
  
  





                       W  I  N  D  O  W  A  T  C  H



             The Electronic Windows Magazine of the Internet





  
   Vol.2   No.7                                           September 1996
  


  page 2
                              WHAT'S INSIDE
   Vol.2  No.7                                            September 1996
  

                               The Editor's Soapbox   Lois Laulicht
   Mainstream Windows Application Development Tools   Herb Chong
       MS Exchange Server 4.0: A View From a Client   Jack Passarella
         Mobile Computing Using Lotus Notes, Part I   Paul Williamson
      Internet Predicts Overloading of Bob Metcalfe   Daniel P. Dern
                    An Update: NT 4.0 Server Beta 2   Linda L. Rosenbaum
                       JunkMail: An Alice Adventure   Peter Neuendorffer
                                  The World of HTML   Gregg Hommel
                                  Producing an Idea   Peter Neuendorffer
             PowerPoint v.7.0 The Office Pro Series   Frank McGowan
                          Wsock32: A Product Review   Lois Laulicht
                      Internet Humour: A Collection   Anonymous
                       Reflections of A ModemJunkie   Leonard Grossman
                  A Modest Proposal: The MolePatrol
                                    Transition Time   Paul Kinnaly
                                  Why '95? Why Not!   Vlad Balak
                   The Evolution of a Windows Hater   Jon Helis
                                 Herb's Art Gallery   Herb Chong



  page 3
  WindoWatch              The Electronic Windows Magazine of the Internet
   Volume 2  No. 7                                        September 1996
  

                         The Editor's Soapbox!

This issue is getting late because I've been splitting my time watching
both political conventions, the US Open, reading about the escalating
browser wars, and scaring myself to death thinking about issues of
privacy as presently defined on the Internet!

Unlike most Americans, my tune-in time to the political party I don't
like, was quite minimal. In direct contrast, I was glued to the TV
during my own political convention. Both events share two characteristics:
Only 20% of the polled public viewed them and the tight management of
internal conflict occurring at each. As a result, we were deprived of
the long overdue discussion of what each group purports to represent!
Important stuff in terms of upcoming Internet related legislation. Shame
on them both!

A great change of pace: The US Open is a marvelous sports event much in
need of a solid technological upgrade. Every match suffered from incorrect
calls by the referees. In an age of the instant replay already in use by
every other major sport, the ATA insists upon maintaining this sham.
Players are resentful and openly laugh at this comedy. Shame on the
American Tennis Association!

The browser war continues, moving to a faster track with an official
complaint from Netscape to the Department of Justice alleging the threat
of a potential Microsoft grab for domination of Internet software. These,
and related issues, are important enough to the Internet for the
specifics to be laid out in full detail and for the groupies orbiting
both entities to close down their smoke and mirrors routines. Too much
heat and almost no light! Shame on the Microsoftfiles and the
Netscapists!

The Internet is squaring off with the hardening of positions relating to
issues of privacy and the reach of the government investigating criminal
activity occurring on the net. There exists, it seems to me, kernels of
truth and fear on both sides of this fundamental question of privacy vs
the protection of citizens under the law. This too has already shaped
into a mammoth controversy presently generating much heat and too little
light. Thoughtful and uncommitted people are backing away from taking a
public position fearing the crazy label that might stick to them from
either extreme.

This last is far too important for any one to take a pass. In ten years
or less, the Internet, in all likelihood, will be as fully used as is
the telephone today. Further, as Americans, we only have the ability to
legislate for ourselves in this multi-cultural and international
environment.

So, let's get real and not try to re-invent the wheel. There is plenty
of existing, albeit, some notably bad, international agreements and
accepted practice already in place.

The Internet is not an island but part of an existing world community
presently doing business in a semi-orderly way. Clichs and slogans
don't do much and name calling and button pushing do even less. Let's
begin to frame a public and rational debate or shame on us...all of us!

lbl


   ww page 4
    Windows Programming Tools: A Survey of the Field
  

            Mainstream Windows Application Development Tools

                      Copyright 1996 by Herb Chong


If you were to pick up a catalog from a programmer's software mail-order
house, you would think that almost everyone has their own tool and there
are thousands of ways to write your application. That isn't the case,
however. There are really only about five tools in wide use. Everything
else has their devotees. Otherwise, all you would get is a single sheet
of paper instead of a thick catalog. To be honest, many of the items in
the catalog are tools to help make building applications easier or to
use as building blocks so that programmers don't have to reinvent the
wheel each time they design a new application.

In its earliest days, the only way you could write a Windows application
was to use the Microsoft C compiler and its sometimes incomprehensible
sidekick, the Windows SDK. Although I won't go into detail, suffice it
to say that writing a Windows program was much different from anything
that anyone was taught in school back then and there was no safety net
in case you made a mistake.

Things are different today. The SDK has pretty much disappeared and has
been replaced by included components of C/C++ and other compilers, and
made redundant by tools which interact with Windows completely
differently than before. The choice is large today too. Although this
article will have a quick look at only five of the most widely used
tools, there are more out there for more specialized purposes such as
multimedia authoring and expert system building.

The biggest player in the market is Microsoft. After all, it is their
operating system and they have to write the tools to be able to generate
applications for it. The second biggest player is Borland. Borland has
had a long history of specializing in tools for programmers. Their Turbo
C compiler was one of the first to diverge from the traditional UNIX
model of a command line compiler and completely independent tools to an
Integrated Development Environment (IDE) with all tools available nearly
all the time. Everything else is a blip on the sales curve. I have
included Symantec C++ with the other tools from Microsoft and Borland
because it is an outgrowth of the Zortech C and C++ compilers, one of
the first C++ compilers for PCs ever to hit the market. At one time, you
could not have a comparison or survey of PC programming tools without
including Zortech.


The C and C++ Compilers

C and C++ compilers have been on IBM PCs since the early days. The only
language available used to be BASIC, but C from various vendors took
over as the language of choice very early on. Writing applications in C
had many advantages over the early BASIC interpreters and compilers.
Mostly it had to do with more advanced language structures and the ease
of extending the programs with libraries of your own code. Microsoft C
was the only game in town for Windows application development for a long
time.

Today, everything is C++. Borland took a good idea in the integrated
development environment design and made it so useful that you can't buy
a serious programming tool without it having a complete IDE. Similarly,
people seldom program to the Windows API anymore, with or without the
SDK. Everything important in Windows has been encapsulated in a C++
class library hidden from the average programmer.

Widespread use of class libraries has two drawbacks for programmers: the
class libraries are very large and require lots of effort to learn and
use, and the class libraries are completely different so that knowing
one helps only vaguely in working with another. For the users, large
class libraries mean large applications and, frequently, slower ones.
The advantages to developers are that there are so many useful
components packed away in the class libraries that programming becomes
more a task of finding and assembling components instead of crafting
them one by one. The more code reuse, the faster new applications come
out. Marketing pressures don't allow otherwise.

The dust has settled in the class library wars and there are two dominant
players competing; Borland's Object Windows Library (OWL) and Microsoft's
Microsoft Foundation Classes (MFC). Symantec C++ includes an older
version of MFC than Microsoft with their compiler. Microsoft's market
presence is such that Borland has made changes to their compiler to make
it possible to compile MFC with theirs. From a purely aesthetic point of
view, OWL is a better package, but higher technology by itself has never
been enough to guarantee a marketing success.

The current version of Borland C++ is 5.0. It supports applications
targeted for DOS, Windows 3.x, Windows 95, and Windows NT on Intel
platforms. It's a serious tool for serious programmers. There are
several versions of class libraries, added database tools, optional
libraries, and support for most of the latest ANSI Draft C++ standards.

As befits a professional tool, it requires a professional machine to run
it on. A full install of the compiler takes about 200MB of disk space.
Some things that BC++ is particularly good at are its elegant OWL class
library. With it, you can go further in application design and
programming before you have to start designing your own objects than the
other class libraries. Sophisticated programmers like the support of the
latest C++ features. The IDE allows you to manage very complex
applications consisting of many modules with relative ease. A lighter
version of BC++ called Turbo C++ for Windows was available at the level
of Borland C++ 4.5 support, but it was never widely used.

Microsoft's Visual C++ is no slouch either. Because it is Microsoft's
own compiler, the emphasis is on support of operating system and
application features. You'll find direct support in this compiler before
you find it in any other one. For many retail software development
organizations, this difference is critical and guarantees a solid market
share to Microsoft. Third party standards support such as ANSI C++ isn't
as good as most other C++ compilers available, but this usually isn't of
concern if you are sticking to one compiler and one target environment.
One disadvantage of VC++ is that you need two versions if you want to
cover Windows 3.x and Windows 95 or NT.

Lumped together, both compilers weigh in at about 200MB or so also.
Naturally, if you aren't interested in Windows 3.x development, you
don't need to install the older version. Microsoft's MFC is less elegant
than OWL and forces a programmer to use more dangerous features of C++
to glue things together. However, it supports new system features
sooner, very important to some people, and they are able to live with
the warts. With VC++ 4.0 and higher, MS has decided to bring together
all their developers' tools into one environment. They have, with
Developer Studio, pulled together all reference information and the
compilers into a single place where you can get at all of them. This may
be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on your point of view. One
thing for certain is that it bulks up the minimum hardware requirements
for using the compiler.

Symantec C++ is the least well integrated of the three C++ compilers.
Their C++ package includes special versions of several third party tools
combined into a single package. Individually, each of these tools are
frequently more capable than their Borland or Microsoft counterparts.
It works very well most of the time, but you can see the rough edges in
the inconsistencies in the user interface across the various components.
The inclusion of so many tools bulks up SC++. A full install of all
components can cost you up to 350MB. The compiler can target DOS,
Windows 3.x, Windows 95, and Windows NT for Intel platforms. The class
library included with SC++ is an older version of MS's MFC class
library. For people who don't need to stay at the bleeding edge of
feature support, the version is much more than adequate.

Other players in the market, even though very small ones, include IBM's
CSet++ for Windows and Watcom C/C++. They have their loyal followers,
but definitely are not in the majority. The cost of being a player in
the C/C++ compiler market has become so high that only a few companies
can participate. All the available compilers will do an good job on
applications that are not pushing the limits of feature support.


Visual Basic

Visual Basic is an easy way to get into Windows programming. For the
weekend programmer or the person who needs to spend time concentrating
on prototyping, Visual Basic 4.0 is a very good tool. Much of Visual
Basic's appeal comes from its visual approach to programming. Although
highly innovative when it first came out, the visual programming model
in Visual Basic 4.0 is very much a minimal standard for competent
development environments.

One of Visual Basic's major attractions is its simplicity. The language
isn't complex and you get immediate feedback as you work. Visual Basic
first made widely known to professional programmers the idea of
component programming. It spawned a huge third party market for
components and also made Windows programming accessible to more people
than every before. Visual Basic 4.0 needs only about 40MB to install. It
comes with many components to get you started. However, there are
several disadvantages to using Visual Basic for Windows programming.
Applications are, usually, noticeably slower than if it were written in
C/C++ or Delphi. Additionally, there is no way to develop new components
in Visual Basic. These can be major disadvantages for some people.


Delphi

Delphi is the new kid on the block as far as Windows programming is
concerned, and has roots in Borland's Turbo Pascal products. The
underlying programming language of Delphi is Object Pascal. It is very
similar to the Pascal language that was implemented in Borland Pascal.
There are several major differences in the product nonetheless.

The first is that it is a visual programming environment like Visual
Basic. The second is that the class library is very different from OWL.
It is possible to program in Delphi as if it were a near clone of Visual
Basic. Dragging and dropping to define the user interface and then
setting and modifying properties interactively to flesh it out work just
as in Visual Basic. There is a crucial difference, however, from Visual
Basic. The objects in Delphi are genuine objects in the computer science
object-oriented programming sense. This means that programmers can take
objects that they use and create new objects that are like, but not
identical to an existing object, through inheritance.

With Visual Basic, if you use a component and it doesn't do exactly what
you want it to, you need to work around it. In Delphi, you can create a
new object that does do what you want and use it from then onwards. The
smaller editions of Delphi lack the database connectivity components and
so weigh in at about 80MB of disk space. The professional versions come
in at about 110MB total. For serious programmers, Delphi has nearly all
the advantages of Visual Basic in terms of development speed and ease of
use, but it also has some significant advantages with respect to
execution speed and flexibility of the language.


