Coconet Users Beware!

3 views
Skip to first unread message

Chris Phillips

unread,
Sep 1, 1993, 3:17:05 PM9/1/93
to
If there are any of you people out there that are using Coconet or
are thinking of buying Coconet, here's a little piece of info
that you should take into consideration:

Our company purchased a copy of Coconet 3.X from another company that
was no longer using it. They transferred their license agreement to
us. We then called and talked to Brian Dear and were amazed at Coconut
Computing's reaction. They informed us that they would not give us
any customer support whatsoever (we were missing a disk). In fact, they
explained that the license agreement neither allows nor disallows transfer
of the license agreement from one party to another. The bottom line
is if you buy a copy of Coconet, your stuck with it for life because
you could'nt even give it away since there is no customer support with
it. Major drawback I'd say. In a world where there are many solutions
to a given problem, customer support makes the difference. If a company
is in such a financial state that they cannot support their software,
I really wonder if they are not destined for extinction? Well, they're
not WordPerfect (not even close)!

You decide.

==========================================================================
Chris Phillips <c...@sosi.com> Spectrum Online Systems Inc
Voice: 719-576-6845 2860 S. Circle Dr. Ste 2202
Data: 719-576-6853 (2400) Colorado Springs, CO 80906
Data: 719-576-0300 (V.32bis)
==========================================================================
"A World of Information on Your Desktop"
==========================================================================


--


Brian Dear

unread,
Sep 1, 1993, 7:24:06 PM9/1/93
to
Mr. Phillips has now had his say, as he said he would.

Just for the record I will state that if anyone has questions
about pricing or policies you should contact our company
directly and not rely solely on information obtained from
a rather unreliable source such as USENET.

-- brian dear
coconut computing, inc.
la jolla, california
br...@coconut.com

dcr...@uoft02.utoledo.edu

unread,
Sep 2, 1993, 12:28:34 AM9/2/93
to

I notice you did not dispute any of what he said...

>
>

Brian Dear

unread,
Sep 2, 1993, 10:44:52 AM9/2/93
to
dcr...@uoft02.utoledo.edu wrote:
:
: I notice you did not dispute any of what he said...
:

That is correct. And I'm not going to. What good would
it do? Nobody here is interested in the truth. This is
USENET. Home of unsubstantiated claims, false rumors,
idle threats, whining, ignorance, and misinformation.
The truth is not welcome here.

Roy M. Silvernail

unread,
Sep 2, 1993, 12:57:04 PM9/2/93
to
coc...@crash.cts.com (Brian Dear) writes:

> dcr...@uoft02.utoledo.edu wrote:
> :
> : I notice you did not dispute any of what he said...
> :
>
> That is correct. And I'm not going to. What good would
> it do? Nobody here is interested in the truth. This is
> USENET. Home of unsubstantiated claims, false rumors,
> idle threats, whining, ignorance, and misinformation.
> The truth is not welcome here.

That is, if you'll pardon the expression, a shitty attitude, Brian. I,
for one, would have appreciated a simple confirmation or refutation.
Remember, you were the one who chose to speak up in public regarding the
original article.

The truth _is_ welcome here, regardless of your personal feelings. Now
that you have specifically declined to dispute that article, you have,
in many readers' eyes, confirmed it.

You could clear the air quite a bit by posting a simple explanation of
Coconet's policy regarding resale of a Coconet license and subsequent
availability of customer support for that resold license. It could go a
long way toward restoring your corporate credibility. Right now, given
the attitude you display above, I'm inclined to write Coconet off as an
unusable resource.
--
Roy M. Silvernail -- r...@sendai.cybrspc.mn.org
"I'm a family man, model citizen."
-- Warren Zevon

Tom Gillman

unread,
Sep 2, 1993, 3:34:46 PM9/2/93
to
coc...@crash.cts.com (Brian Dear) writes:

>Just for the record I will state that if anyone has questions
>about pricing or policies you should contact our company
>directly and not rely solely on information obtained from
>a rather unreliable source such as USENET.

unreliable? Some of the most useful information I've ever learned has come
from Usenet, as well as answers to questions, problems, etc.
You do have to bias filter some of it, but you pretty much have to do that
with anything these days.

--
Tom Gillman, Systems Programmer |"I think you crossed that fine line
Wells Computer Center-Ga. State Univ. | between polite lying and outright
(404) 651-4503 sys...@gsusgi2.gsu.edu | sarcasm" -- Dilbert
My opinions, not GSU's... |

Tom Gillman

unread,
Sep 2, 1993, 3:38:46 PM9/2/93
to
coc...@crash.cts.com (Brian Dear) writes:

>That is correct. And I'm not going to. What good would
>it do? Nobody here is interested in the truth. This is
>USENET. Home of unsubstantiated claims, false rumors,
>idle threats, whining, ignorance, and misinformation.
>The truth is not welcome here.

So I take it that everything you've said is a lie?

Brian Dear

unread,
Sep 2, 1993, 3:42:45 PM9/2/93
to
Roy M. Silvernail (r...@sendai.cybrspc.mn.org) wrote:
:
:[...]
:

I will make no further statements one way or the other regarding
this issue. Not in comp.bbs.misc, at least. Sorry. I don't
participate in this forum that often, and I don't have the time to
constantly put out the fires of misunderstanding that keep igniting
here.

In a nutshell, there is a lot more to the story (as is usually the
case) than what Mr. Phillips originally wrote. More than even he
probably knows. But it is not public information, and I'm not
going to make it public.

As for our policy, we believe it is fair that if you want to do
business with a company, you do business with that company, not
go behind their back and pay someone else for the company's product
and then expect support from the company for free. You don't get
something for nothing. If you want something for nothing, use
public domain software. This will sound reasonable to people who
pay for goods and services, and unreasonable to people who expect
goods and services to be free. So be it.

David Reeve Sward

unread,
Sep 2, 1993, 5:13:24 PM9/2/93
to
Excerpts from netnews.comp.bbs.misc: 2-Sep-93 Re: Coconet Users Beware!
by Tom Gil...@gsusgi2.gsu.
> coc...@crash.cts.com (Brian Dear) writes:
> >That is correct. And I'm not going to. What good would
> >it do? Nobody here is interested in the truth. This is
> >USENET. Home of unsubstantiated claims, false rumors,
> >idle threats, whining, ignorance, and misinformation.
> >The truth is not welcome here.
>
> So I take it that everything you've said is a lie?

