Developer Forum

Doesn't matter. The game here is false advertising. Telling
people they can get away with just $59 is misnomer marketing.


Oh but you do and Serenity relies on it.


You don't have to buy a damn thing related to OS/2 if you use
XNap or Limewire. OS/2 Warp 4.52 installs without registration
code and can be registered with IBM no matter where it was
obtained. Every Software Subscription/Passport Advantage
offering is available via Xnap or Limewire so no subscription
is required.


This still stands. Your argument falls flat on its face.


And again, you're lying to the eCS Luser.
--
Tim Martin, The Official and Only OS/2 Guy
Warp City Web Site - http://www.yqcomputer.com/
email: XXXX@XXXXX.COM OR XXXX@XXXXX.COM

No problem really. An abuse complaint to Google will close
your account and we won't have the problem in the future.
--
Tim Martin, The Official and Only OS/2 Guy
Warp City Web Site - http://www.yqcomputer.com/
email: XXXX@XXXXX.COM OR XXXX@XXXXX.COM

eroen Besse wrote:

Yes, they do. If they want further updates, support, drivers,
etc., they have to pay the price through the subscription
service contract. If they want applications that will install
on eCS they have to obtain those applications from the
eCS distributors. Installing *ANY* non-eCS OEM version
application on eCS is illegal, against the law, and can
result in fines and jail time.

You haven't done that, have you? You didn't buy SS/2
from Lotus/IBM and then install it under your $59 eCS
system, did you? If so, please speak up now.

Umm... no it doesn't. In fact eCS is very problematic. You forget that
I hold a license for the Preview, v1.0, 1.1 and 1.2 and none of them
run as well as a *real* OS/2 operating system. As IBM releases new
updates, new drivers, new software (IBMWEB for example) you or
other eCS Lusers will want them. eCS Lusers are unable to obtain
the latest release of the IBMWEB from Serenity because Serenity
can't get it to run under eCS without crashing the system. Serenity
or eComstation.com doesn't offer it and won't until they can bastardize
it enough to work under eCS.

I've used every version of eCS so far, tried installing each and
every version on 10 different fully OS/2 compatible machines
and each eCS version fails to install on 9 out of 10 machines,
from desktops to OS/2 compatible laptops. On those very same
machines OS/2 Warp 4.52 installs each and every time within
20 minutes.

Xnap and Limewire ARE legal ways. IBM will allow registration of
any OS/2 operating system or application no matter where it was
obtained - even if it was handed out at press conferences, demonstration
shows and seminars, training sessions, 'meet and greet' get-togethers.
If you obtain a copy of OS/2 Warp 4.52 and SS/2 v1.73 you can
register them with IBM and Lotus, no questions asked. Registration
equates to a legal license to use the OS and the application(s).



Doesn't matter *how* you obtain OS/2, IBM will register it for legal
personal
use. Just because someone uses a peer-to-peer application doesn't make
it illegal. You seem to equate Xnap and Limewire with illegal activity and
the Federal courts say different.

Obtaining Serenity's proprietary eCS over Xnap or Limewire and using
the offered universal registrations is illegal. No one wants eCS but OS/2
is welcomed.

Your $59 update will have to be updated sooner or later. It is then
you'll find your pockets picked once again by "The Boob". Either
that or you'll give up eCS and return to OS/2.



Your $59 update will have to be updated sooner or later. You made
a commitment to Serenity aka Managed Systems and give up your
right to run OS/2. Time is the valid argument.
--
Tim Martin, The Official and Only OS/2 Guy
Warp City Web Site - http://www.warpcity.com
email: XXXX@XXXXX.COM OR XXXX@XXXXX.COM

No I don't. Nobody does.


No, otherwise they would've made eCS unable to run without. It runs
perfectly without.


Okay, you have a point. However, I was talking about legal ways.


$59 to be legally up to date. If you think that is a high price, then
the only option you have, is an illegal one. Getting OS/2 over Xnap or
Limewire is illegal. Check the copyrights. This might be your way to go,
but don't bash on those who choose a legal way.


No, it's outlined above. You really haven't given valid arguments that
indicate one has to pay more.

Best regards,
Jeroen Besse

eroen Besse wrote:

Really? Where is the latest IBM Web Browser found
at ecomstation.com? Where's the MCP 4.3 beta found
at ecomstation.com?

And you feel 'new functionality' new features, new
enhancements to OS/2 are items you can live
without? Serenity can't add any of those to OS/2.
You'll want them when they become available
and you won't get them from Serenity without paying
a hefty price.