Up and Coming

New on the horizon are Java and JavaScript. These have assumed their
importance because of the importance of the Internet and Internet
applications. Java and JavaScript have some resemblance to each other
but are completely different in design. Java is a full blown programming
language with desirable "safe" features for components that have to be
delivered across the Internet. JavaScript is a language for extending a
Web browser's ability to interact with the user via code included in
HTML. There is nothing preventing a programmer from choosing to write a
full featured Windows application program in Java except speed. Java
currently is an interpreted language.

There is a program that loads and runs Java code just like Basic
interpreters do, even though currently, they are uniformly very slow.

Java has several interesting features that make it a tool to watch in
the future. The first is that it is a "safe" programming language. It is
supposed to be hard to write programs that can do malicious things to a
machine. The second is that it is operating system independent. There
are Java environments for dozens of operating systems and their number
grow seemingly daily. The third is that there are several powerful class
libraries already built in. All environments start on the same footing
with respect to minimum features available. The fourth and maybe the
most important in the long run is built in distributed networking.
Talking to another machine on the Internet is in one of the basic
packages every Java implementation must have.


Summary

This covers most of the major Windows application programming tools
available. Each has their advantages and disadvantages. No one tool can
meet all the requirements for everyone, but a professional programmer
should have several at hand and be good at them. I use Delphi, Borland
C++, and Microsoft C++ about equally. I know enough Visual Basic to get
by, and Symantec C++ is thrown in just to put on the resume. In this day
and age, that's important too.


                          ...............

Herb Chong does research and is a much respected Windows programmer. He
is the Contributing Editor for WindoWatch and has contributed many fine
articles to the magazine. He regularly creates spectacular computer art
found on the WindoWatch homepage and included in the magazine editions
using Acrobat.



   ww page 5
    Microsoft Exchange Server: Client Side Introduction             NT
  


          Microsoft Exchange Server 4.0: A View From a Client
                  Copyright 1996 by Jack Passarella


Introduction

The alternate title for this article would have been Confessions of a
Former Microsoft Mail User, simply because I propose to compare Exchange
Server: Client to Microsoft's old mail product. Just to clarify, I don't
plan on discussing the Exchange server software, just the client, more
specifically, the Windows NT client - though the Windows for Workgroups
and Windows 95 clients are surprisingly similar. (Note: the MAC client
is forthcoming.) As I write this, I've heard that Microsoft plans on
renaming the Client to something less confusing, but that's as clear as
it gets at this point.

What do I know about the server piece of the software? I was only
peripherally involved in the setup of the Exchange Server piece of our
new mail system. (Feel free to define `peripherally' here as, `He knew
about when the server was put online, but that's about it.' Honest, I
won't mind. I had planned on greater involvement, but emergencies
extracted me from that particular round of hair pulling, substituting
another.) I do know that we are under contract with a national ISP and
that we have a dedicated 56K BPS line coming into our router for our
internet email feed. Our Exchange Server server is a Gateway (GW2K
Pentium Pro 200) with 64MB of RAM and about 2GB of hard drive space.
Beyond that, the hardware details blur. I have seen the Exchange server
interface and it appears user-friendly, for the most part. Rules for
defining user internet addresses seem simple. Our format is
first-initial-last-name-at-our-domain (E.g., JPassarella@lehigh-
press.com)

So far that combination of ISP and hardware has been fine. The server
has only one job: email throughput. It sits in a temperature-controlled,
access-limited, food-and-beverage-prohibited room and basically does
nothing else but sift through internal and external messaging. Our tests
to and from our accounts on America Online were impressive, with
messages being shunted back and forth within 15 to 30 seconds. Usage
will climb, however, as we just recently announced the direct email
connection to our customers.


Under the Hood

Before I go into client-side details, it's important to note the basic
difference in the relationship between our old Microsoft Mail server/
clients and our new Exchange server/clients. Under the old system, the
client was responsible for polling the server and checking for mail the
server might be holding for the client. This polling interval could be
set by the user at five, ten, or fifteen minutes....their choice! The
tradeoff being between performance and immediacy. Whenever the client PC
polled, processing time was co-opted from the user - those polls
obviously taking longer for our remote clients; the less often the
client polled, the longer the delay in getting the mail. You had to
choose your own sweet spot.

The Exchange server relieves the clients of much of the burden. Instead
of the clients polling at regular intervals, the server expedites mail
to the clients upon receipt. Aside from the reduction in steady, often
unnecessary polling traffic between our sites, this switch produced
several benefits: unnecessary network traffic decreases as timed polling
is replaced by actual message movement; the users' systems become more
responsive, while the unmanned server assumes greater responsibility;
and, finally, internet messaging is immediate instead of at the mercy of
set intervals.

I've noticed the Exchange client takes more time to load initially than
Microsoft Mail, but every other aspect of it's performance fares better
in comparison. On occasion, file attachments, MIME and UU-encoded are
supported, seem to take a little longer to attach to a message.


A Client is a Client is a Client...?

We are working with three versions of the Exchange Server: Client. These
are Windows for Workgroups, Windows 95 and Windows NT. To date, I've
installed many NT clients, about a dozen Workgroup clients, and have
observed two Windows 95 client installations. Basically, the interface
is identical, the folder tree reminiscent of Windows 95's Explorer
interface, with small buttons and icons. Since I've not used the NT
client for any length of time, my observations are based on just that
client version. If you delve into one of the other clients, your mileage
may vary.


Plus a change...

Pardon my French, but this is the section where I place emphasis on the
similarities between Microsoft Mail and Exchange Server: Client. Mail
had two minimized icons: an empty mail slot, signifying no new mail; and
"You've Got Mail", a mail slot with the corner of an envelope sticking
out to signify new mail had arrived available to read. With Exchange,
you get new and improved icons, but the same basic concept applies. The
more things change...

You'll notice the mail slot has been replaced by the gray In-box, with a
globe - representing the Internet, I suppose - in the background. You
still get a beep (or a WAV if you're running WFW or Windows 95, or are
fortunate enough to have a sound card with your NT PC) when a new
message is delivered by the server.

I've found this mail-stacked-in-the-In-box icon to be less than a
hundred percent reliable, specifically in the mornings when Exchange
first loads and sometimes when I restore then minimize the window
without reading the new mail. What I mean is that I don't always get the
visual cue that I have new mail. Sometimes I have new mail in the
morning but the In-box icon stays inscrutably `empty.'

As I mentioned above, the folder tree in the left pane is reminiscent of
the Windows 95 Explorer. Compared to Microsoft Mail, the toolbar buttons
are similar in function but smaller and now come equipped with those
handy little pop-up yellow tooltips when you pause the cursor over the
buttons. You still add new folders or sub-level folders under the File
menu. The message envelope flaps do not, however, open after you've read
a message. Instead, new messages are shown in bold; the folder name in
which the new messages reside also becomes bold and has the number of
new messages listed beside the folder name in parenthesis. Messages that
have been read then lose the bold attribute, as do their folders.

The folder tree is collapsible and expandable by double-clicking on the
- or + indicators respectively. The panes, as well as the various right
pane columns can be resized simply by clicking and dragging on the
dividing lines. Messages can still be click-dragged from right pane to a
folder in the left pane. The sorting feature is more flexible, allowing
ascending or descending sorts, indicated by an up or down wedge for any
of the right pane columns, and even allowing you to sort by messages
with attachments or high priority. Also included is a new column
indicating the size of the message. Now you can see just how much hard
disk space all those message attachments are taking up.


Evolution not revolution

As you can see, so far, Exchange has a lot of similarities to Microsoft
Mail, its forebear. But there are numerous changes, some of which I've
mentioned in passing. Coming into play in the age of Windows 95 is the
right-click feature. If you right-click on a message in the message-pane
- as opposed to the folder (left) pane - you get a list of options which
match the basic toolbar shown above. Better yet, if you receive a
message with an attachment, you can right-click on the program icon in
the body of the message and save the file without having to launch Word,
Excel, etc. You can also right-click to print from the message body
window, among other options.

When you compose your message in the Exchange new message window, you
will immediately notice one of the big differences from the old Send
Note screen. Microsoft rich text format is now built in: you can select
any font that resides on your system, and which you hope resides on the
recipient's system, of any point size, font color, etc. to express
yourself as fully as possible.

As you can see from this example (**), I've incorporated bold, italic
and underline as well along with a change in color to really get my
point across. I did not use indenting or bullets, but these features are
also available, as are alignment options. (Note: these font tricks use
Microsoft rich text format which must be supported by the recipient's
mail system; otherwise, they get plain text.) When you click on the send
button, specifically the oversized one to the right of the addressee
section, the depressed button picture changes to the tail end of the
envelope leaving a cloud of dust. If you've seen the Microsoft
commercials, you may have glimpsed this little pseudo-animation. Cute!

Like the 32 bit version of MS Mail, but unlike the 16 bit version,
Exchange comes with a spell- checker. You can even set it up so that it
only checks your original content and not any quoted information from
prior messages.

As a little nod to the Internet way of messaging, you can create
auto-signatures that attach to the tail end of all your mail messages.
These also can be in color, various sizes and alignments. Unfortunately,
the style police are nowhere to be found when you need them.

Another option which defaults to On is the `include original text with
reply.' When you reply to a message, the original content, along with
the To-From-Subject header is indented and placed below your insertion
point. If a message gets replied to several times, the message expands
and indents indefinitely, looking like one side of an inverted pyramid.
In a world where over-quoting is a netiquette DON'T, this is a marginal
lapse which will not endear Internet newbies to the Info Highway
veterans.

Lastly, the Exchange message window also recognizes a hyperlink when it
sees one, changing the text to an underlined blue. Double-clicking on an
embedded link will attempt to launch your web browser and dutifully
visit this site. I do not have the necessary Remote Access machinery in
place to test or vouch for the reliability of this feature.

One of the main reasons we upgraded to Exchange Server was for the
Internet email capabilities. I have to admit that the integration of
Internet addresses with internal addresses is fairly seamless. I
appreciate it more each time I hear an friend's description of how their
Internet messaging systems work. Some aren't aware of their own Internet
addresses; most don't know how to enter an Internet address unless I
send them a test message first, whereupon an administrator helps them
set it up. With Exchange, setting up an Internet address - assuming you
have the `@' address - is surprisingly easy. You click on the Address
Book button, then the blank rolodex button for a New Entry, then just
select Internet Address from the choices available. The next window
presents you blank text fields to enter the name as you would like it to
appear in the address book, followed by the actual internet address. (At
this point you could click on other tabs to enter general business
information, such as addresses, phone numbers, etc.) If you've ever had
to remember who someone was by just their CompuServe address, you'll
certainly appreciate seeing the plain English name appear in your
Address Book as well as in the To: window.


Hit the links

Not only can you send file attachments, you can also send the
`attachment' as a link. When the recipient double-clicks on the
attachment-link, the original file is opened, not a copy. This way,
you're assured that the recipients are seeing the latest version. I
presume this is an internal `Workgroup-type' mail option and doesn't
extend across the internet. Alternately, you can insert objects -
spreadsheets, pictures, etc. - so the recipient sees an actual
spreadsheet or picture object without having to double-click to open it.
You can view the data without having to launch the helper application,
though you do have that option if you want to do a little editing.


Message sending options

You can send a message as Private, Personal or Confidential. The Private
attribute locks the message, preventing changes. Confidential advises in
the status bar to forward with caution. Personal seems to just let you
know that the message is, well, personal.

You can have a message sent after a user-selected time period passes
and, interestingly, you can have a message be deleted from the
recipients mailbox after a similarly selected time period. I suppose
it's entirely likely you could have all your mail sent at 5PM and
deleted before 9AM the following morning. However, before I start
imagining various Mission: Impossible self-destruct-after-reading-
scenarios, I'll move along.


Unpaid Assistants

Two of the most useful features of Exchange are the InBox Assistant and
the Out of Office Assistant. I think Bill Gates probably had some input
on the InBox assistant. I read in one of his syndicated columns that he
used to be able to handle all his own email, but after his Internet
address was published far and wide and the messages started coming in by
the virtual truckload, he started to lose control of it.

