Subj : SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE To : Stephen Hurd From : Michel Samson Date : Thu Nov 04 2004 01:53 pm 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) .