dead OLX not allowing you to set message limits by individual echos.  |-)

BG> It doesn't hurt to have the choice,

RS> The problem with the traditional external stuff in the app itself
RS> is that it inevitably incurs the time to actually do it. Medieval
RS> and dinosaury.

Time to do what though?  Code it?  Otherwise, it can only save time by
having specific commands preset with single-key macros.  You've had a
massive brain fart here, if you'll excuse the plagiarism.

BG> and in the DOS version, it would be a real advantage IMO.

RS> I still cant see that either.

That's becoming obvious.  Maybe your dog can.  Did you ask him?  |-)

RS> Its only useful if you arent running any multitasker at all, just a single 
RS> tasking system.

Nope, it's useful under all circumstances, even under a reasonably decent
MTer like OS/2.  You might not care to use such a feature, but that doesn't
mean that others may not feel differently.  Fuck me dead, what harm does it
do to have it there anyway?

RS> There must be damned few people doing that today, even if
RS> they are using the DOS version. A few dorks on XTs at most.

Well I would if I could, so does that make me a dork?

RS> You should just have List already open in another multitasker window, and 
RS> have some decent window switch mech in the multitasker itself, like the 
RS> Desqview Alt-n approach, even with something like OS2.

BG> Alt-Esc toggles between sessions under OS/2, or Ctl-Esc brings
BG> up the window list,

RS> No news to me Bill.

So why make reference to DV's Alt-n function then?  You continually ignore
questions which ask what OS you run, so how am I to know if you're aware of
OS/2's WPS keystroke functions?  For all I know you could still be running
MS-DOS 5 with dosshell.

BG> I do already have Qedit/2 and List/2 running so it's no big deal here,

RS> So no need for a better external capability.

BG> but I still maintain that it wouldn't be a useless addition at all.

RS> Well, it really comes down to how many people are reading their
RS> mail on a single tasker. IMO there arent enough to worry about
RS> too much, and they should be taken out the back and shot anyway.

Pity there isn't just one true path to salvation though.  We all use our
systems differently, and last I heard, it wasn't a hanging offence not to
be following the "Rod Speed Bible of Multitasker Use" to the
letter.

BG> Jeeze Rod, after nearly 3 years with OS/2, at least give me a bit of credit 
BG> for knowing how to use it productively!

RS> No thanks, you are faking away your medieval way of using it, 

Faking?  Surely you jest.  I'm not apologising for the way I use OS/2.

RS> if you really did use it properly, you wouldnt want the enhanced 
RS> external stuff.

So is pressing Alt-Esc 5 times to toggle to the window that I need, then a
few more keystrokes to invoke the function I want to perform, any easier or
more productive that pressing say F12 in Msged to do the same thing?  And
it ain't all that much easier running Msged windowed and changing windows
with the mouse either.  Maybe you're just missing the point.

BG> I know all that, and I agree that it's a far better method over all, but 
BG> that still doesn't mean that my suggestion is useless, especially for the 
BG> DOS version.  Some people still single-task under DOS, believe it or not. 

RS> Not basically, and if they are that brain dead, thats their problem.

What about dedicated ACAD machines, or accounting PCs, or whatever.  There
are vast numbers of machines which don't even need a MTer at all.

RS> Fraid so, much better machine reliability, no farting around starting up 
RS> the apps again when you turn it on, even if that stuff is autostarted.

If it blows up, I can easily fix it in less time than it's taking me to
write this message, and until such time as you offer to pay my power bill,
I'll continue to leave it off overnight, thanks all the same Rod.

RS> They all should be, even stuff used only once a week, machine never turned 
RS> off. Only way to go for quick task switches. Anything else is medieval 
RS> dinosaur stuff.

Or a total fucking waste of RAM.  Do you honestly believe that it's good
practice to leave an app loaded if you're not going to be using it for
another week?  Pull the other one Rod.  |-)

RS> Anything else is dinosaur technology.

Well, feel free to send me another 16Mb, and I'll be more than happy to do
as you suggest, but until then...  |-)

BG> Not me though, but I'm still not arrogant enough to suggest
BG> that everybody should use their machines the way I prefer to,

RS> Pathetic Bill, try harder boy |-)

Dunno, I thought it was quite cleverly subtle myself.

BG> right or wrong (and who's to say what that is anyway, as circumstances and 
BG> needs differ?).

RS> Thats crap basically.

What, my assertion or my opinion?  If it's the latter, get stuffed.

In fact, get stuffed anyway.  |-)

RS> You could say the same thing about pencil and paper when writing a novel. 
RS> Only someone who is brain dead would claim 'circumstances and needs 
RS> differ', its just plain fucked. It really is as simple as that.

No point arguing this any more.  I'll agree to disagree.

Regards, Bill
@EOT:

--- Msgedsq/2 3.05 alpha