Perhaps the original claim was a lie. I don't know. "This is USENET".
--
David Sward swa...@cmu.edu Finger or email for PGP public key 3D567F

Marc Jellinek

unread,
Sep 2, 1993, 6:59:09 PM9/2/93
to
coc...@crash.cts.com (Brian Dear) writes:

Perhaps you would dispute his claims in public, as it seems you have
nothing to hide. It would go a long way toward repairing the damage to
Cononut computing's reputation in alt.bbs and comp.sys.bbs

Besides, while it may be "business like" to say "come into my office and
I'll explain it to you person to person", that usually translates to "I'm
going to flim-flam you with my wit and inteligence.....or just confuse
the hell out of you until you go away"

Could you please prove me wrong?

William C Beegle

unread,
Sep 2, 1993, 7:15:03 PM9/2/93
to
In article <1993Sep02.124245.2100@crash> coc...@crash.cts.com (Brian Dear) writes:

->As for our policy, we believe it is fair that if you want to do
->business with a company, you do business with that company, not
->go behind their back and pay someone else for the company's product
->and then expect support from the company for free. You don't get
->something for nothing. If you want something for nothing, use
->public domain software. This will sound reasonable to people who
->pay for goods and services, and unreasonable to people who expect
->goods and services to be free. So be it.
->
->-- brian dear
-> coconut computing, inc.

The way I see it, the original company ALREADY paid for support, and with
a title transfer, you would still be supporting only one user. It would
cost you nothing more (and if it did, charge a $5 fee or something to
cover the paperwork) and the original user would be rid of software that
didn't serve their purposes adequately.

It seems that you want to keep the support money even though you KNOW the
customer will no longer need support.

Perhaps you should refund the portion of the purchase price earmarked for
support to the original purchaser, since it is coconut who is getting
something for nothing otherwise.

-willie beegle

Marc Jellinek

unread,
Sep 2, 1993, 7:04:12 PM9/2/93
to
coc...@crash.cts.com (Brian Dear) writes:

> dcr...@uoft02.utoledo.edu wrote:
> :
> : I notice you did not dispute any of what he said...
> :
>
> That is correct. And I'm not going to. What good would
> it do? Nobody here is interested in the truth. This is
> USENET. Home of unsubstantiated claims, false rumors,
> idle threats, whining, ignorance, and misinformation.
> The truth is not welcome here.
>

> la jolla, california
>


Gods, you are really intend on losing any potential customers from
alt.bbs and comp.sys.bbs aren't you?

I read them both so I can pick up things about various BBS packages, as I
install and modify them for a living. By scanning through "HELP me
figure this out...." type messages, I can figure out what certain BBS
packages are lacking in, and what others are strong in. What I have seem
of coconet, both from this side of the screen and from installing it is
Coconut Computing needs to learn a lot about dealing with their
customers. Closed door "explanations" are the breeding ground of
mistrust....while openly discussed disputes (let me emphasize DISCUESSED,
rath than the DMC-ITCnet-Renegade flame war that had capitalized the
majority of the bandwidth here) lead to trust and respect to both people
and the companies they own/represent.

PLease excuse the typos...net lag is a bitch, and I type faster than I
think (please don't flame this comment).

Good day, and good luck

Erik G Lindberg

unread,
Sep 2, 1993, 7:55:41 PM9/2/93
to

OK - we got it. You don't dispute Philipps words and you think that usenet
is a place for whining and ignorance. Well, you just proved it. As for your
coconet company I can just say; Adios amigos!

This makes me think of "It's better to shut up and ...." :-)

Regards,

--
Erik Gunnar Lindberg
e...@stacken.kth.se

dcr...@uoft02.utoledo.edu

unread,
Sep 2, 1993, 9:19:33 PM9/2/93
to
In article <1993Sep02.124245.2100@crash>, coc...@crash.cts.com (Brian Dear) writes:
> Roy M. Silvernail (r...@sendai.cybrspc.mn.org) wrote:
> :
> :[...]
> :
>
> I will make no further statements one way or the other regarding
> this issue. Not in comp.bbs.misc, at least. Sorry. I don't
> participate in this forum that often, and I don't have the time to
> constantly put out the fires of misunderstanding that keep igniting
> here.
>
> In a nutshell, there is a lot more to the story (as is usually the
> case) than what Mr. Phillips originally wrote. More than even he
> probably knows. But it is not public information, and I'm not
> going to make it public.

Ahh...the Richard Nixon defense.


>
> As for our policy, we believe it is fair that if you want to do
> business with a company, you do business with that company, not
> go behind their back and pay someone else for the company's product
> and then expect support from the company for free.

But the second owner purchased the product, from the original owner
who paid you your price. If the original owner still had it, wouldn't you
support them???



You don't get
> something for nothing. If you want something for nothing, use
> public domain software. This will sound reasonable to people who
> pay for goods and services, and unreasonable to people who expect
> goods and services to be free. So be it.

I buy a car with 4 years left on the warranty, it does not evaporate.

Sean P. Ryan, Hardcore Alaskan

unread,
Sep 2, 1993, 11:51:00 PM9/2/93
to
In article <1993Sep02.074452.17001@crash>, coc...@crash.cts.com (Brian Dear) writes...
[his second consecutive flame of the net]

>
>That is correct. And I'm not going to. What good would
>it do? Nobody here is interested in the truth. This is
>USENET. Home of unsubstantiated claims, false rumors,
>idle threats, whining, ignorance, and misinformation.
>The truth is not welcome here.

Oh, so that's why you've written your software in a manner which
doesn't allow any Usenet support. Thanks for letting us know.

--
Sean Patrick Ryan, fs...@aurora.alaska.edu or se...@fredbox.cts.com
(.sig under construction...look for the Grand Opening of our brand
new .sig in August!^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hwhen I get around to it.)

Roy M. Silvernail

unread,
Sep 3, 1993, 12:11:20 AM9/3/93
to
coc...@crash.cts.com (Brian Dear) writes:

> As for our policy, we believe it is fair that if you want to do
> business with a company, you do business with that company, not
> go behind their back and pay someone else for the company's product
> and then expect support from the company for free. You don't get
> something for nothing. If you want something for nothing, use
> public domain software. This will sound reasonable to people who
> pay for goods and services, and unreasonable to people who expect
> goods and services to be free. So be it.