The InBox Assistant lets you set up rules, global or specific to sender,
subject, body text, etc. Why you'd set up a global rule in an InBox
Assistant, I can't answer: the power lies in the specifics. Here you
tell the Assistant how to handle you're incoming mail. You can now
presort mail before you've even seen it: move it other folders, forward
it to someone else or a group of people, even automatically delete it if
you really want to. If you're expecting an important message or need to
know whenever your boss fires a mail-gram your way, you can have the
InBox Assistant alert you with a special WAV sound and/or a pop-up
window telling you to stop what you're doing and read this late-breaking
mail item. If you can play WAV files on your system (note: NT users
require a sound card; others might get away with a speaker driver), you
can associate a different WAV file with each of your correspondents. You
can know without restoring/maximizing Exchange who each message is from:
when it can wait; and when you'd better check it out pronto.

For example, I receive free Tips of the Day for Windows NT, so I set up
a rule for these to be automatically moved to a folder I've created
explicitly for storing them.

I've specified the From address, but since I get other mail from this
`correspondent' I've also indicated text in the Subject line, then added
the rule telling the InBox Assistant to move these items into their
special folder. When both conditions are met, the mail message is moved
to that special folder.

The other assistant is the Out of Office Assistant, which is similar, in
fact, the Rules dialog box is identical to that of the InBox Assistant.
Here, you can indicate that you are out of the office (presumably you
check this option just before you leave the office), adding an optional
note giving further details regarding your absence. For security
reasons, our administrator does not echo these messages out to the
Internet at present, but our internal users see the note, which appears
almost instantly after a message is sent to the out-of-office recipient.
Instead of an envelope icon, the note comes with a curved arrow beside
an open door icon, so it gets your attention.

You could stop there and have no rules. At this point, the sender knows
you are out till whenever you specified in your note. This message is
sent only once to each person sending mail, preventing a string of
repeat notices stating: `I'm on Vacation all week!' However, you will
probably want to set up rules for incoming mail, again global or
specific rules. Routinely, I activate my out of office status Friday
evening for the weekend, forwarding my mail to my other internet
accounts, which I could possibly check before Monday rolls around. This
is how I've set up that global rule: (**)

Messages sent directly to me from anyone, internally or via the
Internet, are forwarded to my other Internet accounts. The original
copies are retained in my Exchange InBox.

For either the InBox Assistant or the Out of Office Assistant you can
also set up automatic replies. For example - "Got your message. Will get
back to you as soon as possible." - could be sent to anyone you specify.
The custom option is for Exchange add-ins which will probably arrive in
the near future, either from Microsoft or third party manufacturers.


What this article did not tell you

We have yet to implement the forms feature of Exchange, though we
certainly plan to take advantage of this feature to create uniform
expense reports, accident reports, etc. Also, the intranet capabilities
of Exchange Server 4.0 at this time are limited to shared public folders
where shared documents can reside with various access restrictions.
Future versions supposedly will have a built-in browser-type interface
for that web look. The way Microsoft has sunk its teeth into the
Internet pie, I find this to be entirely likely and in the relative
short term.

Currently we have not implemented either encryption or digital signature
through Exchange. Exchange also features powerful abilities to
administer a co-worker's or supervisor's mailbox, either temporarily or
permanently. The mailbox administrator may even have the ability to send
the message as that other person and not just on behalf of.

Exchange comes with an InBox repair tool which, fortunately, I haven't
had to use yet. Unfortunately, its efficacy remains a mystery.

Finally, Exchange includes an updated Schedule Plus, which includes a
contact manager and Steven Covey's Seven Habits of Highly Effective
People tools. I don't really see anything here different from the last
incarnation of Schedule Plus, aside from Exchange integration which is
the assumed reason for the upgrade. But I was never a heavy user of
Schedule Plus, so I may be missing something obvious.


Conclusion

There you have it: an introductory look at Exchange Server: Client -
Microsoft Mail's successor. While initial load time is longer,
performance is much better and messaging is more timely; the toolbar
buttons now have tooltips; sorting is more flexible; the program
incorporates right-click functionality and internet addressing; and file
attachments are augmented by linking and object insertion. And not only
do you have more word-processing-style capabilities with this mail
product, you get a couple of free assistants thrown in for good measure.


[** Graphic illustration can be seen in the Acrobat edition of
WindoWatch]

                          ...............

Jack Passarella is our resident Word guru and normally explores the
World of Word with our readers. This talented man has many other
strengths as one can plainly see. On very short notice he banged out
this important piece, drawing from his hands-on experience. The printing
establishment that employs him is very lucky indeed, as are we. Jack can
be found on the Ilink network hosting several conferences including the
one devoted to Microsoft's Word for Windows. He can be reached at
JPassarella@lehigh-press.com



   ww page 6
   Mobile Computing: Part I
  


               Taking Lotus Notes R4 Home and On the Road
      An Introduction to the Mobile Computing Features of Notes R4

                   Copyright 1996 by Paul Williamson


For those of you who have attempted to use Lotus Notes R3 in a mobile
computing environment on the road or at home will more than appreciate
the simplicity that Lotus has included in Notes R4 for accomplishing the
same task. If you were successful in getting R3 working remotely,
congratulations, you deserve some type of an award. If you were not
successful, don't fret, there are many software wizards and gurus to
keep you company. The introduction of Lotus Notes R4 has heralded a new
and refreshing, and simple, way to get Notes up and running on your home
or remote desktop computer and your mobile laptops.

Notes R4 offers many new and powerful features and enhancements that
make remote computing easy. These include, but are not limited to:

   Named Locations (yes, you can have multiple location configurations!)
   Stacked database icons
   A workspace Replicator Tab
   New database replication options and settings

This article is intended to provide an overview of these features. I
thought about writing a tutorial on how to set up Notes for remote
access, but since it is really so simple, this overview should provide
enough information to get you started. Setting up Notes for mobile
computing is relatively intuitive. Nothing like the hassles and
convolutions of setting up R3. With the following information, even
Notes novice's should be able to set up their laptop or home computer
and be on-line with their mail and Notes database servers in record
time.


Named Locations

Lotus has included the new concept of named locations in R4. This
feature allows you to maintain and switch between different predefined
configurations with a simple click of the mouse. Every named location is
defined by a new document called a Location Document. This document is
stored in your personal Name & Address Book, usually located on your
local hard drive. It must be noted here that your personal Name &
Address Book contains more information unique to the installation and
configuration of the machine you are running on. Therefore, copying
personal Name & Address Books from one machine to another may yield
unexpected and unpredictable results.

After a successful installation of the Notes client software, four
default locations are created in your personal Name & Address Book:

      Island
      Office
      Travel
      Home

In the following screen capture, you will note that you are by no means
limited to these location names. However, you must also be aware that
your Notes administrator may create unique Location Documents for your
use as part of the overall Notes policies and procedures within your
organization. For example, on my laptop, I have created the following
Location Documents:

      Lexington Office
      New York Office
      Remote Location
      Home (Dial-In Networking)

These configurations differ slightly, only because the access to my
Notes servers is different. Figure 1 (**) is my Home location document.
In the Basics section you will notice that my Location type is Local
Area Network and the Ports to use is marked as SPX. This is the same
setting that my Office location uses except that at the office I am
connected to the network via Token-Ring cable and at home I use the
built-in Shiva dial-in networking. The Remote Location location document
shows the Location type as Dialup Modem and the Ports to use as COM1.
When using a modem to dial your mail and database servers, you will be
presented with a dialog for dialing. Also notice that you can schedule
replications of your mail and other databases. More on that later.

These Location Documents become an integral part of the Notes
configuration. To switch between locations (changing from on Named
Location to another) is just a couple of mouse clicks away. From the
standard Notes menu bar, you need only to select File/Mobile/Choose
Location.

A Choose Location dialog similar to that in figure 2 (**) will be
displayed. The Notes configuration is then changed to use the setup
specified by the corresponding Location Document. You do not have to
restart Notes nor make any other location changes. It is all done for
you, on the fly. As an alternative, you can select the location by
clicking on the list of location choices on the Notes status bar.


1. Before taking notes on the road, be sure you have all the necessary
   information of fill in the fields in the Location Document. You may
   need to ask your Notes and/or LAN administrators for assistance.
   Having this information may save you an embarrassing phone call later
   to your help desk.

2. If you do have problems while on the road, be sure to have the
   contents of your Location Document handy to assist the Notes
   administrator or help desk analyst.

3. If your Location Document settings are correct, you can check your
   port connection by using the Trace Connection button in the Ports
   dialog box. To test the connection, select the destination, select Log
   Options, and press the Trace Connection. A connection will be
   attempted using the selected port and the problem can be monitored in
   the Trace Info window. This vastly simplifies troubleshooting problems
   associated with port settings and connections..

4. Ensure you have select the correct modem command file in the Ports
   dialog box and ensure the modem is working properly before going on
   the road.


Stacked Database Icons

Stacked icons reduce the confusion and clutter of a workspace that
contains more than one replica of the same database. This feature allows
you to stack all the icons of databases that have the same replica ID
(databases that are copies of the same database) in a single pile. You
are presented with a less cluttered workspace by turning on this
feature. Notes R4 has a master switch which turns on/off the stacking of
icons across the entire workspace. By selecting View/Stack Replica Icons
from the menu bar, you can enable or disable this function. When
enabled, Notes will check all icons on the workspace, identify replicas
and move them into one stack. Stacked icons are identified by the
addition of an indicator in the upper right hand corner of the icon as
shown in figure 3 (**). Databases that are not replicas will not have
this indicator.

When you switch locations, Notes recalls the last copy accessed from
that location and brings that database icon to the top of the stack. If
the icon that appears on the top of the stack isn't the one you want,
you can simply select the proper one by clicking on the indicator to
show a list of all the replicas in the stack as shown in figure 4. Then
you can choose the one you want from the list. To perform a database
operation on any copy of the replica, that copy must be on the top of
the stack.

1. When using Notes from a dial-in site, the local icon should be kept on
   the top of the stack for improved performance (speed).

2. A drawback to stacked icons is that you cannot open multiple copies of
   the replica databases within a single window.


In Part 2, we will take an in-depth look at the Workspace Replicator Tab
and discuss the new database replication options and settings.


     [** Graphic illustration can be seen in the Acrobat edition
         of WindoWatch]

                          ...............

Paul Williamson is a Vice-President of a major eastern banking
establishment. Just prior to joining his present employer, he was an
independent computer consultant for a number of years. Additionally he
has been a well known host for the RIME network and is a respected
WindoWatch contributor. He has served as a member of the WindoWatch
editorial board from the inception of the magazine. This is the first of
a series of Lotus Notes articles.



   ww page 7
   DERN ON THE INTERNET:
  

             Internet Predicts Overloading of Bob Metcalfe
                       As told to Daniel P. Dern
                   ddern@world.std.com, www.dern.com
                   Copyright (c) 1996 Daniel P. Dern

   [Permission granted to redistribute free ONLY to free-for-access
   online forums, sites and such (including mailing lists), and only
   so long as my byline, copyright and this disclaimer are included.
   Anyone else interested, contact me. - dpd ]


I had a front-page article in the July 1 issue of InfoWorld, on the
every-popular topic "is the Internet collapsing." Bob Metcalfe responded
to it, with, "Internet Intelligentsia Stands on Credos, Not Facts", in
the same issue (p.75, opposite my final 'graphs). Here is my response to
Metcalfe's response; Bob, this constitutes the other shoe finally
dropping.


AUGUST 1996 (shortly after lunch) -- If you've been following the
cybernatterings of cyberluminary Bob Metcalfe during the past half-year
or so (or past two years in Internet dog years), in his InfoWorld From
The Ether column, or elsewhere in various speeches, articles,
interviews, and online postings, you're probably well aware that Dr.
Metcalfe is concerned about the Internet.

In fact, he's convinced that the Internet is overloaded to the point
where it will soon collapse. Why he doesn't suggest the Internet take
two aspirins, go to bed, and Internet-phone him in the morning I don't
know -- perhaps he's not that kind of doctor. But he's definitely
concerned.

It is therefore highly ironic that, according to the Internet, a similar
fate may lie in store for Metcalfe. In an exclusive interview I just had
with the Internet, the Internet opined that Bob Metcalfe is overloading,
and, predicts the Internet, he will soon be unable to handle the load.