You better read that one again. Enforcement sits within the
OEM agreement. You can't run a non-Serenity-OEM application
outside of eCS resulting in eCS special scripts to install onto
eCS. eCS is *not* OS/2 - it merely uses OS/2 as the base
operating system. eCS itself is a minor third party proprietary
product known to be problematic. Serenity's St. John and
the former partner have publicly stated this repeatedly. To
play this game of "I didn't know" won't fly in a court of law.


Yes, there is a special deal with Innotek to include the product.
But it's a public product to begin with. SS/2 is not. Have you
asked yourself why Serenity hasn't made a special deal with
Innotek to update SS/2?

And despite your claims OOo *DOES NOT* run great under
eCS 1.2, nor does it run great under OS/2. It is lacking far
too many features, options, and stability. Remember, I too
have eCS 1.2 and OOo and know exactly how well it 'runs'.

No they wouldn't have made eCS unable to run. It is used under
a *public* license agreement. Innotek doesn't own it, they simply
own the work they undertook to port it over to OS/2. Serenity did
sign an agreement for OOo's use under eCS.


So far it's not there and it has been available to *real* OS/2 users
for quite sometime. It is now available on a variety of warez sites
as well as Xnap and Limewire. Serenity cannot get it to run properly
under eCS and any claims that the holdup is because of an inability
to obtain it or a lack of staff to make it available is hogwash.

So what is it you're doing that I'm not? If we both have T40's what
does your machine do that mine does not? Or is there more work
required to install 'without a glitch'? What exactly does that 'glitch'
consist of?


So how do you explain OS/2 Warp 4.52 installing on all 10 machines
within 20 minutes? Is your theory now going to be that I've somehow
rigged these machines to purposely fail with eCS?

Why do others continually complain within the eCS Yahoo Groups
and public newsgroups of their failure to get eCS installed "as
advertised"? Yes, some do spend countless hours fudging, tweaking,
pleading and begging for help and assistance for limited success
but that kind of success completely defies the 'as advertised' claims
that eCS has a better installer and installs 'without a glitch'.

Serenity was constantly being made a fool out of at various demonstrations
of eCS in Los Angeles, Chicago, Denver when eCS failed to install 'as
advertised' in front of eCS investors and non-investors. It would behoove
them to ensure through repeated rehearsals to make sure any new
installation demonstrations used machines that were extremely compatible.
Is the audience being lied to by such phony demonstrations?

So the backup I've made of my legal copy of OS/2, which is a
reproduction, is illegal? The fact that I use that backup is again,
illegal? And I send that backup to another OS/2 user who has
a broken OS/2 CD is illegal?

The license to use OS/2 *comes* with OS/2 and not

Ok, time to get back on focus, because it's getting funny.

The original question:


> Okay, here's a topic for this NG. I asked once before but got no
> reply that I could detect. So this is a rewording...
>
> Basically: I know that, from time to time, eCS upgrades appear
> and are made available for download from the site. How often are
> these incorporated into the CDs which the various retailers sell?
> Or must I continue to download multi-megabytes using my slo-o-ow
> phone line? (The OS/2::eCS package is good and the vendors seem
> conscientious in improving it, so this _not_ a knocking question,
> in any way shape or form.) Any ideas?

Two more posts of interest:


> To my knowledge (eCS 1.1), which isn't totally comprehensive, there
was never any regular refreshes of the eCS media to incorporate these
s/w updates.


> Thanks Stewart (and Don, by a separate posting). Yes, I can see
> the logic of making distinct fixpacks -- in the OS/2 tradition in
> fact. I'll make notes of the *.hu site, for when I get organised
> enough to upgrade from eCS-1.0 <g> and play catch-up. Mensys was
> at one time assembling fixpacks, so maybe I should ask them also.

So it's clear he asked about the operating system.

Tim comes around:


> Serenity issues a new release and charges $300 for it.
> The Preview cost $90. eCS v1.0 cost $300. eCS v1.1 cost $300.
> eCS v1.2 cost $300.
>
> If you made it to v1.2 then you've invested over $1,000

Some discussion, snipped:





Now it's time to close the circle.

You mourn about that with the $59 you don't upgrade the applications.
Well, that's correct. But, the original poster (look up, or grab the
original posts) didn't ask about upgrading the applications.

So did I tell the truth? Yes.

Whether or not your $300 claim for an upgrade in this context is just
false or a deliberate try to let eCS look much more expensive than it
(verifyable) is, I'll leave that to all readers.

