Subj : Re: MMTerm? To : Jim Hanoian From : Ben Carpenter Date : Sun Apr 15 2001 02:55 am -=> Quoting Jim Hanoian to Ed Williams <=- EW> Also the project would set a standard interface for plug in EW> app's. This is helpful in many way's. The concept I'm trying EW> to preach is that we as Fidonet need to band together to EW> provide free tools to contact all the BBS's in Fidonet and use EW> them properly. An integrated BBS dialer with QWK support, file EW> viewing, and extracting, text editing, etc would be a boon to JH> Honestly, with the reduced participation in BBSing, and the JH> small proportion of those who actually do offline mail, and JH> the smaller proportion of those who use QWK, I can tell you JH> that you are striving for a goal that is (1) meaningless to JH> most people and (2) incidently has already been done (and failed). JH> Why do you insist on QWK with its severe limitations? JH> No involved Fido person would consider using QWK, if they JH> chose to do offline mail reading in this manner at all. JH> It is much too limited, and could actually be considered JH> as "broken" with respect to many Fido standards. But I JH> suppose that Fido standards don't mean anything to you if JH> you're trying to build/promote software for Fido????? I have been watching yours and Ed's comments and have to mostly agree with you, but I do not totally agree with your comments on QWK. Don't take me wrong I am not supporting QWK as the only thing. I have over a long time called and or telnetted in to a lot of BBS's running a bunch of different BBS software and supporting different offline mail formats. The two I have really used are QWK and Bluewave. I have no real idea what others are out there. So my comments are limited to these two. First off different BBS software may support the same offline mail formats in different ways or limit their support of that format. The mail format I am using on this Wildcat system is QWK. I have used the QWK format and the Bluewave format on different Maximus systems. I have also used QWK on on TBBS systems. All the time I have used the Bluewave reader to read both formats. For a long time reading the Bluewave Echo I was hearing how much better Bluewave was than QWK and during this time I was using QWK on a TBBS system. QWK on a Maximus system is very limited but on a Wildcat and TBBS system has all the features and more than the Bluewave format except File transfer. With that said I have heard that there are some third party Bluewave doors that are also limited. As I see it when connecting with a BBS you are at the mercy of the SYSOP as to what you can do based on the software he uses and also his setup. Pick any BBS software and call two different BBS's using it and the setup and things you can do may be as different as black and white. If you do not like what you see or can do on a BBS the best thing to do is find another one that fits your needs. I really do not like the way Maximus supports QWK but if the BBS has the content I want then I must live with it if they do not support an other format also. Ok what I guess I was trying to say is that there were some bad implementations of QWK but also some good ones. And when you make a choice of BBS's to use you must weigh all the items involved with that BBS and sometimes it will include QWK and other times it will not. As for your comments on Telnet. I have not made a dial up connection to a BBS in at least two or maybe even 3 years. It has all been by Telnet. I have even heard that there are BBS's out there that only support telnet connections. Like you stated why pay the phone co to make a connection that you can do over the internet for free. Ok some one will say but you have to pay to be on the internet. With me the BBS connections is only one very small part of what I use the internet for. When I first got on the internet I started telnetting in to a BBS that I was calling before that long distance on dial up. When I got a good telnet client I could not tell the difference between a dial up connection and a telnet connection. I think one reason a lot of people try to talk down telnet is that they do not get a good telnet client. Telnet was not invented in the first place for BBS connections. BBS telnet connections require things that a lot of other telnet connections do not require, therefore the telnet client to do BBS connections needs more features than other telnet connections. Telnet is used a lot for remote applications not connected with BBS's so will be around if and when the BBS's are all gone by the wayside. .... Ben .... MILLISECOND: Delay between a green light and honking horns ___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 --- ViaMAIL!/WC v1.60d * Origin: Chowdanet (401-331-5587) telnet://chowdanet.com (1:323/120) .