Dr. Robert Metcalfe, a suave, well-- -if perhaps too-casually- --
dressed techno bon vivant, and award winner, is best known for being the
creator of Ethernet, and also for being one of the founders of 3Com, and
recently variously publisher, editor-in-chief, and columnist at
InfoWorld magazine. He's been kvetching about the Internet long before
other industry pundits, even John Dvorak or Jerry Pournelle.

The Internet is, of course, a global network of networks, linked by the
IP networking protocols which enable applications on different types of
networks and computers to schmooze (intercommunicate), and has become
best known as the home of the WorldWideWeb (which has in turn spawned
all those intranets, extranets, intrawebs, and IP corrals), which, as
well all know, is the reason we all need Netscape Navigator and/or
Microsoft Internet Explorer. (Conspiracy theorists attribute much of the
claimed value of the Web to PR campaigns by memory chip makers.)

"It's the Firesign Theatre's 'Fudd's Law' all over again -- 'If you push
anything hard enough, it will fall over,'" the Internet quipped self-
referentially, while simultaneously blowing routing loops from its
elegantly carved high-bandwidth meerschaum pipe and signing receipt
chits for new top-level domains.

"I know Bob's worried about me -- well, I'm worried about Bob," the
Internet stated statelessly. "He's pushing himself too hard -- and,
unlike me, he only has one provider and wasn't engineered to scale the
same way." The Internet put down the pile of paperwork on a nearby
routing table, which was wobbling as if it might collapse at any moment.

A green plastic fish which had escaped from another essay wriggled
briefly nearby.

The Internet is flattered by the Metcalfe's ongoing interest in its
health, but fears that this may be a case of the bioanarchistic pot
calling the cyber-kettle black.

"He's taking on too great a load," explained the Internet, dressed in a
open-protocol suit and a <BLINK>ing bow tie for the occasion, at its
open suite in the Hotel D'Arpa recently for an exclusive interview.

"He's writing articles and editorials, he's speaking at conferences,
he's being interviewed, he's getting awards, he's giving parties... Bob
Metcalfe was never designed to handle this great a load, nor to handle
many of these types of functions. Heck, it makes me tired just to think
about it. It's inevitable that he'll prove unable to handle the load,
sooner or later."

According to a recent three-year $100 million study by two mailroom
clerks and a service technician at the Cantseetheforestforthetrees Group
located in Cambridge, Mass. near what was supposed to have been the site
of a major urban mall and housing development that never materialized,
"Metcalfe's appearances and activities have been growing at a monthly
rate of 15%." By mid-2002, they predict, "Metcalfe will be speaking at
every trade show in the United States, as well as at 29% of the Boy and
Girl Scout troop meetings, numerous city zoning board committees, and
several county fairs."

(Copies of the full report, including color graphs and pie charts, are
available for the small cheap paltry sum of $597, payable in $3.00 Ecash
certificates made on a browser with margins set to 6.2 centimeters. Free
copies are available from their web site.)

Metcalfe's silicon-intelligent anarchistica, notably several leading
Ethernet segments at major universities, deny the rumors. "Bob's NAPs
keep him well-rested and productive," reported one at a technical east
coast site. But others report dropped salt packets, open jars of clam
dip, and a growing pile of sport coats and sweaters -- some of which,
one WAN wag reported, aren't as seamless as they used to be.

"Being a pundit requires a lot more speed and flexibility than it used
to," notes Sc*tt Br*dn*r, an alleged academic at a university located a
few miles upriver from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (M*T)
in Cambridge, Mass. "Bob's been able to cope, but he'll run out of
bandwidth sooner or later, and fail to show up for a meeting somewhere,
or drop his speech en route."

D*v* Cl*rk, an alleged computer science academic purported to have been
allegedly seen having a beer with an alleged journalist, says, "We have
computer simulations of Metcalfe running on our academic computers
which show how Metcalfe could run at a higher speed. Unfortunately, our
program refuses to run simulations involving Metcalfe performing
non-academic activities." Cl*rk hypothesized that his simulator was
assuming an arbitrarily large supply of graduate students as one of the
resources in its calculations.

V*nt C*rf, alleged father of the Internet paternity suite and co-founder
of C*rfN*t, adds, "At this point, given the expectations that have been
created for Metcalfe, it's important that he drop something, if only to
prove we're right and he's wrong."

Defenders of Metcalfe claim the Internet is being unfair. "Bob, like all
of us, is comprised of many individual organs, bones, cells and old
parking tickets," points out an Ethernet segment in Umbilical, Hawaii
which was subsequently arrested by the Grammar Police for improper use
of 'comprise.' "To say he's completely overloading, versus that some
muscle or organ may be overloading, is unfair."

"Part of the problem," the Internet said in response to these counter-
critiques, "is that Metcalfe was never designed to handle a load like
this. He still needs security, management, proper billing, guaranteed
service, and blue suede shoes. It's our own fault for continuing to use
him."

I attempted to reach Metcalfe for comment, but he was unavailable
(hmmm!) -- off making a speech somewhere in New York... or was it
Chicago... or Los Angeles... or whatever. (Kinda proves the point,
don't it?)

"I understand what it's like to be overloaded," the Internet concluded.
"But I've got the same confidence in Bob that he's got in me. Frankly, I
think we both want to collapse, and then be allowed to spend a few weeks
chilling out somewhere quiet, downloading back a few drinks, and waiting
for the press to find some other headline-grabbing scapegoat.

"As for all those businesses supposedly relying on me -- heck, I never
said I was good for that stuff," the Internet pinged. "I was supposed to
just be the proof of concept. Making me into that info-super-duper-
highway, that was somebody else's idea. Whoops -- here comes the three
o'clock weather checkers and PointCast update -- back to work!"

Shrugging out of its jacket and into a naugahyde jacket with a large "IP
On Everything" JPEG on the back, the Internet sauntered off to the
nearest meetpoint, singing, in a semi-public key, to a frightening
familiar tune, "I know I connect all those LANs/and the LANs I connect
to are grand/So when I say, IP, aye, IP, eye-pee-eye-eh/I'm lookin'
fine, info-highway/info-highway, no way!..."

Note to readers: Only stunt or simulated Metcalfes were used in testing
and writing this article. Not real Metcalfes, or even his sweaters, were
used. And had this been a real "Internet is out" alert, this would, of
course, never have gotten to you.)


                          ...............

- Daniel P. Dern (ddern@world.std.com, www.dern.com) has been writing,
speaking, consulting, and writing song parodies about the Internet for
over a decade. Author of THE INTERNET GUIDE FOR NEW USERS and founding
editor of Internet World magazine, he's ready for somebody to give him
another Internet magazine to be in charge of. Or even another Internet
column. And yes, he knows his Web site is vastly in need of updating!



   ww page 8
   A Product Review
  

                              NT Tools 1.0
                            QuickView Plus!

                  Copyright 1996 by Linda L. Rosenbaum


It seems to me, that one of the more frustrating aspects of both Windows
NT 4.0 and Windows 95, is the new Windows NT Explorer. This is supposed
to replace File Manager and take full advantage of the new interface.
While it arguably does take advantage of the new interface, it is
incredibly slow. For those of us used to File Manager type replacements
incorporating full featured File Manager tools, Explorer can be sorely
lacking . Another feature not found in any of the versions of NT is a
virus detection program. This has become more of a standard with the
inclusion of a virus scan in DOS 6.20. Still another hole one finds when
using all NT versions is the lack of programs or add-ons that give one
the ability to view files without having to launch the program each file
was created in.

I have come upon two products that can be used either together or
separately to help fill the above mentioned voids in NT. Both are well
worth adding to any NT system and are reasonably priced for what they
provide. One is an NT specific program and one is a Windows 95 program
that works quite well in NT 4.0 beta 2.

The first item is Symantec's NT Tools 1.0. Symantec has been providing
DOS and now Windows 95 utilities for many years. I have been a long time
user and fan of their products although I was not currently using any
because they had none for NT. This product was brought to market a few
months ago after a trial period where users could download parts of the
program, File Manager in particular.

Symantec has also been known, along with Central Point Software, now
owned by Symantec, for producing products that include an incredible
amount of value in one box. Starting with their Windows 95 utilities,
they have begun to bundle the various utilities into smaller packages.
The perception of the end user is that it costs more to buy all the
separate tools as opposed to their earlier bundled approach prior to the
release of Windows95. I happen to agree with this sentiment, but also
recognize the reality of cost of development for another operating
system.

Prior to my discovery of NT Tools, I was using a pair of shareware
programs in tandem that gave me alternative File Management tools and
viewing capabilities. I first started using these programs in NT 3.51
where they worked reasonably well. Unfortunately they created some
glitches in NT 4.0 beta 2 even using the newer versions of both. So I
became very interested in finding something else.

At the time NT Tools was released just when NT 4.0 had begun a more wide
spread beta testing, I was hesitant to install it on NT 4.0. Since I was
no longer using NT 3.51 extensively, I had not gotten around to
installing it there either. However, after asking around a bit, I
learned that several people were using NT Tools successfully and NT 4.0
beta 2.

The product ships on CD. The install ran smoothly and required no
restart to be utilized. It comes with four main modules - Norton File
Manager, Norton AntiVirus Scanner, Norton System Doctor, and Norton
System Information. I consider the first two (file manager and antivirus
software) well worth the price of admission at around a $50 street
price. The remaining two are not as needed, in my opinion, when using NT
4.0, but also are not without merit.

Norton File Manager looks almost identical to what ships in Norton
Navigator for Windows 95. It also looks almost identical to what I had
originally purchased called Xtree Gold for Windows 4.0. I have been told
that the File Manager in PC Tools for Windows 2.0 also looked pretty
much the same.

Norton File Manager in NT Tools 1.0 has what I consider a nice blend of
the new interface while still having the ability, to some degree, to do
things the old fashioned way. It takes full advantage of the right mouse
click and provides a nice selection of available choices when right
clicking on either a directory or file. It is more extensive than the
choices I get in NT Explorer when doing the same thing (i.e. right mouse
click).

Norton File Manager has three different views available - default,
classic and icon. Default is akin to how NT Explorer works when on the
left hand panel one can see all the partitions and shared drives.
Classic is what I am more used to, which shows just the directories of
one particular partition on the left hand side and files on the right. I
tend to use Classic view but do switch to default in order to utilize
some of the other features of Norton File Manager. Icon view shows all
files as icons.

The File Manager has some of the standard options available in terms of
what is viewed/seen in file and directory listings. It has a toolbar
which can also be modified and/or customized. I have left mine using the
standard setup that gets installed.

In order to easily move/copy files to another location using drag and
drop, a second instance of File Manager gets started. There is a
convenient icon on the toolbar to do so. Norton File Manager also has an
icon called Viewer Pane. This, in conjunction with viewers for different
file types, allows one to view a file in a pane/window underneath the
File Manager and easily navigate to different files and have each one
automatically viewed. This was in Xtree Gold for Windows 4.0 as well as
Norton Desktop for Windows and was a feature I have been missing for
quite some time.

NT 4.0 ships with the same set of file viewers that come in Windows 95,
which are called QuickView. Norton File Manager utilizes these and they
can be accessed more directly via a right mouse click on a specific
file. There are around 30 file viewers included in NT 4.0.

Norton File Manager comes with something called FTP Client. It is built
right into the File Manager and is accessible when in default view. It
allows one to easily connect to a company's FTP site, view the files
available on the site, and then copy (i.e. download) them to one's local
hard drive. While I had heard of such products before, I was not aware
of how easy this could be done until I tested it out using the FTP
client in Norton File Manager. All I have to do first is connect to the
Internet via my ISP (via DUN/RAS). I now tend to prefer to download
files this way, particularly big files. The product ships with a decent
selection of predefined FTP sites and it is quite easy to add to them or
change what it ships with.

The speed of Norton File Manager is light years faster than NT Explorer.
It is not quite as pretty since it doesn't show all the various icons
for different files but I think that is what helps it be faster. I also
find it much easier to do basic as well as not so basic file management
type operations.

I have only found one feature of Norton File Manager that does not
properly work in NT 4.0 beta 2. When I try to create a new directory in
Norton File Manager I also end up with a phantom icon on my desktop
called desktop. I have found no way to get rid of these other than to
restart, although I have been told of another trick to do so. It is
hoped that this will be an easy fix for Symantec to make once NT 4.0 is
released. In the meantime, I use something else to create new
directories.