Tim, thanks for making me laugh! :-D

Final:

You are the one that advertises to use [eCS SCAM] and to filter out
messages that contain that string in the subject.
- If you do what you say, you won't read this.
- If, however, you react on this message, you agree that you don't trust
the thing that you're trying to sell to others ([eCS SCAM]). So how can
we then believe that other thing you're selling (eCS is bogus)?
It would be wise to not react... but that's up to you.

Oh, and if you react, or if you want to try other FUD on me, too bad.
From now on you're in my killfile: I decided that from now on I'd
rather spend my time in creating things for the OS/2 and eCS community,
than to argue with FUDsters.

Best regards,
Jeroen Besse

eroen Besse wrote:

Now it's time to correct the circle.

Yes and No. He avoided telling the truth about the whole cost of
the eCS product package hoping to con the reader into believing
the $59 version of eCS is the final cost. It's called "bait and switch"
and the phrase you conveniently snipped out of the previous posts.

The 'upgrade' and the 'full version' eCS are exactly the same. Any
new or previous OS/2 user can purchase the eCS upgrade product
and with much diligence, fudging, tweaking, praying and begging
install a full working eCS product. Yet that product is useless without
the full set of eCS addons required and necessary to maintain any
future with eCS.

Readers need the truth as reported by Joe Farruggio who angrily noted:

" I ordered the full set of ecs1.2 ... My credit card was charged *$352.00*
on Nov9,2004. I was told by BMT that it would take about 2 weeks to
get delivery. On Dec 3 or 4, I placed a protest with American Express ...
It is now Dec. 8 and still no word or delivery. " /s/ Joe Farruggio

If/when Joe receives his eCS 1.2 it will arrive on CD and be labeled
eCS v1.2. The upgrade version is labeled exactly they same.


Fools laugh at themselves easily.

Yes I do. I advise all readers who wish to avoid reading anything
regarding the scam known as eCS to be alerted my message refers
in response to an eCS Luser posting another piece of eCS spam.


Of course I will. I KNOW that what you are doing is spamming on
behalf of eCS. Those who avoid reading messages with the [eCS
SCAM] alert will be saved from wading through more eCS spam.


I don't agree whatsoever. I'm confident my alert is working and being
seen. You prove that by responding yourself.


Why would it be unwise to react to another bait and switch claim
made by an eCS investor? It is to my advantage to respond.
eCS is a failed product. You can't name one Enterprise customer
nor provide the reader with the address of the Serenity Systems
aka Managed System storefront. No one is buying eCS other
than a few IBM haters such as yourself.

eCS is viewed and hated by the OS/2 community just as Lindows is
viewed and hated by the Linux community. Lindows is nothing more
than a ripoff of Linux and eCS is exactly the same.


Too bad? Stomp those widdle feet, Jerone.


Then you admit I've exposed your lies and false advertising. Thank you.


You mean you'd rather spend your time creating more lies and false
advertising in an effort to destroy OS/2 and hopefully save your failed
eCS investment.

Thanks Jerone. I look forward to exposing your "killfile" claim lie. It
will be fun to make you look like a fool once again.

BTW, what kind of name is Jerone? Does it have a special meaning?
--
Tim Martin, The Official and Only OS/2 Guy
Warp City Web Site - http://www.warpcity.com
email: XXXX@XXXXX.COM OR XXXX@XXXXX.COM

No thank YOU! Another eCS Whiner has been cut-off successfully.

--
Tim Martin, The Official and Only OS/2 Guy
Warp City Web Site - http://www.yqcomputer.com/
email: XXXX@XXXXX.COM OR XXXX@XXXXX.COM

On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 22:00:40 UTC, Jeroen Besse < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >



THANK YOU...
--
From the eComStation 1.2 of Doug Bissett
doug dot bissett at attglobal dot net
(Please make the obvious changes, to e-mail me)

You're welcome.
I'm beta-testing RBLcheck 2.1 now...
Something from the last few days gave me the idea to add the possibility
to list IP addresses from where spam is sent. RBLcheck already had a
local whitelist, it now gets a local blacklist.
Another improvement: the header parsing is much better, and the need for
the keyword 'ReceivedRFC' is eliminated.

On Tuesday, in article < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >



This is patently untrue; such copies have no more legal validity than an
Eminem track pirated through the old Napster or Kazaa.

There must be someone in this group that has the requisite details of
IBM's lawyers' e-mail addresses: I'm sure their security department would
be very interested in Larry advocating theft of copyright.

--
Brian {Hamilton Kelly} XXXX@XXXXX.COM
"I don't use Linux. I prefer to use an OS supported by a large multi-
national vendor, with a good office suite, excellent network/internet
software and decent hardware support."