Why do you have such a difficult time saying you offer a
non-transferrable license? I'm sure you inform your clients of this at
the time of purchase, as well. No big deal, Brian. No need to tap
dance around it.

Michael D. Maxfield

unread,
Sep 3, 1993, 12:47:43 AM9/3/93
to
In article <930902.221120.0...@sendai.cybrspc.mn.org> r...@sendai.cybrspc.mn.org (Roy M. Silvernail) writes:
>
>Why do you have such a difficult time saying you offer a
>non-transferrable license? I'm sure you inform your clients of this at
>the time of purchase, as well. No big deal, Brian. No need to tap
>dance around it.

Point of laymans law... (I watch Wapner;-)

I believe the original post mentioned that the license neither allowed,
nor disallowed the resale of the product.

In California, (other states may vary) a contract (ie: the license),
if it contains any abiguities, is settled in the favor of the person
who did NOT write the contract.

You might want to check with some legal authority familiar with the law
in the license issuers state, and if they think you have a case, you might
bring these points to the attention of Coconet, and if they still refuse to
settle the problem, you may want to consider small claims court.

CAVEAT EMPTOR: I am NOT a lawyer, NOR do I play one on TV, But I do
have a tv, and I do watch Peoples Court.

tw...@netcom.com tw...@tweekco.uucp WWIVNet 1@511 DoD #MCMLX
I'd rather get my cable service from the phone company,
than my phone service from the cable company.


William S Gillingham

unread,
Sep 3, 1993, 3:23:07 AM9/3/93
to
I looked into the coconet software and I found it to be too expensive
and not backed enough to substantiate purchasing it.


Larry D Snyder

unread,
Sep 3, 1993, 9:27:58 AM9/3/93
to
c...@rainbow.sosi.com (Chris Phillips) writes:

>Computing's reaction. They informed us that they would not give us
>any customer support whatsoever (we were missing a disk). In fact, they
>explained that the license agreement neither allows nor disallows transfer
>of the license agreement from one party to another. The bottom line

That is crazy and needs to be included in the Unix BBS FAQ information.

Considering what they charge, and basically what the industry standard
is -- Coconet is off in left field..

--
Larry Snyder Internet: la...@gator.oau.org
Orlando, Florida UUCP: ..!uunet!tarpit!gator!larry

dcr...@uoft02.utoledo.edu

unread,
Sep 3, 1993, 8:07:35 AM9/3/93
to
In article <tweekCC...@netcom.com>, tw...@netcom.com (Michael D. Maxfield) writes:
> In article <930902.221120.0...@sendai.cybrspc.mn.org> r...@sendai.cybrspc.mn.org (Roy M. Silvernail) writes:
>>
>>Why do you have such a difficult time saying you offer a
>>non-transferrable license? I'm sure you inform your clients of this at
>>the time of purchase, as well. No big deal, Brian. No need to tap
>>dance around it.
>
> Point of laymans law... (I watch Wapner;-)
>
> I believe the original post mentioned that the license neither allowed,
> nor disallowed the resale of the product.
>
> In California, (other states may vary) a contract (ie: the license),
> if it contains any abiguities, is settled in the favor of the person
> who did NOT write the contract.

Not just California. That is a hold-over from the common law, and is universal
in America.


>
> You might want to check with some legal authority familiar with the law
> in the license issuers state, and if they think you have a case, you might
> bring these points to the attention of Coconet, and if they still refuse to
> settle the problem, you may want to consider small claims court.

Actually, the UCC as adopted in the various states holds with it two key
warrnties which COCONET sold whether it wanted to or not. One was the implied
warrany of fitness for a particular purpose, the other was the implied warranty
of mechantability. Provided that the end user is not doing something radical,
like using cocnet to do DTP, the warranties apply.

And can be transferred.

If the original buyer of the coconet product sold all of his rights to the
product, those warranties were also sold.

And Coconet is in breach for not honoring them.

If Coconet wishes to not honor its warranties to third parties, it MUST state
so in the warranty agreement.

Remember, however, if anyone is considering the purchase of Coconet, they
consider their "policy" as better than the law.

John W. Temples

unread,
Sep 3, 1993, 1:47:46 PM9/3/93
to
In article <262sjb$b...@rainbow.sosi.com> c...@rainbow.sosi.com (Chris Phillips) writes:
>We then called and talked to Brian Dear and were amazed at Coconut
>Computing's reaction. They informed us that they would not give us
>any customer support whatsoever

I'd first find out if they'll give you any support even if you DO send
them money. We use Coconet here, and it's got the following MAJOR bugs
that Coconut has acknowledged yet hasn't fixed:

1. In the message area, if you search for "active" (new) messages, it
usually says there are none, even though there are. You have to manually
go through all the messages to see if there are actually any new ones.

2. When two users go into a private chat, they'll often both end up talking
to no one. Both users have to exit and restart the chat (often several
times) before it actually works.

3. The list of who's on the system usually includes "ghost" users who
aren't on at all. You can even get chat requests from these users
(though it usually means you're getting a chat request from some other
user). And these users show up on the COCOADMIN display, doing things
like chatting with other users who are really doing something else.


I have to wonder if Coconet is really a supported product at all anymore.
--
John W. Temples -- jtem...@netcom.com
Kuwait Electronic Messaging Services, Safat, Kuwait
Phone: +965 242 6711
Fax: +965 242 6725

Lim Chee Tuck <lim@ctuck.pl.my>

unread,
Sep 5, 1993, 5:30:13 AM9/5/93
to
coc...@crash.cts.com (Brian Dear) writes:

>Just for the record I will state that if anyone has questions
>about pricing or policies you should contact our company
>directly and not rely solely on information obtained from
>a rather unreliable source such as USENET.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Hey guys ... don't belive him. This is really *unreliable*.

Carlos Dominguez

unread,
Sep 2, 1993, 9:16:32 PM9/2/93
to
In <1993Sep02.074452.17001@crash> coc...@crash.cts.com (Brian Dear) writes:

>That is correct. And I'm not going to. What good would
>it do? Nobody here is interested in the truth. This is
>USENET. Home of unsubstantiated claims, false rumors,
>idle threats, whining, ignorance, and misinformation.
>The truth is not welcome here.

well, unless you provide evidence to the contrary, I'll have to
assume that coconet is not to be purchased at any cost.