Norton AntiVirus Scanner looks quite similar to what the separate Norton
AntiVirus Scanner for Windows 95 looks like. One very nice feature of
the one included in NT Tools 1.0 is it can be used across a network on
any shared drive. It also works on NTFS drives.

Symantec releases monthly updates to the virus definition files, which
can be obtained from the Internet either through their Web page, FTP
site, CompuServe, AOL, MSN, and the Symantec BBS. Norton AntiVirus
Scanner can be set up to run at scheduled intervals. One has to activate
the provided service to do so in NT. And then use the provided
scheduler. I have not set it up this way but believe it should work with
no problems. Getting and using Norton AntiVirus Scanner was the first
antivirus scanner software I had used on my system since I installed NT
3.51 over a year ago. It is a relief to have such software available
again.

Norton System Doctor looks very much like what comes in Norton Navigator
for Windows 95 as well as what came in the last DOS version of Norton
Utilities, which also came with some Windows specific tools. It allows
you to monitor certain aspects of your system such as CPU usage, disk
space, virtual memory, physical memory, page file size and utilization,
and network reads and/or writes throughput. Most of the sensors allow
information to be displayed in one of two ways. In addition there are
three types of sensor styles - graph sensors, stop light sensors and
calendar sensors. Further most sensors include an alarm that can be set
to be triggered when the condition being monitored reaches a preset
value. The alarm can be set to either display a message or play a sound
file.

I personally have not been using any of the above sensors on a regular
basis. I am using the new NT Task Manager that comes in NT 4.0 beta 2 to
monitor my CPU usage. Otherwise I have found far less need to monitor
the sorts of things I felt it was imperative to monitor in Windows
3.1/WFWG 3.11. I also have 64MB of RAM and a decent sized swap file. And
I manually monitor my available disk space. But Norton System Doctor can
be quite useful in situations where it is helpful to be able to monitor
what is occurring on an NT system.

Norton System Information gives you information about your computer. I
think that NT Diagnostics in NT 4.0 beta 2 provides much of the same or
more information. However it is very easy to use the packaged Norton
sysinfo. It is worth looking at now and then, particularly if trying to
diagnose a problem or to determine if new hardware and/or software will
work in a particular system.

QuickView Plus! is made by Inso Corp., who also provided MS with the
viewers that come with Windows 95 and NT 4.0. It can be purchased
direct from Inso via the Internet as well as Egghead Software online for
$30 with Cue card discount plus S&H and sales tax. Quick View Plus! has
been out for some time and is sold as a Windows 95 product and works
beautifully in NT 4.0 beta 2, at least on my system.

QuickView Plus! can be installed on any drive/partition one would like,
including an NTFS one. It adds around 200 plus viewers. It also adds
abilities when a file is being viewed that just don't come in either
Windows 95 or NT 4.0. One is the ability to actually view the particular
file with proper formatting. This means, as an example, that a Word
document with a graphic in it, can be viewed with all proper formatting
and with the picture being displayed as if you were viewing it in Word
itself. Another feature is the ability to print the file being viewed
from within QuickView Plus! This allows one to print files even if one
does not have the application the file was created in. QuickView Plus!
also allows one to quickly launch the necessary application to do
editing of the particular file, if that application is available.

QuickView Plus! automatically integrates with NT Explorer and Norton
File Manager after it has been installed. It also integrates with
several Web Browsers, including Netscape, MS Internet Explorer, and Air
Mosaic. This means that more files can be viewed within the browser
itself than without QuickView Plus!.

In Norton File Manager, the QuickView Plus! viewers can be accessed in
two different ways. One is by clicking on the icon discussed above
called Viewer Pane. Now the QuickView Plus! viewers are utilized instead
of what comes in NT 4.0 beta 2. In addition, by right clicking on a
particular file and selecting QuickView, QuickView Plus! is called upon.
I think it should have been changed to actually read QuickView Plus, but
since it works as I want it too, I decided this was no big deal.

In summary, I believe that both Symantec NT Tools 1.0 and Inso's
QuickView Plus! should be given serious consideration by any NT user.
Both are reasonably priced and fill voids in NT.


                          ...............

Linda Rosenbaum lives and works in a suburb of New York City. She is an
assistant controller at the World Headquarters for a large global
manufacturing company. She has two young children and a husband whose
full time job is to take care of the kids. When not working, Linda can
be found on a variety of online services and the Internet reading and
writing about her experiences with NT, networking, and multimedia. She
maintains a home network of four systems using a combination of NT and
Windows 95. Linda is the NT Editor for WindoWatch and can be reached via
Email at either lindar@cyburban.com or 71154.2622@compuserve.com.



   ww page 9
   Annoying Advertisements!
  

                               Junk Mail
                  Copyright 1996 by Peter Neuendorffer


I got a junk email from my friend, - the entrepreneur Alice. She has
started a new business: "annoying advertisements". Her pitch reads:

"Hello, out there in Internetland! Have you asked yourself, 'How can I
make a PILE of MONEY with no effort?' If you are one of the LUCKY FEW
who gets this message, then I know you are one of those people. Why work
hard on a project when you can develop Upside Down Marketing and give
them next to nothing for lots of something.

You may ask yourself, "What is upside down marketing?" This is a pyramid
by a different name, with only one level, - your own!

Simply say to yourself, how can I provide some stupid information and
then charge people for it?" Thirty seconds of work can do it all.

My patented upside-down chart allows you to maximize income for minimal
effort. Unlike credit cards, which have a habit of wanting to be paid
back, my system is fool-proof and absolutely guaranteed for the life of
this email.

We will spice up your ad with technical babble, such as multi-layered
productivity or ergonomically encapsulated.

If you are still reading, you are ready to roll. Send out 2,000 stupid
advertisements to 2,000 strangers, and just wait for the MONEY to roll
in as thousands buy your "STUPID" product - that has taken you THIRTY
SECONDS to produce.

Do not ask them to send along the ad. That would be illegal. After all,
you are the one getting the money.

We will email your advertisement to a tightly focused demographic group
of people who are most likely to fall for your pitch.

With the thirty second principle, you can be a drain on the Internet to
people you don't even know, with little effort on your part.

Join the junk email REVOLUTION, and see for yourself the power of macro
marketing. The sky's the limit."


                          ...............

Peter Neuendorffer is the creator of my friend Alice and her many
adventures and pronouncements. He is also a Windows programmer and a
regular WindoWatch contributor. His homepage can be seen at
http://www.users.channel1.com/petern



   ww page 10
    Discussions of HTML: A Regular Feature                         HTML
  

                           The World of HTML
                     Copyright 1996 by Gregg Hommel


HTML? Excuse me, but where did you learn to spell?

Actually, it isn't a spelling mistake. Some of you may know what it is,
while others may think I can't spell. Put simply, HTML is the language
of the World Wide Web. Many mistakenly refer to that as the Internet,
but it isn't, at least, not entirely. The World Wide Web (WWW) is but a
part of the whole entity called the Internet, and HTML is it's main
language.

In truth, HTML is an acronym. It stands for HyperText Markup Language,
and it is a series of "tags" used to tell WWW servers how to translate
text within those tags into a displayable page for the Web.

This will be a new section of WindoWatch Magazine, and it will be
devoted to things HTML. But even that is too narrow a description, as we
will cover reviews of various browsers, and how they display the various
versions of HTML, from the basic 1.0 to the current spec version 3.2,
including proprietary extensions to the language.

We'll look at HTML Editors, known also as Authoring Tools, or software
programs from commercial versions available at some cost to the user, to
shareware and freeware versions available at almost no cost, via the Web
and the Internet.

We'll cover Java, JavaScript, ActiveX controls, using Visual Basic
scripts on the Web, and anything else that impinges on the Web, and it's
language, HTML. But mostly, we'll look at HTML... writing simple and
fancier Web pages, what the tags are, and how to use them, basic design
concepts behind Web pages, and so on.

This section of WindoWatch is in it's formative stages. Right now, I am
an editor with nothing much to edit. Before long, we hope to have both
regular, and guest columnists writing in this section, including myself,
whenever there is no one better to fill the pages. There are many people
already quite good at writing HTML, but not all of them approach it from
the same point of view. Some are quite adept at manipulating graphics
and animations for inclusion on a Web page. Others like me, can't draw a
straight line if their lives depended on it, but can code a half decent
looking Web page, in spite of the drawing handicap.

We are going to use as broad a brush stroke as possible when looking at
HTML here. Animation and sound are, strictly speaking, not HTML, but can
be included on a Web page. We'll try to get someone to tell us the
tricks of the trade in creating animations, and sound files for the Web.

The Microsoft Internet Explorer 3.0 beta, and the Netscape Navigator 3.0
have both opened the World Wide Web to some rather amazing possibilities
when it comes to innovative features. We'll try to discuss these,
including, if possible, various plug-ins for both browsers, and what
they can do for you when cruising the Web, or designing a Web page.

There is one aspect of this section, where I would like your assistance.
Currently, on the Web, there are countless excellent sites to visit. And
not all of them are big, commercial sites. Many of them are sites that
you, or a friend have created. One thing about HTML... it is an
equalizer. Anyone can write in the language, without a great deal of
difficulty, and publish a spectacular Web site.

If you have a good Web site, or know of one, preferably written by a
non-commercial author, let us know. We'll publish a list of sites worth
looking at, and if possible, try to convince the author to write a guest
spot here, telling about the creation of the site; the tools used, the
tricks developed, and the work that went into it. We can learn best from
the experience of these people, and broaden our horizons through them.

We may even have our own "Letters to the Editor" section here, where you
can ask questions of others about a sticky problem you may have in HTML
coding, or can simply tell us about the work you have done, and what
your future plans are for your site.

To start us off, we'll use my site as our first "Pick". Not that it is
anything special, but since I wrote the code, at the least, I can answer
questions about it, and can write a column for this issue on the
creation of the current version, as an example of what we hope to offer
you in future issues.

So, as a start, this is the URL for my site...

http://www.ionline.net/~gregghom

It is a framed page, but with provision for frame disabled browsers,
too. If you get a chance, head off to it, and see what it looks like.
Then read about the creation of it, and, if you feel like it, email me
your criticisms, comments, or, best of all, praise.

But one thing to remember... HTML can be a very interactive language on
the Web, and that is what we hope to achieve in this section of
WindoWatch.. interactivity with you, the reader, your Web sites, and
coding techniques.

Gregg Hommel: Editor
The WindoWatch World of HTML



   ww page 11
   Programming and the Creative Process
  

                           Producing an Idea
                  Copyright 1996 by Peter Neuendorffer


Having written several articles about good design in computer
programming, I am at a loss as to what to write next. Then it occurred
to me that a large part of the creative process is often assumed but
rarely described. Skimping on any one of the creative components can
lead to a muddied and unusable piece of software.

We see a video of a musical artist or band on cable, and assume that
somehow it has been manufactured full blown, when actually, many long
hours of hard work have gone into simply writing the tune. We assume the
musical artists are overnight sensations, when actually any successful
artist goes through years of unrecognized toil, travel, and sometimes
poverty.

What makes a creation a success? If I knew this, perhaps I would be more
successful with my shareware programs. I'm told that product, by itself,
is not enough, and that one must have marketing. The product must meet
a need, and the customer must feel that the product is the best one for
them.

Critical success is nice, but does not necessarily lead to financial
success. One of my programs was favorably reviewed in the Boston Globe.
However the sales generated were negligible. The one corporate client
who could have most benefited from the software was totally
uninterested. Recognition of the company behind a product is certainly
helpful.

Large corporations devote much time and effort to produce a corporate
image, reinforced in everything from stationary to signs over doors.
The Apple Corp.'s apple logo is a case in point, with very specific
standards for name recognition set down in writing.

Borland International came out with a new computer programming language,
Delphi. There was some talk among analysts, however, that people should
stick with Microsoft's Visual Basic, simply because it is from Microsoft
the industry leader.


Writing a program:

Problem Definition, Design, Implementation, Debugging, Testing.

Aside from success, there is a part of the creative process that is hard
to define. The over used light bulb going off in one's head and
crystallizing an idea for a subject which may have been brewing for
months or even years! Not exactly lightening striking but rather letting
a notion sit on the back burner until the frame has flesh on it. For me,
I find myself staring into space in coffee shops trying to answer the
single question "How can I implement this idea in a unique and amusing
way?" Yes, amusing. I feel if a program is to be of maximum use, it must
be fun to use. It must play itself out like a musical composition, in
that it's features are offshoots of a single image. An image not unlike
the corporate logo.


