Subj : Re: QWK vs. FTN
To   : Irish_Monk
From : paulie420
Date : Mon Aug 29 2022 18:48:04

 Ir> So whats the pros and cons of QWK vs. FTN. Hopefully I said that right.
 Ir> So right now I have Mystic BBS setup. Basically right now just use it
 Ir> for myself mostly. (few friends wanted to check it out that seem
 Ir> interested in BBSing). I have had FSXNET setup with FTN (BinkP) and now
 Ir> I have DoveNET setup thru QWK. Is there any problems with that I guess
 Ir> Im asking and whats the Pros and Cons of each? And either way would it
 Ir> have any affect on someone like me who set it all up just so I can
 Ir> basically use it for myself at this point? I actually have a 3rd NET
 Ir> setup but have not recieved a message yet on it, and I sent out a test
 Ir> message. So that will probably be my next little challenge. Thanks for
 Ir> everything!!

I'm certainly not the best to answer this, and I'm sure one of the folks who know these old networks better than I will will answer shortly - but;

QWKs were supported by Synchronet which has become a really popular bbS software; you create an account on the 'server' system for your QWK NET feeds and the setup was a little simpler, IMO.

FTNs are FidoNet type networks, preceeded QWK - well, QWK *networks* at least - and have nodes for netmail... QWK has netmail, too - but I think your netmails go to the 'server' system and then out to wherever yer sending it - while FTNs can send netmail more directly using nodes... 

They are both antiquated networking protocols, and I think they both exist because no one can settle on 'the best' solution. I host both types @ 2o, and once you get them dialed in they both seem to work w/o issue.

I have had more issues w/ FTNs - but I think that has more to do with the software / tosser [Mystic for me] side of things than anything else.

I keep typing, while realizing I shouldn't be the one answering this. :P



|07p|15AULIE|1142|07o
|08.........

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/15 (Linux/64)
 * Origin: 2o fOr beeRS bbs>>>20ForBeers.com:1337 (21:2/150)

.