And since you enjoy to put down the medium that you
just used, you've lost any credibility you ever had.

Look on the bright side, you could always find work doing
data entry at K-Mart when business drops, eh?

Watch those bar-codes..


--
""" | Carlos Dominguez - Sys-admin, owner, kibbitzer
-(o o)- | ----------------------------------------------
-----oOO--(_)--OOo----- | ro...@carlos.UUCP or uupsi!jpradley!carlos!carlos
A HELLDIVER MIME Site | car...@carlos.jpr.com ( guaranteed address )

Bert Rozenberg

unread,
Sep 3, 1993, 11:14:00 PM9/3/93
to
In bbs_misc Brian Dear wrote
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

|||As for our policy, we believe it is fair that if you want to do
|||business with a company, you do business with that company, not
|||go behind their back and pay someone else for the company's product
|||and then expect support from the company for free. You don't get
|||something for nothing. If you want something for nothing, use
|||public domain software. This will sound reasonable to people who
|||pay for goods and services, and unreasonable to people who expect
|||goods and services to be free. So be it.
|||
|||-- brian dear
||| coconut computing, inc.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

As a sysop of a 10 line Major BBS, a reseller of The Major BBS and add-ons
and a third party developer I don't agree with you. Unless you state that
support for your products must be bought separately, the customer pays for
it when he buys the product: de product is supported.

If one of our customers (or Galacticomms) transfers his license official
to another (by written agreement) he also transfers the support. There's
no difference between when he sold it or just gave it away: the product
is still supported.

Bert Rozenberg

---
* TLX v1.55 * "Beware of programmers who carry screwdrivers

--------------------------------------------------------------------
| STER BBS, The Netherlands | 10 V.32bis lines on rotary |
| Internet Mail and NetNews | Major BBS v6.11 * 18 CD-ROM's |
|______Call ++31 1880 40035________|_* QWK * CHAT * GAMES * MORE *_|

Charlie Lear

unread,
Sep 5, 1993, 6:27:29 AM9/5/93
to
In article <1993Sep02.074452.17001@crash>,

Brian Dear <coc...@crash.cts.com> wrote:
> it do? Nobody here is interested in the truth. This is
> USENET. Home of unsubstantiated claims, false rumors,
> idle threats, whining, ignorance, and misinformation.
> The truth is not welcome here.

Hey wow. What an amazing outpouring from just one keyboard.

I'd suggest a couple of things here.
1: Great way to alienate a potentially large audience of
customers. Way to go Brian!
2: Hire a marketing guy and a public relations agency.
With an attitude like yours, you need both.


--
Charlie "The Bear" Lear cl...@actrix.gen.nz Ph/Fax +64 4 564-5307
Shareware Distribution NZ PO Box 2009, Wellington, New Zealand
NZ Distributors of Walnut Creek CD-ROM Products DoD #221

Ken Germann

unread,
Sep 7, 1993, 11:17:10 PM9/7/93
to
Reply:

>

You should find a good home on USENET...

Ken Germann Sky Point Communications.
ke...@skypoint.com Administrator.
Ken Germann@1:282/3021 Fidonet
612-458-3889 Data (2400-14.4) 612-459-7554 Voice

SeaWolf

unread,
Sep 10, 1993, 5:16:31 AM9/10/93
to
fs...@acad3.alaska.edu (Sean P. Ryan, Hardcore Alaskan) writes:

> In article <1993Sep02.074452.17001@crash>, coc...@crash.cts.com (Brian Dear)

> [his second consecutive flame of the net]
> >
> >That is correct. And I'm not going to. What good would
> >it do? Nobody here is interested in the truth. This is
> >USENET. Home of unsubstantiated claims, false rumors,
> >idle threats, whining, ignorance, and misinformation.
> >The truth is not welcome here.
>
> Oh, so that's why you've written your software in a manner which
> doesn't allow any Usenet support. Thanks for letting us know.

I don't normally read this newgroup but I just happened to
be wondering through the various newsgroups I carry and
I noticed this post.

Here is a man (whom I assume wrote some bbs software) that
apparently hates Usenet, and yet he still posts to it.

Isn't that a paradox?

*************************************************************************
Sea...@yesanext.thetech.com
Sameer Manek -- Sysop of the Big Brother BBS

Those that condemn wealth are those who
have none and see no chance of getting any.
*************************************************************************

SeaWolf

unread,
Sep 10, 1993, 5:34:23 AM9/10/93
to
After reading this long drawn out debate about using this
bbs software I have one suggestion.

You all know the type of service that they give so you
can either buy the software and accept the fact they
give poor service or you can hit Brian where it
hurts (no this doesn't mean belting Brian in
the balls <grin> )

I mean take away what Brian wants most..your money.
There are plenty other bbs software programs that allow
you to use Rip graphics and customizable screens.

Think of buying the software just like you would think
about going out to eat at a restaurant. If you get poor
food, service and assistance how many times do you return
to that business or recommend that place to your friends?
On the other hand if you get good food and service how
many times do you return and recommend the place to your
friends?

Like wise don't recommend coconet to anyone or buy the
software and soon Brian will have to
a) improve support
or b) go out of business.

and to Brian here is a saying that my dad always used to
say to me when I worked in the family business.
"A satisfied customer will tell about you to one friend
but an unsatisfied customer will tell anyone that listens"

Think about it and then go ahead and flame me or ask any
the owner of any mom & pop business if they sometimes will
accept reduced profits in the name of good customer relations?

Robertc. Moldenhauer

unread,
Sep 10, 1993, 9:08:35 AM9/10/93
to
In article <90LN0B...@yesanext.thetech.com> sea...@yesanext.thetech.com (SeaWolf) writes:
>fs...@acad3.alaska.edu (Sean P. Ryan, Hardcore Alaskan) writes:
>
>> In article <1993Sep02.074452.17001@crash>, coc...@crash.cts.com (Brian Dear)
>> [his second consecutive flame of the net]
>> >
>> >That is correct. And I'm not going to. What good would
>> >it do? Nobody here is interested in the truth. This is
>> >USENET. Home of unsubstantiated claims, false rumors,
>> >idle threats, whining, ignorance, and misinformation.
>> >The truth is not welcome here.
>>
>> Oh, so that's why you've written your software in a manner which
>> doesn't allow any Usenet support. Thanks for letting us know.
>
>I don't normally read this newgroup but I just happened to
>be wondering through the various newsgroups I carry and
>I noticed this post.
>
>Here is a man (whom I assume wrote some bbs software) that
>apparently hates Usenet, and yet he still posts to it.
>
>Isn't that a paradox?
>


No, Paradox is a database, and a d*mn good one too!