Problem Definition

The question is not so much how am I to do something, as is what am I
going to do. The question is, quoting Alice in Wonderland, "who is to be
master you or the word." Simply because a problem lends itself well to
computing, in my opinion, does not mean it is worth implementing. Form
follows function. Function should not be a slave to stylish form. With
the new rapid application development tools such as Visual C++, Visual
Basic, or Delphi, one can easily create a labyrinth of windows and a
kaleidoscope of features. One must keep in mind that the user is trying
to get something done.


Design

I think that as in musical production, software production is a mixture
of intuition, style, and most importantly, substance. Many conventions
are followed in musical production that identifies the music with a
style, such as alternative or heavy metal. It is important in design to
present a form that is familiar to the user. Much of Windows enforces
this, if not to the degree that the Apple does. But splashes of color,
use of double click and mouse drag over can add a bit of amusement to an
otherwise drab work.

In Visual Windows programs it is possible to design the screen as an art
project - where what you see is what you get. But this design space can
become cluttered with hidden controls, and it is important to name
controls with meaningful names so they may be sorted out both during
coding and testing.


Implementation

The actual coding of the program may be helped along by setting up the
various areas first (stubbing). Then the code is written to flesh out
the various events. Like the script in a movie, directions go from the
general to the specific.

Computer code is usually in an English-like form with a small vocabulary
of reserved words, a library of tasks - procedures and functions - and a
user-supplied (the programmer) data dictionary. The programmer must
decide what types of data is put into the program (input), how it is
processed, and what results follow (output). This input-processing-cycle
applies not only to the overall program, but to the smallest task it
performs. A set of housekeeping procedures may be written by the
programmer, augmenting the language's pre-defined library.

If during a coding session, coding becomes convoluted with many
cross-references and special fix-it variables, it is a good sign that a
module or routine's design is flawed. This is called spaghetti code. The
law of parsimony says that the simplest solution is probably the right
one. Mr. Cray, the designer of the supercomputer, was noted for saying
"If I can't understand it, it probably isn't any good."


Debugging

Debugging involves the minute-to-minute correction of spelling errors
that prevents the compiler from recognizing the various data, to
correcting a perplexing problem where the program performs according to
the rules, but does not give the expected output. Trying various test
data may elucidate the logical error, as well as tracing or checking the
value of a variable over it's lifetime. Often, only an inspirational
Eureka experience can uncover the problem.

As one becomes more experienced, a list of errors can be kept in mind.
For example, if a counter used to count the number of times something is
done in a loop is of a too-small data type, it can produce unintended
results. Using the same counter in a double loop is a sure-fire freeze
bug, hanging the entire machine.


Testing

Testing is an important part of programming, like a dress rehearsal
where we would prefer things to go wrong, rather than during the public
release performance. Presenting the choices available to the user in an
easy-to-follow manner gets a big boost from presenting the work in
progress to a beta tester, who may have unexpected suggestions. It is
an axiom that errors most often crop up during such demonstrations.
Since the programmer wants everything to work just fine, it does so for
them, although not always for others.

Sometimes most problems come from that which is not wanted. If a certain
option must be disabled under certain conditions, care must be taken
that this button is in fact disabled. Because there can be many
combinations and data possibilities involving controls, the finished
program should be tested under as many possible scenarios as possible.

One of the biggest joys of programming is knowing, or at least hoping,
that the work in writing the program has produced something that may
automate or make easier tasks for unknown other people who will not have
to go through the programming task, and can simply use the software. It
is easy for the corporate coder or the shareware sculptor to become
bitter: "One more time and out with the garbage, this time, everything's
coming up roses this time for me. " (Jule Stein, from Gypsy). But far
from being a dull undertaking, computer programming is a highly creative
process. If is_good then it_ok is true.


                          ...............

Peter Neuendorffer is a Windows programmer, the creator of Alice and a
regular WindoWatch contributor. He is the author Peter's Many Things a
very fine Personal Information Manager. He can be reached at
petern@channel1.com



   ww page 12
   The Microsoft Office Series     Part 4                      Windows95
  

                            POWERPOINT V7.0
                    Copyright 1996 by Frank McGowan


As I begin this final installment in the Microsoft Office Professional
95 series, I am struck by the sense of deja vu that hangs over me. But
in fact, it's not really deja vu, because I really have had this
experience before, at least three times in the recent past; I'm not just
imagining it!

Once again, the similarities between PowerPoint version 7 and its
immediate predecessor far outweigh the differences, at least at the user
interface level, as has been the case with the other Office Pro
applications.

The menu bar is virtually unchanged, though there are some subtle
modifications once you open a menu. And there have been some welcome
additions, including the AutoCorrect feature in the Tools menu, and
others to be discussed later. But the overall sense is that Microsoft
has again abided by the rule of not fixing what isn't broken. Not that
some features haven't been improved. Notable are:

 Auto-layout choices now number 24, up from the 21 in version 4.0. The
  newcomers include Large Object, Text & Media Clip, and the flipside(*),
  Media Clip & Text

 A new toolbar, Animation Effects, has been put in for faster access
  to presentation effects

 The Format Painter is available as a button on the standard tool-bar,
  a la Word (and functions in the same manner)

 New buttons to increase and decrease paragraph spacing are available
  on the Formatting toolbar, so you quickly align text vertically. A
  very nice feature!

The Microsoft Network option in Help lets you reach various forums on
MSN where you can get answers to specific questions you might have. (I
wonder if there's a Katie Couric forum?)

The File menu includes a Send command, so you can email your
presentation to someone at a remote site. There's also an Add Routing
Slip option that lets you send it to several recipients, one after the
other in the order specified. That way, they can review the
presentation, add their comments, and pass it on to the next person.
When all have finished reading and commenting, the last one sends it
back to you so you can consider their comments and take the appropriate
action (such as ignoring the criticisms and doing it the way you wanted
to in the first place!). These aren't new in the `95 version, but they
certainly are worth mentioning.

The Tools menu once again proved fertile ground for neat little
features. However, I was surprised to see that the Autosave feature had
not been implemented. This is such an important safety device it would
seem almost mandatory, but apparently not when it comes to PowerPoint.
I'd certainly lobby for this to be made standard in the very near
future.

The AutoCorrect tool is a real winner. Be aware that it now exists in
PowerPoint and put it to good use. I find it especially useful for
expanding abbreviations, such as product names or proper names. So if I
want to put in something like "Analog Equipment Corporation" in several
places, I would created an AutoCorrect entry such as AEC and let
PowerPoint spell it out for me. Sure saves a lot of typing and potential
typos. AutoCorrect isn't just for fixing simple typographical errors.

The Tools menu also contains the Interactive Settings option, new in
version 7. This nifty gadget lets you branch out of your presentation to
other slides, or even other applications, to bring in data that will
support the point you're making. So if you're trying to get across the
notion that opening a Tall Man's shop in Kenya would be a profitable
venture, you can quickly back that up by jumping out to a chart that
shows the number of people over 6-foot-6 in that part of the world. Too
bad Henny Youngman's brother-in-law didn't have this when he decided to
open his Tall Man's shop in Tokyo.

Format Painter is another spiffy feature carried across from Word.
Rather than having to bother with the Format menu, you just select the
text that has the desired formatting, click (or double-click) the
little paintbrush icon on the toolbar, then drag across the text you
want formatted. Presto, change-o! The format goes into effect. The
difference between single and double-clicking is that single clicking
lets you use the Format Painter only once, while double-clicking lets
you use it as many times as you want. Then to turn it off, you just
click the paintbrush icon again. Like many of the other toolbar buttons,
it's a toggle switch.

The Format menu has a Change Case option, but I find it's easier to use
the Shift-F3 combination, again something that has worked in Word for
quite a long while. Just click in the word you want to change, hold down
the Shift key and press the F3 function key. Pressing it three times
takes you through all three permutations: all caps, initial cap, or all
lowercase.

The Format toolbar now includes buttons for Shadow and Text Color,
besides the usual Bold, Italics, and Underline buttons. Still, for the
fancy effects, you have to go to the Format menu, and select Font. The
dialog box has a lot more flexibility, but it does take a little longer.
The Help feature has been modified, most notably by the inclusion of the
Answer Wizard, which lets you frame your question in your own words,
rather than working your way through the Search for Help on, Show Topics
method. So if you want to know how to modify a bullet font, you can put
the question to the Answer Wizard directly: How do I change bullet
fonts?

Such nice touches are indicative of the ways in which PowerPoint has
been enhanced in its '95 incarnation. There's a richness to it that's
very satisfying to experienced users, but it's not so complex as to be
intimidating to the neophyte. Power and simplicity. Nice combination.


    (* How many of you are old enough to remember that this term
     applies to the B side of an audio disk, pre-CD days?)

                          ...............

Frank McGowan completes his Office series with this last article. He is
presently exploring the Corel Suite and will begin his report to us next
issue. Frank is a teacher and computer consultant and a regular
contributor to WindoWatch.



   ww page 13
   A Product Review: Wsock32                                      WIN95
  

There's a new Winsock for 32bit software on the scene. Wsock32 v 2.01 is
shareware and very cheap to register, only $20. Wsock32 from Eric
Friedrich does everything it is supposed to do. It is also a lead pipe
cinch to install and configure!

Eric's-WSOCK32.DLL translates a 16bit WINSOCK.DLL to a 32bit address
space. The standard WINSOCK.DLL which comes from your internet service
provider is in all likelihood Trumpet. Trumpet (winsock.dll) is copied
to your main Windows directory and tagged read-only after the original
file of the same name is given another file extension.(i.e. Winsock.Old)
The two files included in the package are copied to the Windows\system
directory and are also tagged as read-only. A quick check on your hard
drive will ferret out other Winsock.dll and WSock32.dll files for
renaming so that they will not be automatically loaded into memory.
After a re-boot, you're ready to get on line!

I ran every piece of 32bit Internet software I regularly use and found
not a single bug. I have been using Wsock32 since mid-July and am still
very pleased and impressed with it. In fact I used Friedrich's software
for several; weeks before I decided to review the product. In the course
of writing this piece I asked Eric a question or two:

LBL> For openers, what was it that motivated you to develop Wsock32?

EF>  I simply wanted to be able to run 32bit software on top of AOL's
     TCP/IP stack.

LBL> How widely is Wsock32 used?

EF>  It is most commonly used on AOL, GNN and T-Online

LBL> Who is your targeted customer?

EF>  Everybody who has no technical possibility to configure the WIN95's
     built in stack and needs 32bit network access.


                          ...............

Eric has been involved with computers since 1987. First for a computer
company in Frankfurt and then as a freelance consultant in software
development. Since October 1993, he has been a freelance consultant
working as a systems programmer in software development for BOG Koblenz
at the GODICS/Opel project.

For product and update information of WSOCK32 connect to:
   http://members.aol.com/friedv

For information: E-Mail: friedv@aol.com



   ww page 14
   Humor on The Internet:
  


WindoWatch has been publishing jokes, one-liners, computer nonsense,
and Internet bantering from our very first issue onward. Others have
produced their own versions of our practice and we thank them for the
compliment. There is, however, a single unique site that takes the
prize. Set your pointer to http://www.microsnot.com and start your day
with a giggle! It is outrageous!

Our offering this issue... some old and some new!


A New Internet Service!     Author Unknown

    [Upon returning from the Olympics I found this reply to my request
    for information about this "for real" service. I post it here
    without further comment for your edification. Names have been
    changed to protect the uninitiated.]

July 24, 1996

OutBound, Inc. proudly offers a completely new option honoring the
interest of a lifetime -- launching the cremated remains of you or a
loved one into space.

In the fourth quarter of this year, a group of families and other
surviving loved ones will gather near Vandenberg Air Force Base in
California to witness the launch of the cremated remains of their
honored dead into space. The lives of these pioneers, visionaries and
dreamers will be celebrated on this historic OutBound Founders' Flight.

You may purchase the OutBound service now for a deceased loved one, or
you may prearrange the service for yourself.*

The cost for our service is $4,800. All funds received to secure a
reservation on the Founders' Flight are held in trust pending successful
delivery of the OutBound service.

