Text 311, 108 rader
Skriven 2004-11-04 13:53:00 av Michel Samson (1:106/2000.0)
     Kommentar till en text av Stephen Hurd
Ärende: SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE
================================
Hi Stephen,

     About "Web access, false BBS ID" of November 3:

SH> Support for a platform has to come from users of that platform.
SH> However, he seems to want a free utility for DOS that does telnet,
SH> http, ssh, https, rlogin and who knows what else.  Because the only
SH> free one he could find that handles telnet is Kermit, he then rips
SH> into myself and DigitalMan for not supporting it in Synchronet.

     Perhaps you should refrain from getting involved in a situation you
fail to understand:  i REPEAT, the `MS-Kermit' terminal is OK on `SBBS',
actually!  %>  But regarding my BBS UNIVERSALITY promotion, no 1st-timer
would gladly spend money on $hareWare he may not require soon, don't you
think?...  `MS-Kermit' is free but few newbies would know how to use it,
i believe;  Wayne Warthen's `Kermit for Win-16/32' is free too but there
was a major issue, the last time i was able to try it on `SBBS' systems,
including yours as i recall!  By the way, `G-Kermit' doesn't seem ideal.

     Rob Swindell FORCED eventual `Kermit' users to run $hareWare, which
isn't a suitable way to promote it as an alternative to `ZMoDem' at all.

SH> Synchronet has NEVER had internal protocols.

     Who says it has?  It's no reason to SABOTAGE `Kermit', in any case!

SH> So, DM whips up support for kermit, adds it to the default...

     Yeah, "whips up" sounds right here, when i consider how little time
was spent - before he decided that this was FINAL by including it there!
                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
SH> ...it turns out that MS wants something else...

     The whole thread which took place over no more than a week is here:

          http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/Vert-801.QWK.ZIP  (284 Kb)

     I know better than you what i want and i've explained it in length.

SH> He gets mad at DigitalMan for not spending hours configuring Kermit
SH> exactly in the manner MS wants it.

     Don't forget all the topic obstructions and insults i had to endure
while i repeated my request for basic setup information and i waited for
answers...  and also, that i *DID* warn about disabling `WWKfW-16/32'!!!

SH> Yes, it works, yes, it's part of the default install, but it's not
SH> the way MS wanted it.  From there, MS gets mad at DM and I...

     And you?  So you feel concerned, after all?!  Well, i'm sorry if it
happens that `G-Kermit' isn't the best thing around but nothing i can do
matters because the outcome was set more than a year ago - during a long
and hot summer.  Yes, it fails, oh yes, and the fault isn't mine.  There
is no way you can convince me that a `Kermit' which requires the user to
run a pure DOS setup helps to undo twenty years of SysOp pre-conceptions
and not even if he can spare the effort simply by $pending money, sorry!

SH> ...for moving to existing standards and not supporting him who is
SH> using outdated non-standards on an unsupported OS.

     Hummm...  It's outstanding to observe how much attention you've put
into this, before you finally decided to jump in!!!  You forgot `Kermit'
calls for a lot more than would be reasonable to discuss here, standards
my eye!...  `MS-Kermit' is as standard as it can get and it's Columbia's
last *OFFICIAL* release - which is somewhat more mature than some `FDSZ'
PROTOTYPE of May 1997 where the "-e" Escaping function doesn't even seem
to help in `SynchroNet' since it's not put there by default, i'm afraid!

     Oh but, "Yurk", Rob said!  Should this "-e" `FDSZ' item work, there
probably would be a drop in speed due to the overhead and those who have
no problem with the present external `ZMoDem' setup would require that a
2nd `ZMoDem' item is added to the transfer menu instead.  In MY opinion,
it's better to use what it takes and dismiss esthetical criterias!  %-b,

     As unsupported as it may be my DOS setup gets me `Kermit' transfers
as good as 13 Kcps - compared to 4-5 Kpcs - and i didn't try this with a
faster access just yet.  I don't request your support, i provide my own!

     Fifteen months have just past and they add to years of indifference
(a decade!) during which `MS-KERMIT' WAS READY FOR ~TELNET~ ALL ALONG...
                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     All you had to do was to read and wonder why my setup is like this:

          http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/MSK.INI

SH> It's gone downhill from there.

     Oh yes, that you can say!  Down the drain with remarks about myself
instead of my actions/topics, you `OverNet' guys got no lessons to give!

     Anyway, don't forget:  here's something you didn't care to try yet:

          ftp://kermit.wwarthen.com/pub/KermWin/Files/v085/kw32v085.exe

                                                           Salutations,

                                                           Michel Samson
                                                           a/s Bicephale


P.S.:  Take a look at the TearLine, from my previous post to Mark Lewis!


... Rob's SBBS/Kermit:  spend spare-time just to prove he got it trashed
___ MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.45 - If only TelNet OLMR BBSing were *UNIVERSAL*

--- Maximus/2 3.01
 * Origin: COMM Port OS/2 juge.com 204.89.247.1 (281) 980-9671 (1:106/2000)