Brian Dear

unread,
Sep 10, 1993, 4:11:59 PM9/10/93
to
SeaWolf (sea...@yesanext.thetech.com) wrote:
: After reading this long drawn out debate about using this

Sameer Manek, whoever you are, you ought to be ASHAMED of yourself, posting
a note like that! I don't believe you have ever met or spoken
to me. I don't believe you are a customer of Coconut Computing, Inc.
I don't believe you have any knowledge of our products, services, or
policies. On WHAT basis do you make your statements? Upon WHAT facts
are your statements based? Oh? No facts? Just hearsay? Or are you
just making them up, just to rekindle a "flame-war"? Ever heard of the
word "libel"? Look it up.

This whole thing has just gone too far! All of you
strangers who know nothing about our company, know nothing about
the issue that was raised, and know nothing about our product or
policies, should be ashamed of yourselves for posting messages
about our company, the issues, our products, or policies, as if
you knew what you were talking about.

I am simply stunned by the immaturity of some of you. I don't know
your ages -- all I have go to on is what I see in your postings. I am
referring to those of you who responded to the "Coconet Users Beware"
note. Did you ever stop to think, JUST FOR A SECOND, that maybe
there was more to the story than was being presented? Did it ever occur
to you that maybe since the issue did not involve you, you should keep
quiet? Did it ever occur to you that maybe what I was saying was the truth,
i.e., that I really DID have valid reasons why the whole subject was
NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCUSSION? And that that was really the END of the subject
and that you should restrain yourself from the temptation of prying into
matters that shouldn't have been public to begin with but were made so because
of one individual's determined effort to make it public?

The "Coconet Users Beware" thread demonstrates precisely what I was
trying to point out in my prior message: that the truth is not welcome, and
misinformation and ignorance and malicious intent are all tolerated in
messages. I apologize for saying "USENET", what I meant was "comp.bbs.misc".
I apologize for generalizing too. Of course not everyone is mean or malicious
or ignorant in comp.bbs.misc, but there are those who are, and you feed on
arguments such as these. This note I am sure will provide new fuel for
these immature people to feed upon. Bon appetit!

This whole episode has been a terrible shame. I predict this message I am
typing will be misconstrued and misinterpreted by many. This too is a
terrible shame. What can be done? I don't know. It's a limitation
of this medium -- ASCII only conveys perhaps ten percent of the meaning
that's trying to be communicated.

Some of you out there take advantage of that. And that is a shame too.
You drum up nasty messages, make unsubstantiated claims, etc., about
our company or products when you don't even have knowledge about the product.
If you are an actual customer, it does no good to report bugs in comp.bbs.misc,
since no-one at Coconut reads this newsgroup with any sort of regularity.
If you have problems, take them to us.
We have a technical support online system that serves that purpose.
Sure our products have bugs, what product doesn't? We're doing the very
best we can to fix them as soon as we can.

The fact of the matter is, COCONET(R) is not a bulletin board system.
It is certainly not a "UNIX BBS". It should not be included in the
"UNIX BBS FAQ" as that is misleading. Our company has no control over
that FAQ and there's nothing I can do about having it removed. This
too I predict will be misconstrued to imply that we just want to hide something.
Fact is, Our products are not marketed to DOS BBS sysops, nor to hobbyists,
LINUX fans, high school students, or individuals wanting to run a BBS out
of their home. It is not appropriate for these kinds of people and these
kinds of people are only going to be frustrated if they try to use our
product. The pricing is different, the support is different, and everything
is different. Thus, these folks' expectations will not be met. Well,
that's just the way it is, sorry.

Now look: I am truly sorry this whole episode has happened. What good
has it done anyone? All I ask is that you THINK HARD before joining
some irrational "mob" that's in the heat of an argument, just for the thrill
of being in an argument. It reminds me of the Star Trek episode where the
alien creature invades the Enterprise and feeds off of violence, replacing
the phasers with swords, and creating an unending battle between the
Enterprise crew and the Klingons who've taken over the ship. The solution
was laughter, good will, honesty, and reason. As Bones said, "Yeah,
Enough Already!"

-brian

-- brian dear -- coconut computing, inc -- br...@coconut.com --


Robertc. Moldenhauer

unread,
Sep 11, 1993, 9:30:16 AM9/11/93
to
So COCONET is a way to hook two Radio Shack COlo(u)r COmputers together?

Mark Oberg

unread,
Sep 11, 1993, 8:21:38 PM9/11/93
to
Brian Dear (coc...@crash.cts.com) wrote:

|>I am simply stunned by the immaturity of some of you. I don't know
|>your ages -- all I have go to on is what I see in your postings. I am
|>referring to those of you who responded to the "Coconet Users Beware"
|>note. Did you ever stop to think, JUST FOR A SECOND, that maybe
|>there was more to the story than was being presented? Did it ever occur
|>to you that maybe since the issue did not involve you, you should keep
|>quiet? Did it ever occur to you that maybe what I was saying was the truth,
|>i.e., that I really DID have valid reasons why the whole subject was
|>NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCUSSION? And that that was really the END of the subject
|>and that you should restrain yourself from the temptation of prying into
|>matters that shouldn't have been public to begin with but were made so because
|>of one individual's determined effort to make it public?

Did it ever occur to you to simply post your company's policy on support
for 2nd buyers of your software? I certainly would have been more
impressed by that than the little tirades you post everytime someone says
something about your company. 99% of public relations is the impression
you give of your company. In this case, I am not very impressed.

BTW, just in case you wondered, I am *exactly* the sort of potential
customer you say your product is focused towards. After reading this
thread, I can honestly say that I don't have a lot of confidence in you or
your company.

--
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
Mark Oberg (mark....@noplace.com) BBS design and consulting services
No Place Like Home BBS "....one of the most unusual bbs in America"
Telnet to bbs.noplace.com or modem to 301-596-6450

Carlos Dominguez

unread,
Sep 11, 1993, 5:53:20 AM9/11/93
to
In <1993Sep10.131159.29129@crash> coc...@crash.cts.com (Brian Dear) writes:

[ tripe deleted ]

>Now look: I am truly sorry this whole episode has happened. What good
>has it done anyone? All I ask is that you THINK HARD before joining

[ tripe deleted ]

Since this episode is in the public domain, you have two choices.