For those who are prearranging this service for themselves, several
payment plans are available. If you have any questions, please call me
at 1-800-000-0000. I look forward to your call and hope to learn more
about your interest in our project.

We have literature describing our service along with a 3 1/2 minute
video tape entitled A Step Into The Universe available for your review.
If you wish to receive this information, please send your name and mail
address to my attention.

Again, thank you for letting us know of your interest in OutBound.

With best regards,

John E. Doe
Vice President, Distribution

* Available capacity on the 1996 Founders' Flight is limited to ten
  additional individuals as of the date of this correspondence.



                      It Might Be a Mainframe if:
                         by Marcel van Kervinck

 If you could kill someone by tipping it over on them, - it might be
  a mainframe.

 If the only mouse it has is the one living inside it, - it might be
  a mainframe.

 If you need earth moving equipment to relocate it, it might be a
  mainframe. (thanks to Tor Sjowall)

 If you've ever lost an oscilloscope inside of it, it might be a
  mainframe. (thanks to Tim Shoppa)

 If it's big enough to be used as an apartment, it might be a mainframe.

 If it has ever had a card-punch designed for it, - it might be a
  mainframe.

 If it weighs more than an RV, - it might be a mainframe.

 If lights in the neighborhood dim when it's powered up, - it might be
  a mainframe.

 If it arrived in its own moving van, -it might be a mainframe.

 If its disk platters are big enough to cook pizzas on, it might be a
  mainframe.

 If Michael Jordan would need his entire annual salary to buy one, it
  might be a mainframe.

 If keeping all of the manuals together creates a fire hazard, it might
  be a mainframe.

 If it's so large that a dropped pen will slowly orbit it, it might be
  a mainframe.

 If it's ever been mistaken for a refrigerator, (or the disk drive for a
  washing machine), it might be a mainframe.

 If anyone has ever frozen to death in the room where it's kept, it
  might be a mainframe.

 If it has a power supply that's bigger than your car, it might be a
  mainframe.

 If it has its own postal code, it might be a mainframe.

 If the operators considered the addition of COBOL to be an upgrade, it
  might be a mainframe.

 If it was designed before you were born, it might be a mainframe.

 If its main power cable is thicker than your neck, it might be a
  mainframe.

 If the designers have since died from old age, it might be a mainframe.


On Corporate Culture:

The Americans and the Japanese decided to engage in a competitive boat
race. Both teams practiced hard and long to reach their peak
performance. On the big day they felt ready.

The Japanese won by a mile.

Afterward, the American team was discouraged by the loss. Morale sagged.
Corporate management decided that the reason for the crushing defeat had
to be found, so a consulting firm was hired to investigate the problem
and recommend corrective action.

The consultant's finding: The Japanese team had eight people rowing and
one person steering; the American team had one person rowing and eight
people steering.

After a year of study and millions spent analyzing the problem, the
consultant firm concluded that too many people were steering and not
enough were rowing on the American team. So as race day neared again the
following year, the American team's management structure was completely
reorganized. The new structure: four steering managers, three area
steering managers, and a new performance review system for the person
rowing the boat to provide work incentive.

That next year, the Japanese won by TWO miles!

Humiliated, the American corporation laid off the rower for poor
performance and gave the managers a bonus for discovering the problem.


It's a Free World

  Has anyone heard of cyber aids?

  You get it from screwing around with the wrong computer.


You're Addicted to the Net If:

  The Top 10 Signs

     10. You wake up at 3 am to go to the bathroom and stop to check
         your E-mail on the way back to bed.

     9. You get a tattoo that reads "This body best viewed with Netscape
        Navigator 2 or higher"

     8. You name your children Eudora, Mozilla and Dotcom.

     7. You turn off your modem and get this awful empty feeling, like
        you just pulled the plug on a loved one.

     6. You spend half of the plane trip with your laptop on your
        lap...and your child in the overhead compartment.

     5. You decide to stay in college for an additional year or two,
        just for the free Internet access.

     4. You laugh at people with 2400-baud modems.

     3. You start using smiles in your snail mail.

     2. The last girl/guy you picked up was a JPEG.

   and the #1 sign that you're addicted to the Inet:


     Your hard drive crashes. You haven't logged in for two hours. You
     start to twitch. You pick up the phone and manually dial your ISP's
     access number. You try to hum to communicate with the modem.
     And......YOU SUCCEED!




   ww page 15
   Computer Withdrawal
  


                      Reflections of a ModemJunkie

                   Copyright 1996 by Leonard Grossman


I really don't know if it's just the time of year, but it's happening
again. There are actually moments when I think I have been freed of this
addiction. Would you believe, I went ten days without touching a
keyboard? Granted, I was in New Mexico on vacation. But I had taken my
Sharp Wizard along in case I needed a quick fix and then never touched
it... didn't even unpacked its modem!

Since I've been back, my time on line has definitely declined. I check
my mail, peek at a couple of newsgroups. But some days I don't even look
at the Web. What could be happening? In part it may be the Olympics. I
was also reading a great book ( Snow Falling on Cedars; by David
Gunderson). Maybe, too, it's the cumbersome cast on my broken leg. There
is no way to sit comfortably at the computer.

Maybe also its is the memory of the majesty of the mountains, the wonder
of the colors, the fresh air, the exhilaration and the shared time spent
with my wife instead of up here alone in my study.

But maybe it's also something else. As everyone gets online, maybe the
uniqueness is wearing off. And as the Internet becomes more and more a
commercial, multimedia, infotainment extravaganza, perhaps it is really
not as interesting or as useful.

On the other hand it is becoming ubiquitous. In spite of the fact that
only a small percentage of the population is online and that many of
those who are haven't the slightest idea how to get their AOL software
to work or to make use of it, it seems impossible to find a bill board
or a television ad without the mandatory http://...... line at the
bottom. If I could only get that Spinal Tap IBM Olympic promo out of my
mind.

And although I never touched a keyboard in New Mexico, I discovered that
virtually every business person I met either had a web page, or a
connection to one (someone else listing his product or service) or
intended to do so in the immediate future. This ranged from a company
providing specialized telephone systems for prisons to Native American
artists.

Of course, many of the pages could be useful. Many companies are being
talked into including the latest, flashiest graphics and other new
features on their pages. What are they paying for this flash and why?

When I want some information, I really don't want to spend online time
downloading swirling globes, flashing marquees and figuring out how to
manipulate frames. There are appropriate sites for such flash and
bombast! But as the judge said to me when criticizing my closing
argument in a mock trial many years ago, "Some day you may have a case
worthy of that level of histrionics, but I doubt it."

The other day I found a notice that the once popular MPEG Movie Archive
site had been closed permanently. It is in brilliant color with blinking
type and took more than a few seconds to load. What was the point? If
you are going to close a site, don't make the surfer wait forever for
the information. The same applies to price lists, product catalogs and
so much more.

One of my sets of pages is devoted to images of stained glass windows.
Of necessity, it includes a large number of images. But, even there, I
have reduced the size of the images, and even separated the site into a
number of pages to make viewing easier. For those interested, I have
made many of the images available in higher resolution and larger size
files, but I have given the viewer the choice. (By the way, you may
enjoy the site: * <http://www.mcs.net/~grossman/gropper.htm>)

From the 50's to the 90's we became a nation of couch potatoes. The
attempt seems now to turn us into mouse potatoes. I hope it doesn't
happen. The computer is essentially a solitary activity. This is an
advantage as well as a disadvantage. It provides time out, separation,
and individual possibility. But there is also need for flesh and blood
community.

If you think the battle for the channel remote is vicious now, imagine
what will happen when multimedia computers with wall size flat panel
screens dominate our living rooms. With fifty million pages already
available, who will control the mouse? But that is a nightmare for the
future.

Oddly, because of the time I spend online, I find that when I choose to
watch TV. I enjoy it more. It is a chosen activity rather than a habit.
And often it is a shared experience, which computing will never be.

Now... Where will I stay when I go back to the mountains? There is that
Taos website. Let me check their recommendations...


                          ...............

Leonard Grossman in an attorney who works for the government. He is a
WindoWatch regular and has been contributing "Reflections" for some
time. Leonard's home page was chosen as a "Best o'
comp.infosystems.www.announce" site during April 1996. He is also
president of his local user group. Comments can be sent to
grossman@mcs.com or leonard.grossman@syslink.mcs.com



   ww page 16
   A Modest Proposal:
  

A Cooperative Venture!

Some of us in the Ilink Browser Conference feel strongly that it is
important that Internet users be protected from the unauthorized
collection of information about themselves and their computer equipment
while visiting Web sites on the Internet.

On smaller sites at least, much of the information which is gathered is
for the use of site owners as most Web site operators are interested in
the numbers of visitors and the kinds of material they read. For most of
us that data in neither reproduced or sold to others.

Nonetheless there is a long standing tradition within the marketing and
sales industry where the sale of lists is widespread. Some of us have
already noted an increase in unsolicited mail and offers of products and
services. Indeed, both the management of AOL and CompuServe have taken
steps to protect their subscribers from the deluge of unsolicited email
offers. Additionally there is a generalized recommendation that Internet
Service Providers (ISPs) be urged to put in place available software to
limit the effect of intrusive Email.

What we are proposing is a completely voluntary commitment to do the
following:

   To inform visitors of the kind of information gathered and its
   proposed use.

   To promise that all information gathered will not be disseminated to
   others.

   To provide a graphic or logo for participating sites to display.

   To urge the major browser and news group developers to include a
   switch to make crucial system files, like the registry, hidden from
   Web site software.

   To persuade ISP administrators, who provide the data collection
   software to their web page customers to keep that data private and to
   add software tools to curtail random spamming of their customers.

In the tradition of the Internet there will be no charge to
participating sites save an announcement on their site that they
subscribe to the MolePatrol goals and guidelines and subscribe to
respect and protect the privacy of Internet users who visit their site.

If this proposal is one that interests you, we urge your participation
to help plan and launch this venture. To join the MolePatrol send the
following information to editor@windowatch.com

   Name
   Email
   URL
   What info is automatically picked up from visitors and how is it used?
   How would you like to help?
   Other info:

lbl



   ww page 17
   It's Transition Time!                                          Win31
  

                       So What about Windows 3.1?

                      Copyright 1996 Paul Kinnaly


It was just a little more than one year ago when Windows95 became
available - amidst glowing reviews and rosy predictions that it would
take the world by storm. Truth is, it didn't happen.

Microsoft expected corporations, a number of whom had been beta test
sites for `95, to lead the buying spree. Some did buy, but more did not.
Windows 95's heavy demands for hardware and the need for familiarization
training were too high a price for a modest gain in capabilities. And
while many home users did upgrade, the bulk of Win95's sales came from
its pre-installation on virtually every new system sold since late 1995.
For many home users - just as for the big corporations - Win95 demanded
too much hardware for too little perceived gain.

While Microsoft touted Win95 as requiring a 386DX, 4 mb of RAM, and 40mb
of hard drive space, power users quickly found that running 32bit
applications - the only true potential gain of upgrading - more
typically meant a fast 486 or Pentium, 16mb of RAM, and upwards of
150-300mb of hard disk space. With 16 mb of RAM selling for $500, a new
1 gig hard drive going for $350, and a processor upgrade in the $150-250
range, many users were faced with nearly $1,000 in hardware upgrades to
make Win95 a useful operating system. Few followed this path. Those who
could afford to do so got brand new systems, with 95 pre-installed; the
remainder stayed with Windows 3.1, just as the big companies did.

Those millions of users did, however, feel abandoned. Almost all the
newest software being released was designed for 95, that which wasn't -
ProComm 3.0, for example - was derided. Magazines, including WindoWatch,
wrote article after article about 95 or even NT, with few words to spare
for the "old Windows".

It was bitterly ironic: if 95's hardware demands were out of reach, NT's
were even less realistic. But, as Microsoft prepared to release NT 4.0,
the magazines talked more and more of NT as the "standard desktop",
relegating Win95 to the least demanding of home users. The cries of
those still using Win 3.1 became louder and more anguished...

We hear you. But the rationale for remaining with 3.1 is now fading
fast, folks. 16 mb of RAM is now well under $200, down about 60% in
price in one year. While last year $339 would buy a 1.2 GB hard drive,
today that same money will buy a 2.559 GB drive (the 1.2 gig is about
$190). In fact, brand new 16mb Pentium systems, capable of running NT
4.0 as well as Win95, are available for under $1,500. While money still
doesn't grow on trees, the cost of upgrading is becoming a less
convincing argument every day.

