RevG and NT (AREV Specific)
At 12 OCT 1999 11:21:06AM CT Savell wrote:
OK, since there was no response to my earlier query, lets try this:
Has any one successfully run a REVG application on an NT network with NT workstations?
At 12 OCT 1999 05:22PM Steve Smith wrote:
Yup. That question I *can* answer…
Steve
At 12 OCT 1999 05:37PM [email protected] wrote:
Well, don't keep us in suspense!
The answer is…….
here, I'll help you out:
a) it only works when the IT department stands on their heads and sings Misty
b) everywhere except Alabama, Canada and where prohibited by law.
c) better than my companion's version
d) at this time, I do not have firm estimates of the time frames required to answer this question, but it is my planning objective to have provided the fundamentals to you in just over 2 years, however, plans change, and I might never answer your question since I'll have received feedback from the majority of users telling me their needs will have changed.
At 13 OCT 1999 05:04PM Harvey Horsman wrote:
We have had our REVG application installed and running on a NT Server
with NT workstations since Sept/95.
That site recently replaced all of there workstations which came pre-
loaded with Windows 98. The application would not run AT ALL.
They have since replaced Win 98 with Win 95 and are back up and running.
At 13 OCT 1999 06:44PM CT Savell wrote:
Well, that's two success stories. Steve Smith has had the same experience with his RevG application. Our's is not locking at two different user locations. One has both 95 and 98 working on the NT network but not NT workstations.
If you would be willing to share your NT setup with our network guy, please contact me at [email protected].
Thanks
Tom
At 16 NOV 1999 04:46PM CT Savell wrote:
For those who were following the progress on this, we finally solved the problem my customer was having with record locking of our REVG application on NT workstations with an NT Server Network. It appears that their 5-user REV.EXE file was corrupted because when a different REV.EXE was used the problem went away. Ironically, the old (bad) 5-user bump REV.EXE works fine on their LANTASTIC network but failed to lock records on the NT system. The new 8-user REV.EXE is actually older in time than the original 5-user system with the problem. Furthermore there are no other unusal behavior with the bad 5-user REV.EXE. Strange but true!
At 17 NOV 1999 09:22AM [email protected] - [url=http://www.sprezzatura.com]Sprezzatura Group[/url] wrote:
Silly question, but could one of the EXEs be an IBM version and the other a generic version?
At 17 NOV 1999 12:15PM CT Savell wrote:
Wow Aaron, you've got me there. I didn't even know that there were two different REV.EXE releases! Both single user REVG's were purchased from either COSMOS or ELF and then bumped from bump disks again from COSMOS or ELF. (Actually the older 8-user network was obtained from COSMOS with a different commerical name from "BUMP" but I don't remember what they called it back then.)
How would I be able to tell if one is IBM or generic?
At 17 NOV 1999 12:30PM [email protected] - [url=http://www.sprezzatura.com]Sprezzatura Group[/url] wrote:
On the original banner, where is says "You are using a copy of REVELATION which is owned by COSMOS…" (and I can't remember the rest) has the serial number and a release or revision number. For IBM machines it will say IBM. For clones, it should say GEN or generic or MS-DOS or something like that.
Back them a true blue IBM wasn't the same as a clone and the EXE was designed to run on either PC-DOS or MS-DOS. I was doing some testing when 95 first came out, and there was a difference in how colours were generated and what ANSI.SYS did based on the different EXEs and the OS version. Networking has seemed fine and I didn't do heavy duty math to try and break it.