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)