A) Present your side of the story.
B) Don't bother, and watch your potential customers slide off to
TEAMMATE and other packages.

SeaWolf

unread,
Sep 13, 1993, 4:01:27 AM9/13/93
to
car...@carlos.jpr.com (Carlos Dominguez) writes:

> In <1993Sep10.131159.29129@crash> coc...@crash.cts.com (Brian Dear) writes:
>
> [ tripe deleted ]
>
> >Now look: I am truly sorry this whole episode has happened. What good
> >has it done anyone? All I ask is that you THINK HARD before joining
>
> [ tripe deleted ]
>
> Since this episode is in the public domain, you have two choices.
>
> A) Present your side of the story.
> B) Don't bother, and watch your potential customers slide off to
> TEAMMATE and other packages.

Curiosity on the progress of this thread drew me back
to this newgroup, so hear I am.

Brian, have you ever worked in a job were you dealt with
the public face to face? Maybe you should talk to someones
sucessful in marketing because your doing a good job
of scaring off you potential customers. Do you by any
chance have a finacial interest in the sucess of TeamMate?

Your the kind of guy I'd love to have working in my competitors
firm.

*************************************************************************
Sameer Manek Sea...@yesanext.thetech.com
-=Sysop of the Big Brother BBS=-

George W. Hayduke

unread,
Sep 12, 1993, 5:28:13 AM9/12/93
to
coc...@crash.cts.com (Brian Dear) writes:

> This whole thing has just gone too far! All of you
> strangers who know nothing about our company

We know this much: you should hire some PR people to talk for you, and stick
with coding or whatever it is you do.


--
Fred Polsky aka George -- sys...@fred.com -- AS...@ALASKA.BITNET -- fnord
PO Box 232251 -- Anchorage, AK 99523-2251 -- PGP v2.2 public key available
Radio Free Fredbox +1 907 344 8437 -- Telebit WorldBlazer -- Waffle 1.65
GEEK CODE 1.0.1: GAT d-- p---@ c++++ "I suppose there's a little bit
+u- e+ !n h++(--)(*) f+ l m* s++/-- of Sean Ryan in all of us."
!!g w+++ t+ r- y+ -- Bob Rusbasan

Robertc. Moldenhauer

unread,
Sep 13, 1993, 9:09:03 AM9/13/93
to
In article <q61R0B...@fred.com> sys...@fred.com (George W. Hayduke) writes:
>coc...@crash.cts.com (Brian Dear) writes:
>
>> This whole thing has just gone too far! All of you
>> strangers who know nothing about our company
>
>We know this much: you should hire some PR people to talk for you, and stick
>with coding or whatever it is you do.
>

You'd think he'd be more upset about some of these peasants actual soiling
his product by buying it! Don't worry your highness, I'll never buy
your software!

Brian Dear

unread,
Sep 13, 1993, 12:56:02 PM9/13/93
to
SeaWolf (sea...@yesanext.thetech.com) wrote:
:
: Brian, have you ever worked in a job were you dealt with

: the public face to face? Maybe you should talk to someones
: sucessful in marketing because your doing a good job
: of scaring off you potential customers. Do you by any
: chance have a finacial interest in the sucess of TeamMate?
:
: Your the kind of guy I'd love to have working in my competitors
: firm.
:
: *************************************************************************
: Sameer Manek Sea...@yesanext.thetech.com
: -=Sysop of the Big Brother BBS=-
:
: Those that condemn wealth are those who have none and see
: no chance of getting any.
:
: *************************************************************************

Sameer Manek, your new message further demonstrates
that you truly do not know what you are talking about.
You really should consider thinking first, or at least
doing a little fact checking, before you make a bigger
fool of yourself.

-- brian dear -- coconut computing, inc. -- br...@coconut.com --

William C Beegle

unread,
Sep 13, 1993, 6:54:55 PM9/13/93
to
In article <1993Sep13.095602.8240@crash> coc...@crash.cts.com (Brian Dear) writes:

>You really should consider thinking first, or at least
>doing a little fact checking, before you make a bigger
>fool of yourself.
>
>-- brian dear -- coconut computing, inc. -- br...@coconut.com --

mr. dear,

while i don't want to start another flame war, i would strongly encourage
you to consider the audience for your messages.

this forum exists for sysops and potential sysops to exchange information
and 'tips' on various software packages. one user had a bad experience
with coconut and posted his version of what happened. it was nothing more
than that, and after the message, i had no negative impression of coconut,
but i did want to remember not to but any used software.

then you responded, and to be blunt, you were rude, accusatory, and
patronizing, not only to a person using your product, but to the entire
usenet community. you refused to shed any new information on what had
been said and basically told us to mind our own business. many people,
including myself, formed a VERY unfavorable impression at that point, and
some said so in very certain terms along with explanations.

your resopnse, unfortunately, was to belittle all of us and to play
holier-than-thou ("i'm ahamed of all of you...").

at this point, i will strongly recomment that friends and associates steer
well clear of coconut if this is the sort of behavior they can expect.

-william beegle
wcb...@pitt.edu
w.be...@genie.geis.com
wbe...@aol.com

Message has been deleted

Chris Mauritz

unread,
Sep 14, 1993, 12:44:28 PM9/14/93
to
Brian Dear (coc...@crash.cts.com) wrote:

: Sameer Manek, whoever you are, you ought to be ASHAMED of yourself, posting


: a note like that! I don't believe you have ever met or spoken
: to me. I don't believe you are a customer of Coconut Computing, Inc.
: I don't believe you have any knowledge of our products, services, or
: policies. On WHAT basis do you make your statements? Upon WHAT facts
: are your statements based? Oh? No facts? Just hearsay? Or are you
: just making them up, just to rekindle a "flame-war"? Ever heard of the
: word "libel"? Look it up.

It is only libel if it isn't true.