The past year has shown that, while not the panacea that Microsoft may
have wanted us to think it was, Windows95 is generally a superb product,
far more stable and far more capable than Windows 3.1 could ever hope to
be. Even those "necessary" DOS games work with it. And, with NT 4.0 now
in the stores as 95's "big brother", the prospects for new 16bit Windows
software development are fading fast.

Progress is painful ... and expensive. And the speed with which progress
occurs in the computer hardware and software industries is, frankly,
mind-boggling. The thought of scrapping what had been an expensive
system when purchased and buying a whole new system -just to keep up-
hurts! But, just as the systems keep getting more powerful, they are
also getting less and less expensive(*). In terms of "bang for the
buck", computer hardware has never been less expensive.

Many years ago, I had invested much of my money in a beautiful Apple ][+
system. It was, in my opinion, the best available with a full 128k of
RAM and 16 color graphics. But times changed and I had to decide whether
I wanted to change with them or be left behind. Others went through the
same process with their TRS-80s and Commodore 64s. Each of us made the
choice between staying with a familiar, and largely paid-for, system -
with no future prospects and diminishing support - or making a new
investment for the inevitable which offered more capability and a
growing, rather than declining, variety of tools. Painful and expensive!

The choice facing Windows 3.1 users today may be no less painful than
that which we faced in the past. However the options they have are more
plentiful and considerably less expensive. The short-term solution of
upgrading an older system to be Win95 capable usually runs less than
$500; the long-term solution of a new Pentium system runs from $1,500 to
$2,500 currently. That's still scarce dollars but the alternative must
be faced, folks: Windows 3.1 is on its deathbed! And, while Microsoft
hasn't unplugged the life support as yet, it's only a matter of time. As
those corporate users who didn't go with 95 switch over to NT 4.0, the
last remnants of industry concern about 3.1 and its users will rapidly
fade away.

Like other publications, WindoWatch will have to keep its focus on that
which most affects its audience. And, increasingly so, that will not be
on Windows 3.1...


  (* Today I can buy a 200mHz Pentium Pro, with 17" monitor, 3gb Hard
     Drive, and 8x CD-ROM for less than my 486-33, 14" monitor, 240mb
     drive -and no CD-ROM- cost a few years back!)

                          ...............

Paul Kinnaly is a Management Analyst for the Veterans Administration. He
is the author of many articles for WindoWatch and serves on its
Editorial Board. He has been a beta tester for Microsoft, a host for
several Ilink conferences and has the responsibility for the WindoWatch
home page.



   ww page 18
   Another Loyal Workgroup User!
  

                           Why '95? Why Not!
                      Copyright 1996 by Vlad Balak


G'day! I 'm from the land down under (Australia) and I'm gonna' write a
little article on why I prefer Windows for Workgroups to Windows95.

Streuth, hold on a tic, - that pesky kangaroo is eating my veggie garden
again.

Where's my boomerang? I'll give him a lump he'll never forget.

Oooops, sorry Rover. Hey, don't look at me like that! At least it
matches the one on the other side of your head from the other day.

Ahhh that's better. That flea bitten dingo is chasing him all the way to
the black stump.

Okay. The neighborhood squabble is over now and back to my views on
WFW. Before I continue, I must warn you, we are really quite advanced
over here and I hope you don't get too jealous. After all, here I am
sitting in utter bliss at a powerful 386SX25, 4 megs of ram, 200 meg
hard drive and a powerful 4800 internal modem. And get this! Even the
printer is a 24 pin. Cool ay? Well, it won't be long before you guys get
this type of gear too. He...He...He...

Over the last few years (damm that aging process), I've played around
with Windows till the wee hours and even ran a small BBS through Procomm
for Windows. The BBS software is called GHOST and replaced the original
host bought out by Procomm. WFW handled it well, even doing automatic
virus scanning of new uploads by dropping to DOS while the users were
still on line without loss of speed and even allowing DOS door games to
be played by users. The benefit it gave me was access through the modem
and doorways to my computer, where I used XTGold, a memory hungry
programme. This, I thought, was the Bee's Knees and does show that WFW
is capable of a fairly heavy work load. When users were online, I was
working in the background, doing my own thing.

Then came along the dreaded Windows95 with everyone raving about it.
Well, I tried it four times and deleted it four times, which is an
experience in itself. Anyone who has tried to delete it will know
exactly what I'm talking about and even the experts just format the
disk. Who cares about other valuable information which could be hidden
there. Now, unless something great happens in the near future, I'm into
WFW and staying there.

My main argument against Windows95 is that it completely takes over your
hard drive! Okay, they say it is great for people to use because the
computer boots up and bingo, you have access to everything you want.
With WFW you have to type in "win" ...sob ...sob ...sob, - a bit hard to
do. But this is only a platform for people to start exploring how hard
drive are organized. All you have to do is to add "win" at the end of
your autoexec.bat and it will start up automatically anyway.

WFW takes up relatively little of your hard drive space and does it in
two directories. It is very easy to delete and reinstall, and now, since
the gig drives are so cheap, you can ARJ, ZIP, etc. your windows and
keep it in another directory. If the system crashes just replace with
your saved backup.

Exploring your computer can be interesting and rewarding. Before you
know it, you will be able to do many things you previously thought
impossible saving on expensive service calls when something goes wrong.

Personally, I have deleted, reinstalled programmes and formatted the
hard drives so many times, that the number would surpass the number of
hairs on my body, so who needs technicians now?

This is my personal view that many will not share with me, but isn't
freedom of speech great!

Okay. better go now, that tongue poking goanna is trying to break into
the chook pen and he hasn't got sightseeing in mind.


                          ...............

  [Editor's Note: Since writing this piece, Vlad decided to install
  Win95 again mainly for the reliability and ease of use of its Internet
  interface. In the future, Vlad will be writing "guest" articles about
  his harrowing experiences with Win95 from the point of view of someone
  who loved WFWG 3.11. Although he currently is running Win95, the story
  is not yet over, as he is still having some problems with `95. Vlad is
  a self taught computer user having setup and managed his own BBS for a
  number of years. With his wife, he lives in Brisbane and is regional
  manager of a saw milling company.]



   ww page 18
   A Good and Stable Operating System                    WIN3.11
  

                   The Evolution  of a Windows Hater
                      Copyright 1996 by Jon Helis


My first exposure to Windows was in 1991 when I got my first MS-DOS
based computer, a 386SX 20 mhz clone with two megabytes of RAM. This
machine was *loaded* with Windows 3.0 and DOS 5.0, a teeny bit less
advanced than the Pentium I have now, but a big leap beyond the
Commodore 128 I had been using.

Windows 3.0 running on this small machine, to put it mildly, dragged! If
the applications software permitted it, I frequently exited to DOS and
ran it in a window. Even programs designed to run under Windows were
slow. This slowness told me why many people call this new operating
environment "Windoze". Unfortunately, it frequently crashed or locked
up, requiring me to reboot the computer.

Additionally, the PFS Windoworks word processor frequently failed to
print full documents on the first try. These problems motivated my
switch to Wordperfect for DOS, avoiding Windows altogether. As a result
of all of this, I was turned off by Windows and decided not to use it
from then on.

As time went on, there were more and more programs that would only run
under Windows. Being very un-fond of Windows, I found this trend of
computer software becoming nothing more than "point and click" very
disturbing. I began asking "What happened to the C> prompt?", "cd\,"
etc. What was happening with computers? Was this change for the better
or worse? For me, the Windows hater, it would be a long time before I
found out firsthand.

In August 1995, amidst a media blitz, Windows 95 was released. I
shrugged thinking "Oh no! Not more Windows." Hearing that this new
Windows required at least eight megabytes of RAM (with sixteen
recommended), and a 100 mhz processor, and that many non-Microsoft
programs were not working properly under it, helped to reinforce my
dislike of Windows.

By 1996, my computer needed an upgrade to run the newer software and
multimedia applications. In no time at all, via a motherboard
transplant, my computer jumped from being a 386SX 20 mhz to being a 75
mhz Pentium with eight megabytes of RAM. It was now time to try some new
applications.

One of the hot items in computing was the Internet's world wide web
(WWW). My inquiries into this area determined that the major browser
programs required Windows to operate. I obtained a copy of Windows 3.11
and installed it on my PC. The interface looked somewhat similar to the
Windows 3.0 system I had seen earlier. Even so, I decided to give it a
chance.

To get onto the Internet using my local ISP, I would be using the
browser Netscape and for e-mail, Eudora, both provided by LinkNet.
After installing them, I found a new icon in the Program Manager labeled
Netscape Personal Edition. Clicking it on with the mouse brought up a
selection of programs. With a few more clicks of the mouse, I was
exploring the World Wide Web. Eudora was also just as easy. I was
impressed, but I still wondered, could this simplicity be achieved
without Windows? As a person not fond of Windows, I still remained
skeptical.

An unusual request later came from an online friend who showed me a
feature in Windows I found to be very useful. This friend was relocating
to Florida, and was in search of a list of TV stations in that state
airing the program Babylon 5.

Previously, I had downloaded such a list, so my friend was in luck.
Using File Manager, I loaded this file into a window. Using the mouse, I
marked a portion of the text containing the needed information and
copied it onto the Clipboard, and then pasted it into an e-mail form on
Eudora. This simple feature, was a dream come true for me. Maybe Windows
wasn't so bad after all.

Since this event, I've become accomplished at using Windows 3.11. So
far, with the Pentium 75 computer, I have yet to experience the lockup
problems or slowing down I associated with Windows 3.0. The point and
click interface has made locating and running my favorite programs very
easy. I plan now to use Windows 3.11 regularly and to learn all there is
to learn about it. As for Windows 95, maybe after I have saved up for
and purchased that Sound Card and two gigabyte hard drive I've been
dreaming about, but for now, Windows 3.11 has become a good friend.


                          ...............

Jon Helis is active in his local User Group, the Cajun Clickers and has
mentored a number of new Windows users learning to get onto a BBS.



   ww page 20

                            Herb's Art Gallery

                       Copyright 1996 by Herb Chong

Ascii readers should know that there are a number of computer created
images available in the PDF edition.

All of these images are of Yosemite National Park. This month Herb is
offering us a video... a 2.5 Meg *.avi file.  It  is available for
download from the WindoWatch homepage. What we are including in the
Windows edition of the magazine are but a few of the beautiful pictures
displayed in the video. Herb rarely names his work so I am taking the
liberty.


           Violet Colored Flowers        (c)1996 Herb Chong
           Reflections                   (c)1996 Herb Chong

Check them out on the WindoWatch homepage. lbl


   ww 

EDITORIAL

Editor:                            Lois B. Laulicht
Contributing Editor:               Herb Chong
Home Page Editor:                  Paul Kinnaly
Ascii Edition Editor:              Lin Sprague

Contributing Writers:              Derek Buchler, John M. Campbell,
                                   Leonard Grossman, Gregg Hommel, Stan
                                   Kanner, Jerry Laulicht, Frank
                                   McGowan, Peter Neuendorffer, Jack
                                   Passarella, Jim Plumb, Linda Rosen-
                                   blatt, Ben Schorr, Paul Williamson


EDITORIAL BOARD                    Herb Chong, Gregg Hommel, Lois
                                   Laulicht, Paul Williamson, Paul
                                   Kinnaly

SUBMISSIONS and REQUESTS

Email:                             editor@windowatch.com
                                   lois.laulicht@channel1.com
                                   Editor: WindoWatch
                                   Valley Head, WV 26294

Submissions remain the intellectual property of the author. Manuscripts
will NOT be returned if not used.

Electronic File Access:            All back issues are available from
                                   the WindoWatch homepage. See Back
                                   Issues or anonymous ftp site at
                                   FTP://206.151.74.157
                                   www.shareware.com - Search under the
                                      "All  Windows" category
                                   FTP>Simtel.Net/pub3/Simtel-win3/winwatch
                                   FTP>coast.net/Simtel/Vendors.html

Comments, letters, and requests can be sent to lois.laulicht@channel1.com

WindoWatch (c) 1994, 1995, 1996 all rights reserved, is the property of
Lois B. Laulicht and CCC of WV Valley Head, WV 26294

  
  Vol.2 No.7 ww End