: I am simply stunned by the immaturity of some of you. I don't know


: your ages -- all I have go to on is what I see in your postings. I am
: referring to those of you who responded to the "Coconet Users Beware"
: note. Did you ever stop to think, JUST FOR A SECOND, that maybe
: there was more to the story than was being presented? Did it ever occur
: to you that maybe since the issue did not involve you, you should keep
: quiet? Did it ever occur to you that maybe what I was saying was the truth,
: i.e., that I really DID have valid reasons why the whole subject was
: NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCUSSION? And that that was really the END of the subject
: and that you should restrain yourself from the temptation of prying into
: matters that shouldn't have been public to begin with but were made so because
: of one individual's determined effort to make it public?

Well, your disgruntled customer chose to make it public. That is a fact that
you cannot change. You have two choices: (a) take it on the chin and say
nothing (effectively conceding to him) or (b) making your side public also
in order to allow potential customers to make up their own mind about
that happened. I must say that the tone of your responses to date has
probably turned off quite a few potential clients. You should probably
be a little more sensitive to the fact that this newsgroup draws a crowd
of precisely the people you are marketing your product to...not the people
you want to insult.

: The "Coconet Users Beware" thread demonstrates precisely what I was


: trying to point out in my prior message: that the truth is not welcome, and
: misinformation and ignorance and malicious intent are all tolerated in
: messages. I apologize for saying "USENET", what I meant was "comp.bbs.misc".
: I apologize for generalizing too. Of course not everyone is mean or malicious
: or ignorant in comp.bbs.misc, but there are those who are, and you feed on
: arguments such as these. This note I am sure will provide new fuel for
: these immature people to feed upon. Bon appetit!

Well, it is true that Usenet can be an anarchy, but that is the price
of free speech. It is unfortunate that for each bit of net.pearl.wisdom
you get, it is often necessary to deal with an equal or greater amount
of net.oyster.turds. Annyoing, but we all have to deal with it. Your
best bet is to ignore the obvious flame baiters and respond to genuine
questions/complaints.

: This whole episode has been a terrible shame. I predict this message I am


: typing will be misconstrued and misinterpreted by many. This too is a
: terrible shame. What can be done? I don't know. It's a limitation
: of this medium -- ASCII only conveys perhaps ten percent of the meaning
: that's trying to be communicated.

This is rather silly. I suppose ASCII only conveys 10% of the meaning
of Moby Dick, the Bible, or the front page of the NY Times? If you
write clearly and think out your position, ASCII works just fine.
If not, I guess I'll just have to start sending videotapes to the IRS
instead of my (ASCII) 1040A form. :)

: Some of you out there take advantage of that. And that is a shame too.


: You drum up nasty messages, make unsubstantiated claims, etc., about
: our company or products when you don't even have knowledge about the product.
: If you are an actual customer, it does no good to report bugs in comp.bbs.misc,
: since no-one at Coconut reads this newsgroup with any sort of regularity.

The original poster said that he had contact you first. Only after getting
a, according to him, rude and improper response did he post here. If
his side of the story is accurate, I am grateful that he shared it since
I am also a System Administrator (TM) or a public BBS in search of software.
That is what this newsgroup is for...sharing information, be it good or
bad.

: If you have problems, take them to us.

He claims he did.

: We have a technical support online system that serves that purpose.


: Sure our products have bugs, what product doesn't? We're doing the very
: best we can to fix them as soon as we can.

Well, that is what you should be doing. The original poster claimed
otherwise. Tell your side of the story so that the readers of the
group can get a balanced view of the situation.

: The fact of the matter is, COCONET(R) is not a bulletin board system.


: It is certainly not a "UNIX BBS". It should not be included in the
: "UNIX BBS FAQ" as that is misleading. Our company has no control over
: that FAQ and there's nothing I can do about having it removed. This
: too I predict will be misconstrued to imply that we just want to hide something.
: Fact is, Our products are not marketed to DOS BBS sysops, nor to hobbyists,
: LINUX fans, high school students, or individuals wanting to run a BBS out
: of their home. It is not appropriate for these kinds of people and these
: kinds of people are only going to be frustrated if they try to use our
: product. The pricing is different, the support is different, and everything
: is different. Thus, these folks' expectations will not be met. Well,
: that's just the way it is, sorry.

That is very useful information. Now we're getting somewhere. If you
dould confine your postings to this type of factual information you
would come out looking a lot better.

Regards,

Christopher Mauritz
Owner/SysAdmin
Mordor International BBS
ri...@mordor.com
--
--------------------------+----------------------------------
Christopher Mauritz | This space reserved for some
maur...@spcvxa.spc.edu | future witty saying.
maur...@spcvxe.spc.edu |

Brian Dear

unread,
Sep 14, 1993, 12:43:22 PM9/14/93
to
William C Beegle (wcb...@pitt.edu) wrote:
: mr. dear,

:
: while i don't want to start another flame war, i would strongly encourage
: you to consider the audience for your messages.
:
: this forum exists for sysops and potential sysops to exchange information
: and 'tips' on various software packages. one user had a bad experience
: with coconut and posted his version of what happened. it was nothing more
: than that, and after the message, i had no negative impression of coconut,
: but i did want to remember not to but any used software.
:
: then you responded, and to be blunt, you were rude, accusatory, and
: patronizing, not only to a person using your product, but to the entire
: usenet community. you refused to shed any new information on what had
: been said and basically told us to mind our own business. many people,
: including myself, formed a VERY unfavorable impression at that point, and
: some said so in very certain terms along with explanations.
:
: your resopnse, unfortunately, was to belittle all of us and to play
: holier-than-thou ("i'm ahamed of all of you...").
:
: at this point, i will strongly recomment that friends and associates steer
: well clear of coconut if this is the sort of behavior they can expect.
:
: -william beegle
: wcb...@pitt.edu
: w.be...@genie.geis.com
: wbe...@aol.com
:


Mr. Beegle,

When some complete stranger posts a message in this forum encouraging
people in this forum to boycott our company and products, when the
person knows absolutely nothing about or company or products, and
has never spoken to me or met me and yet makes malicious and possibly
libelous statements about me or this company, you can bet I am not going
to just stand aside and let him get away with it. This conference is
read all over the world, and I will not tolerate misinformation or
rumor or hearsay being spread about by people with nothing better to
do than flame on and on.

This person's actions were entirely shameful, and I stand by my
statements. And if you care to read carefully you will note that I
did not "belittle you all", but rather specifically addressed those
who had made statements or claims based upon nothing but ignorance or
hearsay.

Form whatever opinions or impressions you will. I insist
on accuracy and fairness and when I see inaccurate (and seemingly
deliberately inaccurate) statements regarding my company or
products I'm going to do everything I can to correct them and
point out the inaccuracies. Nothing holier than thou about it.
Some kids just have to learn that spreading lies and rumours is
not a polite thing to do, and sooner or later they're going to get
caught.

-- brian dear
president & ceo
coconut computing, inc.

Carlos Dominguez

unread,
Sep 14, 1993, 9:49:31 AM9/14/93
to
In <1993Sep13.095602.8240@crash> coc...@crash.cts.com (Brian Dear) writes:

>Sameer Manek, your new message further demonstrates
>that you truly do not know what you are talking about.
>You really should consider thinking first, or at least
>doing a little fact checking, before you make a bigger
>fool of yourself.

Brian Dear,

You continue to dig yourself deeper and deeper into this hole
that you created by antagonizing more and more readers here.

put up or shut up!

dfi...@colornet.com

unread,
Sep 16, 1993, 9:59:16 PM9/16/93
to
Robertc. Moldenhauer writes :

>So COCONET is a way to hook two Radio Shack COlo(u)r COmputers together?

Well, the 'Shack Color Computer was called a CoCo, and fans were called
CoCoNuts. I had three (3!) of them talking to each other over UUCP and a
link to a Usenet node, however I called my collection ColorNet ! (still use
the name, but now running Coherent on a 386)

Anyway, WHAT IS COCONET ? Brian had told us what it is NOT, but what IS
it ? (my boss recently heard about this and asked, and I told him I thought
it was a sophisticated DOS BBS, but apparently I am wrong)

Regards,

Dave.

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
= David E. Filip UUCP : dfi...@colornet.com =
= ColorNet Information Systems CIS : 76430,3111 =
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
= The belief of what makes a good operating system is generally based more =
= in theology than technology ... and, of course, my belief is right ! =
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Chris Phillips

unread,
Sep 17, 1993, 1:34:08 AM9/17/93
to
(Brian Dear) writes:

>The fact of the matter is, COCONET(R) is not a bulletin board system.
>It is certainly not a "UNIX BBS". It should not be included in the
>"UNIX BBS FAQ" as that is misleading. Our company has no control over
>that FAQ and there's nothing I can do about having it removed. This
>too I predict will be misconstrued to imply that we just want to hide something.
>Fact is, Our products are not marketed to DOS BBS sysops, nor to hobbyists,
>LINUX fans, high school students, or individuals wanting to run a BBS out
>of their home. It is not appropriate for these kinds of people and these
>kinds of people are only going to be frustrated if they try to use our
>product. The pricing is different, the support is different, and everything
>is different. Thus, these folks' expectations will not be met. Well,
>that's just the way it is, sorry.
>

Well, sounds convincing doesn't it?

Let me quote one of Coconut Computing's ads from a September 1992
Boadwatch Magazine, inside of front cover.

"COCONET Revolutionary Graphics-based BBS Software"
"Whether you're starting a commercial online information service, or
need a bulletin board system for customer support or private use within
your organization, look to Coconet from Coconut Computing for the
solution ..."

So Brian, is it a "BBS" or not?
Do you have to be a technocrat to use Coconet?

==========================================================================
Chris Phillips <c...@sosi.com> Spectrum Online Systems Inc
Voice: 719-576-6845 2860 S. Circle Dr. Ste 2202
Data: 719-576-6853 (2400) Colorado Springs, CO 80906
Data: 719-576-0300 (V.32bis)
==========================================================================
"A World of Information on Your Desktop"
==========================================================================
Note: None of my comments reflect the position of my employer.

John W. Temples

unread,
Sep 17, 1993, 10:17:23 AM9/17/93
to
In article <1...@colornet.com> dfi...@colornet.com writes:
>Anyway, WHAT IS COCONET ? Brian had told us what it is NOT, but what IS
>it ?

To paraphrase Edward Vielmetti,

"Coconet is not a bicycle. Coconet is not a fish."

Len.An...@resnova.com

unread,
Sep 17, 1993, 2:39:37 PM9/17/93
to

I have been out of it for a while here and have missed many messages, did we ever hear CocoNet Computing's official side of the story? That seems to be what is lacking.


Patricia Snyder-Rayl

unread,
Sep 19, 1993, 7:51:34 PM9/19/93
to
In article <27bi8g$p...@rainbow.sosi.com>,

Chris,

It's a little unfair to hold a year old ad against Coconut. Go ahead and
debate as you like, but I'd like to inject a little fairness! :)

Patricia Snyder-Rayl
CONNECT
--
| CONNECT Magazine |(313) 973-8825 | Covering commercial online |
|"The Modem User's Resource"|(313) 973-0411 fax | services, Internet and BBS |
| 3487 Braeburn Circle |(313) 973-9137 BBS | networks from a user's |
| Ann Arbor, MI 48108 | 14.4Kbps V.32bis| perspective. |

Robertc. Moldenhauer

unread,
Sep 20, 1993, 12:29:51 PM9/20/93
to


It's a sort of Zen thing, they advertise Coconet as a BBS in magazines, but
then say it isn't when you ask them about it. Coconet is what you want
it to be, need your toenails curled, need a spam slicer, Coconet may be it,
then again it may not.

One thing is clear from their posts here - IF YOU HAVE TO ASK WHAT COCONET
IS, THEN IT'S NOT FOR YOU!


Chris Phillips

unread,
Sep 23, 1993, 12:37:21 AM9/23/93
to
Patricia Snyder writes:
>
>Chris,
>
>It's a little unfair to hold a year old ad against Coconut. Go ahead and
>debate as you like, but I'd like to inject a little fairness! :)
>
> Patricia Snyder-Rayl
> CONNECT
>--
>| CONNECT Magazine |(313) 973-8825 | Covering commercial online |
>|"The Modem User's Resource"|(313) 973-0411 fax | services, Internet and BBS |
>| 3487 Braeburn Circle |(313) 973-9137 BBS | networks from a user's |
>| Ann Arbor, MI 48108 | 14.4Kbps V.32bis| perspective. |

Unfair!? Coconut Computing announced the release of its Version 4.0
_over_ a year ago and it still hasn't seen the light of day.

If you would like to see a more recent ad with similar content I'm
sure I can dig one up for you.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages