!! RIPSCRIP-3 VISUAL TELNET COMING SOON
Pat Clawson
ATTENTION BBS SYSOPS:
In 1997, the Internet and BBS systems will sizzle with high-energy
RIPscrip-3 (TM) graphics and multimedia that travel lightning-fast over
low-bandwidth connections as slow as 9600 baud.
RIPscrip-3 creates images that are incredibly bandwidth-efficient. For
instance, an 80K GIF image is only 4K in RIPscrip-3.
BBS systems ROCK when RIPscrip-3 images are used, and any BBS can use
them -- it doesn't matter if the system manufacturer "supports" RIPscrip-3
or not. So that means that Wildcat and WorldGroup sysops won't be left out
of the action. If your BBS system is capable of transmitting text -- and
every BBS can -- you can use RIPscrip-3 technology.
RIPscrip-3 also makes BBS systems a valuable part of the Internet by
unleashing the Power of Visual Telnet. Think of RIPscrip Visual
Telnet (TM) as mixing telnet with steroids and Technicolor -- bold,
brilliant graphical interactivity with all the raw power that comes
from a continuous direct computer connection. RIPscrip Visual Telnet will
make BBS systems come alive graphically to Internet users the same way that
Web pages do. With RIPscrip Visual Telnet, your telnettable BBS system
becomes an easy-to-access Internet destination rivaling any Web site.
Standalone RIPtel Visual Telnet (TM) clients will be available in just
days. Plug-ins for Netscape and Microsoft Explorer are coming soon.
Programmer tools will be available in January, including the
complete 450-page RIPscrip-3 technical specification -- and the
powerful RIPscrip-to-C graphical erector set.
We'd like to hear from BBS sysops who want to crack the
bandwidth barrier and ramp up the Net to warp speed NOW.
Send e-mail to: in...@telegrafix.com
TeleGrafix Communications Inc.
128 South Loudoun Street
Winchester, VA 22601
United States of America
Voice: (540) 678-4050
Fax: (540) 678-4052
Daniel H. Ward
On 16 Dec 1996, Pat Clawson wrote:
>
> ATTENTION BBS SYSOPS:
>
> In 1997, the Internet and BBS systems will sizzle with high-energy
> RIPscrip-3 (TM) graphics and multimedia that travel lightning-fast over
> low-bandwidth connections as slow as 9600 baud.
You know - I wonder if it will be as big of a hit as ripscript 2.00 was ..
Rip is a dead technology .. it will *NOT* be revived..
-Dan..
Steve Mann in San Jose, CA
Daniel H. Ward (exo...@common.net) wrote:
I wouldn't be so fast to declare RIP dead. There is a need for a fast
vector-based graphics standard on the Web. But, being a twice-bit RIPKIT
victim, it will take a bit of convincing for me to adopt yet another
attempt at RIP on my BBS.
You have to admit that Pat does keep coming back...
Jim
Daniel H. Ward wrote:
>
> On 16 Dec 1996, Pat Clawson wrote:
> >
> > ATTENTION BBS SYSOPS:
> >
> > In 1997, the Internet and BBS systems will sizzle with high-energy
> > RIPscrip-3 (TM) graphics and multimedia that travel lightning-fast over
> > low-bandwidth connections as slow as 9600 baud.
>
> You know - I wonder if it will be as big of a hit as ripscript 2.00 was ..
> Rip is a dead technology .. it will *NOT* be revived..
>
Guessd again........ You obviously have not had an opportunity to use a
beta copy of RIPtel. RIPtel runs as a telnet program configured in
Netscape and when telneting to the likes of Boardwatch Magazine's BBS
what you see will blow you away as will the speed. Makes sites in HTML
seem to crawl along (which of course they are). RIP is far from dead.
It may be more accurate to say that HTML is dead, as it rightfully
should be. The really neat thing about RIPtel is it makes it possible
for any present BBS with any level of RIP to be telnetable from the WEB,
so anyone with Searchlight, Wildcat, TBBS, Spitfire, or any of the other
RIP supportive BBS software packages to be accessed from the WEB with
all their RIP in tact. RIP-3 will totally change the nature of the WEB
as we know it today, it's that revolutionary.
Jim Edwards
ROUTE 66 On-Line
Houston, Texas
Brandon
Or will it be ANOTHER charge from Mustang??! :)
On 16 Dec 1996 08:49:19 GMT, cla...@telegrafix.com (Pat Clawson)
wrote:
>
>ATTENTION BBS SYSOPS:
>
>In 1997, the Internet and BBS systems will sizzle with high-energy
>RIPscrip-3 (TM) graphics and multimedia that travel lightning-fast over
>low-bandwidth connections as slow as 9600 baud.
>
George Tamayo
Yes... you are obviously right ... all the available information points
to it..... HTML is dead.
Sysop
CL>ATTENTION BBS SYSOPS:
CL>Standalone RIPtel Visual Telnet (TM) clients will be available in just
CL>days. Plug-ins for Netscape and Microsoft Explorer are coming soon.
CL>Programmer tools will be available in January, including the
CL>complete 450-page RIPscrip-3 technical specification -- and the
CL>powerful RIPscrip-to-C graphical erector set.
CL>We'd like to hear from BBS sysops who want to crack the
CL>bandwidth barrier and ramp up the Net to warp speed NOW.
CL>TeleGrafix Communications Inc.
What a bunch of BULLS&*T... your co has NEVER met even one (1) of your
OWN announced deadlines.
What happened to RIPv2.0?
Junk/NO Supported Products/Vaporware is all you are know for now!
---
--
-- ARIZONA INTERACTIVE SYSTEMS! 32 Lines ** FULL Internet Service --
-- Telnet to: azi.com ** IP: 199.190.114.2 ** http://www.azi.com --
-- AZI! provides members complete Internet, 9 CD-ROMs online, Games, --
-- SLIP/CSLIP/PPP accounts and more! DIAL-UP Access: (602) 951-8379 --
-- ARIZONA INTERACTIVE SYSTEMS! "The BEST in the WEST!" --
Benjamin E. Hill
>
> You know - I wonder if it will be as big of a hit as ripscript 2.00 was
.
>
> -Dan..
>
And you know, I really never understood that. RIPScript provided a great
way for the BBS world to be accessed by users without having to learn all
the text-based commands to move around. Not to mention the speed
improvment for menus, etc. I still use and support RIP on my board, but I
know that hardly no one uses it. Now in the days of HTML, I don't see why
we don't just use an HTML-type viewer and call BBSes, and use a new reader
for viewing the messages. I have never seen the support for such a thing
for the non-internet systems.
Benjamin Hill
Catlin
Same here, I have some really nice RIP but none of my users ever see
it because no one uses a rip term program. I suspect a lot of that is
because so many people have gone to Windows and Ripterm is an old DOS
type program. I think the one thing that really hurt RIP a lot was
the high cost of a decent paint program like Rip Paint. How many of us
could really fork out $200 for a paint program? Don't want to turn
this into a RIP discussion so... will just leave it at that.
MaryLou
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISHING WELL SYSOPS' CORNER
"The BEST BBS Related site on the Internet!"
http://www.geocities.com/~sysopscorner
Featuring... Door of The Week - Available for download!
Gateway to the SysOps' Hangout Chat Lounge! Come On By!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
James C
> know that hardly no one uses it. Now in the days of HTML, I don't see why
> we don't just use an HTML-type viewer and call BBSes, and use a new reader
> for viewing the messages. I have never seen the support for such a thing
> for the non-internet systems.
What terminal software supports HTML though? Are there any plug-ins for
Netscape which will allow it to call a BBS and act like a terminal?
James
Daniel H. Ward
On Tue, 17 Dec 1996, Jim wrote:
> Guessd again........ You obviously have not had an opportunity to use a
> beta copy of RIPtel. RIPtel runs as a telnet program configured in
> Netscape and when telneting to the likes of Boardwatch Magazine's BBS
> what you see will blow you away as will the speed. Makes sites in HTML
> seem to crawl along (which of course they are). RIP is far from dead.
> It may be more accurate to say that HTML is dead, as it rightfully
> should be. The really neat thing about RIPtel is it makes it possible
> for any present BBS with any level of RIP to be telnetable from the WEB,
> so anyone with Searchlight, Wildcat, TBBS, Spitfire, or any of the other
> RIP supportive BBS software packages to be accessed from the WEB with
> all their RIP in tact. RIP-3 will totally change the nature of the WEB
> as we know it today, it's that revolutionary.
How much they paying you?? ;) Well - I have to admit that I have not
seen anything of RIP since their version 2.00 came out .. None of the
users had the terminal because it was such a memory hog and bulky program
and they charged an arm in the leg for the RIPaint package .. since then I
basically lost faith in anything that has RIP on it .. guess I'll have to
open my mind back up sometime and try it out .. ;)
-Dan
Linux: More Power, More Freedom, More Fun, Less Micro$oft..
Joan Tine
Catlin (Cat...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: Same here, I have some really nice RIP but none of my users ever see
: it because no one uses a rip term program. I suspect a lot of that is
: because so many people have gone to Windows and Ripterm is an old DOS
: type program. I think the one thing that really hurt RIP a lot was
: the high cost of a decent paint program like Rip Paint. How many of us
: could really fork out $200 for a paint program? Don't want to turn
: this into a RIP discussion so... will just leave it at that.
: MaryLou
You put your finger on it MaryLou. Rip died because of greed. Do you
know why TCP/IP is the world standard? Because Vinton Cerf GAVE IT
AWAY, and the government adopted it, rather than fork out money for
something like AppleTalk or an IBM equivalent.
But nobody learns from history:).
Joan
William McBrine
In alt.bbs.searchlight Jim <rod...@intertex.net> wrote:
: what you see will blow you away as will the speed. Makes sites in HTML
: seem to crawl along (which of course they are).
It's not HTML that's slow, it's GIFs and JPGs.
There's no reason vector graphics can't be integrated with HTML -- used
as inline images, in place of bitmaps -- and indeed I'd like to see that.
But I'm not sure RIP is the way to go.
--
William McBrine | http://www.clark.net/pub/wmcbrine/html/
wmcb...@clark.net | VOTE RALPH NADER FOR PRESIDENT IN 2000!
Babylon (Ray)
The main reason we *never* put RIP on our system (in addition to cost) is
that is never had error correction (or detection). As such, say if you
had some RIP commands to draw a circle and then fill the circle, well if
you got a little line noise the system would miss the circle command and
fill the entier screen! I guess Telegraphix was counting of people using
error correcting modems
Now error correcting modems are common (although a large part of my
usership is still logging on at 2400 baud), but when they first
introduces RIP I had ALL 2400 baud modems and very few of my user had
14.4 or above.
If Telegraphix wants to be a *real* standard for the internet, they need
more that just making a plug-in for Netscape and hoping that people will
install it - They need to make a deal with Netscape and have RIPTel be
*pre-installed* in netscape at the telnet client. That's the only way to
do it in today's market.
Let's hope that the new version (assuming it gets off the ground) has
*some* form of error correction and is a decent telnet client.
Babylon (Ray)
Jeff Breitner
In article <Pine.LNX.3.93.961218...@shell1.erols.com>
James C <jco...@erols.com> wrote:
A terminal doesn't need to support HTML. If it supported HTML it would be called
a browser.
What would be the point of this plug in, that's what they make telnet clients for.
Exactly what is it you're trying to say James?
Jeff Breitner
In article <32b7969b...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>
>>And you know, I really never understood that. RIPScript provided a great
>>way for the BBS world to be accessed by users without having to learn all
>>the text-based commands to move around. Not to mention the speed
>>improvment for menus, etc. I still use and support RIP on my board, but I
>>know that hardly no one uses it. Now in the days of HTML, I don't see why
>>we don't just use an HTML-type viewer and call BBSes, and use a new reader
>>for viewing the messages. I have never seen the support for such a thing
>>for the non-internet systems.
>>
>>Benjamin Hill
>>
> Same here, I have some really nice RIP but none of my users ever see
> it because no one uses a rip term program. I suspect a lot of that is
> because so many people have gone to Windows and Ripterm is an old DOS
> type program. I think the one thing that really hurt RIP a lot was
> the high cost of a decent paint program like Rip Paint. How many of us
> could really fork out $200 for a paint program? Don't want to turn
> this into a RIP discussion so... will just leave it at that.
>
RIP made nice screens but it was a compromise. How big is the palette
with RIP? Can you import photos? Can you view these photos using other
software?
RIP died because it was swallowed up by the graphical interfaces. RIP won't
make a comeback because there's no point to it. No one is going to draw
screens in RIP for a web page because it's just simply easier to draw it, scan
it or steal it as jpeg or gif.
Catlin
je...@gatecom.com (Jeff Breitner) wrote:
>In article <Pine.LNX.3.93.961218...@shell1.erols.com>
>James C <jco...@erols.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>> know that hardly no one uses it. Now in the days of HTML, I don't see why
>>> we don't just use an HTML-type viewer and call BBSes, and use a new reader
>>> for viewing the messages. I have never seen the support for such a thing
>>> for the non-internet systems.
>>
>> What terminal software supports HTML though? Are there any plug-ins for
>> Netscape which will allow it to call a BBS and act like a terminal?
>>
>> James
>>
>
>A terminal doesn't need to support HTML. If it supported HTML it would be called
>a browser.
>
>What would be the point of this plug in, that's what they make telnet clients for.
>
Maybe, but telnet is painfully slooowww! I tried it a number of times,
but no way, it's not worth all the waiting.
James C
On 19 Dec 1996, Jeff Breitner wrote:
> A terminal doesn't need to support HTML. If it supported HTML it would be called
> a browser.
>
> What would be the point of this plug in, that's what they make telnet clients for.
>
> Exactly what is it you're trying to say James?
I want a *terminal* which will display HTML pages, not a browser. If a
*terminal* supported HTML, it would NOT be a browser - it'd be a terminal
that supported HTML.
Maybe *you* think a terminal would not be useful, but *I* think it would
provide a lot of dialup DOS-based BBSes opportunity to offer a GUI system
for their users.
Ever see Wildcat! 5.0 dialup client? Same concept, and its definetly NOT
a browser.
James
Brian
> I want a *terminal* which will display HTML pages, not a browser. If a
> *terminal* supported HTML, it would NOT be a browser - it'd be a terminal
> that supported HTML.
> Maybe *you* think a terminal would not be useful, but *I* think it would
> provide a lot of dialup DOS-based BBSes opportunity to offer a GUI system
> for their users.
> Ever see Wildcat! 5.0 dialup client? Same concept, and its definetly NOT
> a browser.
> James
I'd tend to agree here. Some sort of Web-like interface for WG would be
a good thing. Scrollable menus (or pages) would be far more flexable
than what we have now. A move such as this might not sit well with
Gcomm's recent advertizing (the "dead horse" thing), but judging from
the lack of advertizing in the latest issue of Boardwatch from Gcomm,
maybe they've already decided to copy rather that critisize.
Brian Kile
Alex Kemp
James C was passing little notes around the room to All:
> know that hardly no one uses it. Now in the days of HTML, I don't see why
> we don't just use an HTML-type viewer and call BBSes, and use a new reader
> for viewing the messages. I have never seen the support for such a thing
> for the non-internet systems.
JC> What terminal software supports HTML though? Are there any
JC> plug-ins for Netscape which will allow it to call a BBS and
JC> act like a terminal?
No, the Host would have to run some kind of TCP/IP session with the caller..
CGI scripts can be quite powerful, and could provide all the features that a
BBS would need. I think an HTML BBS is the BBS of the future... But I'd prefer
it to be a good old dos-based one...
Regards,
a...@norbert.craybbs.co.uk
aJk, 2:254/211.12
--
|Fidonet: Alex Kemp 2:254/211.12
|Internet: Alex...@norbert.craybbs.co.uk
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.
cit...@cris.com
>I still use and support RIP on my board, but I know that hardly no
>one uses it.
I've taken RIP support off of my system. When I tried to access a
RIP system as a user, the darn thing kept locking up or crashing my
computer. As a sysop, I got tired of answering questions from users
about how to keep RIP from locking up and crashing their computers.
Michael Dillon
In article <32B6B7...@intertex.net>, Jim wrote:
>Daniel H. Ward wrote:
>> You know - I wonder if it will be as big of a hit as ripscript 2.00 was ..
>> Rip is a dead technology .. it will *NOT* be revived..
>Guessd again........ You obviously have not had an opportunity to use a
>beta copy of RIPtel. RIPtel runs as a telnet program configured in
>Netscape and when telneting to the likes of Boardwatch Magazine's BBS
>what you see will blow you away as will the speed. Makes sites in HTML
>seem to crawl along (which of course they are). RIP is far from dead.
>It may be more accurate to say that HTML is dead, as it rightfully
>should be.
I don't know if HTML should rightfully be dead but I will point out that the
only reason for HTML's widespread success is that the full specifications
and sample source code to display HTML documents was made free in the
public domain.
If RIPscrip v3.0 is not made equally public then it will never be more than
a niche product. Someone else will copy the good concepts, make their design
free in the public domain, and everyone will flock to that and ignore
RIPscrip entirely.
>RIP-3 will totally change the nature of the WEB
>as we know it today, it's that revolutionary.
RIP-3 will change nothing if it remains a closed proprietary protocol.
Others have tried similar proprietary protocols and they remain niche products.
--
Michael Dillon - Internet & ISP Consulting
Memra Software Inc. - Fax: +1-604-546-3049
http://www.memra.com - E-mail: mic...@memra.com
Michael Dillon
In article <32b7969b...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>, Catlin wrote:
>Same here, I have some really nice RIP but none of my users ever see
>it because no one uses a rip term program. I suspect a lot of that is
>because so many people have gone to Windows and Ripterm is an old DOS
>type program. I think the one thing that really hurt RIP a lot was
>the high cost of a decent paint program like Rip Paint. How many of us
>could really fork out $200 for a paint program? Don't want to turn
>this into a RIP discussion so... will just leave it at that.
I don't believe the cost of a paint program is the issue. If there were hundreds
of users calling your BBS with a RIP-compatible terminal program you
would be willing to pay for a good drawing program. The fact is that
RIPscrip 1.54 was a clunky design based upon Borland's DOS graphics
library which made it hard to build a terminal program for anything other
than DOS and you had to use Borland's compiler to do it.
If a new RIP-3 is a public open specification and if it is not too
kludgy and if it can be easily built into dozens of terminal and
telnet programs then it will be very successful. Telegrafix could make a lot
of money building drawing tools etc... that support RIP-3.
Catlin
mic...@ruadh.memra.com (Michael Dillon) wrote:
>In article <32b7969b...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>, Catlin wrote:
>
>>Same here, I have some really nice RIP but none of my users ever see
>>it because no one uses a rip term program. I suspect a lot of that is
>>because so many people have gone to Windows and Ripterm is an old DOS
>>type program. I think the one thing that really hurt RIP a lot was
>>the high cost of a decent paint program like Rip Paint. How many of us
>>could really fork out $200 for a paint program? Don't want to turn
>>this into a RIP discussion so... will just leave it at that.
>
>I don't believe the cost of a paint program is the issue. If there were hundreds
>of users calling your BBS with a RIP-compatible terminal program you
>would be willing to pay for a good drawing program. The fact is that
>RIPscrip 1.54 was a clunky design based upon Borland's DOS graphics
>library which made it hard to build a terminal program for anything other
>than DOS and you had to use Borland's compiler to do it.
>
There is more involved than the cost of the paint program, but you are
very wrong about people being willing to pay $200 for a drawing
program. For starters, many of us don't have that kind of money to
spend especially if we run a free bbs. Not all of us are
independently wealthy.
/\**/\
( o_o )_) @ Catlin... @
(u .u .,) \|/ \|/
{}{}{}{}{}. *'~^~`'*;,_,;*'~^~`'*;,_,;*'~^~`*;,
Jim Hribnak
Oh here we go again.. What has telegraphix run out of money and trying to
get people to yet again pay for something that isnt going to make it?
I agree with others about the fact that its proprietary and will not make
it unless the protocol is FREE.. We have been running MajorBBS for 5-6
years now and when RIP 1.54 came out we grabbed it thinking, "Oh ya people
will love this" People didnt, since most people have their favorite
terminal program they didnt want to switch,, (sure they tried RIP) but the
feedback we got on it was unbelieveable they said the RIPterm was slow,
very buggy, crashed alot, and the graphics didnt work right when getting
line noise. Thats where Telegraphics screwed up.. Released a product
before it was more stable.. To this date we have drop RIP support as no
one uses it and its a waste to purchase the RIP stuff.. They told
everyone that RIP2 was going to blow the socks off of everyone.. Didnt
hear too much about RIP2.. Now RIP3? Gawd give it a break.. With
MILLIONS anbd MILLIONS and MILLIONS of sites runinng HTML etc and with
high speed modems, ISDN T/A's low pricing, HTML with GIFS or JPG's its
damn quick.. RIP3? HAH I laugh it will be a niche market and thats about
all it will amount too... HTML and what have you have been around a long
time, the protocol is free, (look how many different WWW servers are out
there now, look at the browers quite a few of those as well.. But all you
hear about is the MSIE and the Netscapes
Nuff said..RIP is dead and it doesnt have a very big following...
R. Scott Perry
> What terminal software supports HTML though? Are there any
There is no terminal software to my knowledge that supports HTML. However,
there is no need for one! You can just run Netscape (or Mosaic, IE, etc.)
by dialing into the BBS and starting a SLIP/PPP session, and then connect to
the BBS via the web browser. Simple. No need for plugins (some of which
take 1/2 hour or longer to donwload), special clients (not even an SMTP/POP3
client or FTP or NNTP client), and all very quick. There are 100's of BBSs
that are running on the web right now.
Most of the BBS's that I am aware of are all running WebLines, by
Computerized Horizons, which works with existing Worldgroup/MajorBBS
systems. However, a few are running other programs such as "Web BBS(TM)" or
Webboard.
WebLines works in conjunction with the Worldgroup/MajorBBS software, so that
the web users are interacting in the same way as dialup, telnet, LAN, X25,
etc. users (IE they see the same content, and can even interact with those
other users in real time). They can read/send their E-mail, read/write
forum messages, download files (unlike FTP, they can actually see file
descriptions), page other users, see their account information, view files
(IE see GIFs, hear sounds, etc.), and a lot more. With the 32-User and
higher version, you get "Module Emulation", a feature never before seen on
the WWW, that allows you to run any of hundreds of existing Worldgroup and
Major BBS addons.
For more details, you can go to http://www.fcc.com/weblines.htm.
-Scott
Babylon (Ray)
All valid points and for the most part I agree with you. We looked at RIP
2 years ago and when we found that it had *no* error correction (so
graphics might "crash" and you can't find the buttons anymore...) we
didn't go any further with it and our users don't miss it.
HTML is a very good protocol but it has a real problem with BBS's:
INTERACTION. It is not posible (currently) with HTML to do a real
teleconference or play most of the games on BBS's. Web Lines is great, a
superb product, but it is limited by what HTML can do, as such a web user
does not get the full effect when accessing a BBS. The lack of
interaction makes you feel very alone on the BBS, even if there are a
bunch of other people on-line. (And having to press the "submit" button
in teleconference with your mouse is SLOW - by the time you have done this
all of the ANSI users have already seen 2 pages of text and you're way
behind.) Web Lines is a great way to get your BBS known on the web, but
I don't thing it is really practical for "everyday" use.
I don't know if RIP 3.0 is the answer or not. Maybe just a good ANSI
telnet Netscape plug-in/Windows client. Really tho, the only way I see
it really working and being accepted is if Telegraphix can make a deal
with Netscape and have RIP 3.0 preinstalled as the Telnet (BBS??) plug-in
for Netscape 4.0. This I doubt is going to happen, but we'll see. <G>
Babylon (Ray)
John Roberts
In article <32bea...@207.41.47.8>, rsc...@fcc.com says...
>> What terminal software supports HTML though? Are there any
>> plug-ins for Netscape which will allow it to call a BBS and
>> act like a terminal?
>There is no terminal software to my knowledge that supports HTML. However,
>there is no need for one! You can just run Netscape (or Mosaic, IE, etc.)
>by dialing into the BBS and starting a SLIP/PPP session, and then connect to
>the BBS via the web browser. Simple.
Only "simple" assuming that there's an internet connection, and that the BBS
talks TCP/IP.
What we've been talking about is doing it *without* an internet connection or
TCP/IP, by a straight dialup connection, and avoiding the "world wide wait".
Jeff Woods
Babylon (Ray) wrote:
>
> HTML is a very good protocol but it has a real problem with BBS's:
> INTERACTION. It is not posible (currently) with HTML to do a real
> teleconference or play most of the games on BBS's.
IRC. We play graphical poker over the 'net WITHOUT Teleconference at
irc.poker.net:6667. Others do the same.
> Web Lines is great, a superb product, but it is limited by what HTML
> can do, as such a web user does not get the full effect when accessing
> a BBS. The lack of interaction makes you feel very alone on the BBS,
> even if there are a bunch of other people on-line.
Obviously, you've never been ON the entire Internet. I've never
understood why people paid Tessier those big bucks for WorldLink hours
when IRC was free, with a couple orders more magnitude of users online.
You're falling inot the same trap -- trying to think like a BBS, rather
than embracing the Internet for what it is -- a REPLACEMENT for the BBS.
Jeff Woods
Jeff Breitner wrote:
>
> RIP died because it was swallowed up by the graphical interfaces.
> RIP won't make a comeback because there's no point to it. No one is
> going to draw screens in RIP for a web page because it's just simply
Close. RIP didn't die SOLELY because of what you said. v2.0 and prior
died because they tried to extend a dying beast -- the BBS. Even the
BIG BIG BBS's (CRS, Software Creations, Channel 1, High Society) are
having to more or less abandon the BBS model and either become ISP's in
the real sense (not just a BBS with Internet access, but real, Unix
login ISP's), or go off in a totally new direction.
BBS's died, and that doomed a BBS add-on like RIP from the get-go.
Catlin
Jeff Woods <je...@delta.com> wrote:
>
>BBS's died, and that doomed a BBS add-on like RIP from the get-go.
I hate to burst your bubble, Jeff, but my BBS is alive and well :)
Catlin
Eddie Salonga
EH>From: "Benjamin E. Hill" <behi...@homer.louisville.edu>
EH>Subject: Re: !! RIPSCRIP-3 VISUAL TELNET COMING SOON
EH>>
EH>> You know - I wonder if it will be as big of a hit as ripscript 2.00 was
EH>.
EH>> Rip is a dead technology .. it will *NOT* be revived..
EH>>
EH>> -Dan..
EH>>
EH>And you know, I really never understood that. RIPScript provided a great
EH>way for the BBS world to be accessed by users without having to learn all
EH>the text-based commands to move around. Not to mention the speed
EH>improvment for menus, etc. I still use and support RIP on my board, but I
EH>know that hardly no one uses it. Now in the days of HTML, I don't see why
EH>we don't just use an HTML-type viewer and call BBSes, and use a new reader
EH>for viewing the messages. I have never seen the support for such a thing
EH>for the non-internet systems.
Wildcat! 5 is using HTML interface as well as ANSI. All it lacks
is news reader support.
<<Eddie>>
eddie....@livewire.com.ph
---
* OLXWin 1.00b * LiveWire! Manila * +63(2) 634-2120 * N-8-1 * 24 hours
Steve Mann in San Jose, CA
gatecom.com> <32C012...@delta.com>
Organization: a2i network
Distribution:
Jeff Woods (je...@delta.com) wrote:
: BBS's died, and that doomed a BBS add-on like RIP from the get-go.
RIP died because it rarely worked. I don't think I EVER saw a session
with a RIP BBS that didn't have a few screwed up pages because of a
single byte error. (RIP has no error correction.)
Burned once, shame on me. Burned twice, shame on you. I am going to be
VERY apprehensive when looking at the third iteration of RIP. They've
already gotten too much of my money.
Jeff Woods
Catlin wrote:
>
> >BBS's died, and that doomed a BBS add-on like RIP from the get-go.
>
And how are you call stats compared to two years ago? There may still
be BBS's operating,but they are FAR overshadowed by the Internet now.
Ed Watson
A>> RIP died because it was swallowed up by the graphical interfaces.
A>> RIP won't make a comeback because there's no point to it. No one is
A>> going to draw screens in RIP for a web page because it's just simply
A>. easier to draw it, scan it or steal it as jpeg or gif.
A>
A>Close. RIP didn't die SOLELY because of what you said. v2.0 and prior
A>died because they tried to extend a dying beast -- the BBS. Even the
A>BIG BIG BBS's (CRS, Software Creations, Channel 1, High Society) are
A>having to more or less abandon the BBS model and either become ISP's in
A>the real sense (not just a BBS with Internet access, but real, Unix
A>login ISP's), or go off in a totally new direction.
A>
A>BBS's died, and that doomed a BBS add-on like RIP from the get-go.
You are right to some degree but you left off one very important part:
DOS BBS's died and RIP was caught up in that. Windows BBS are
flourishing everywhere. Of course many have become ISP's but mainly for
the money. My BBS is dialup (352) 793-2620, on the net (in windows not
telnet) PA/Net to gator.iag.net, and on the WWW at http://gator.iag.net
and is alive and well and moving with the internet.
Ed Watson
Gator Programming
http://gator.iag.net
John Roberts
In article <32C13D...@delta.com>, je...@delta.com says...
>And how are you call stats compared to two years ago?
Mine are up, actually.
>There may still be BBS's operating,but they are FAR overshadowed
>by the Internet now.
In terms of total numbers, that's probably correct ... and the more sysops that
leave the BBS scene for the internet, the higher the usage of the remaining
BBS's will be for power users and folks tired of the "World Wide Wait".
The internet is the "CB" of the 90's, and the dialup BBS is moving back toward
its roots as sort of an "Amateur Radio" thing, like it was before every kid
with a modem and a phone line decided they could run a successful BBS.
Robert
John Roberts wrote:
>
> In article <32C13D...@delta.com>, je...@delta.com says...
>
> >And how are you call stats compared to two years ago?
>
> Mine are up, actually.
>
Ours are atleast double what they were one year ago, with local usage growing at the same rate as
ppp connectivity.
> >There may still be BBS's operating,but they are FAR overshadowed
> >by the Internet now.
>
> In terms of total numbers, that's probably correct ... and the more sysops that
> leave the BBS scene for the internet, the higher the usage of the remaining
> BBS's will be for power users and folks tired of the "World Wide Wait".
>
> The internet is the "CB" of the 90's, and the dialup BBS is moving back toward
> its roots as sort of an "Amateur Radio" thing, like it was before every kid
> with a modem and a phone line decided they could run a successful BBS.
Overshadowed by the hype of the net yes, outdated or not needed, hardly. As in my other posts, it
was the doom and gloom of "BBS's are dead" that has put Mustang, Gcomm and Clark on the brink of
disaster. All around me systems turned all ISP and all around me, they go belly up. You have to
offer something for everyone.
It is kinda like the "tastes great, less filling" ads. for the beer, both are great, but the 2
sides argue. The combo of great local content and traditional BBS services AND great access to the
net at a price everyone can afford gives you something for everyone. That way if the online side
has a slow day, you are filled with Internauts. If the net dies, well there are lots of people
playing those local games, etc.
An example, we have a 126 CD ROM library with everything I can find. While FTP is there, we have
more and more usage of a local library with over 500,000 files in it as FTP is confusing to most, no
descriptions, thumbnails, etc. BUT, our power users can enjoy not only the traditional FTP area,
but a menu driven area AND HTTP access from our BBSphere web area.
The goal should not be which is better BBS or the net, but rather how can I integrate them into a
single cohesive, easy to use package to make money from everyone... That is what I think we have
figured out how to do and what I suggest to everyone.
Tom Porter
You're running tbbs, right Ed?
Tom - from com.bbs.tbbs
Catlin
Jeff Woods <je...@delta.com> wrote:
>Catlin wrote:
>>
>> >BBS's died, and that doomed a BBS add-on like RIP from the get-go.
>>
>> I hate to burst your bubble, Jeff, but my BBS is alive and well :)
>
>And how are you call stats compared to two years ago? There may still
>be BBS's operating,but they are FAR overshadowed by the Internet now.
>
Your statement was BBS's died... I simply said.. mine didn't.
Catlin
ed.w...@gator.iag.net (Ed Watson) wrote:
>You are right to some degree but you left off one very important part:
>DOS BBS's died and RIP was caught up in that. Windows BBS are
>flourishing everywhere. Of course many have become ISP's but mainly for
>the money. My BBS is dialup (352) 793-2620, on the net (in windows not
>telnet) PA/Net to gator.iag.net, and on the WWW at http://gator.iag.net
>and is alive and well and moving with the internet.
>
Ed, I don't know where you get your information, but DOS BBS's have
not died! Mine is very alive and well.. as are many others in my area
who run DOS based bbs's.
Catlin
Ed Watson
A>>You are right to some degree but you left off one very important part:
A>>DOS BBS's died and RIP was caught up in that. Windows BBS are
A>>flourishing everywhere. Of course many have become ISP's but mainly f
A>>the money. My BBS is dialup (352) 793-2620, on the net (in windows no
A>>telnet) PA/Net to gator.iag.net, and on the WWW at http://gator.iag.ne
A>>and is alive and well and moving with the internet.
A>>
A>Ed, I don't know where you get your information, but DOS BBS's have
A>not died! Mine is very alive and well.. as are many others in my area
A>who run DOS based bbs's.
A>
A>Catlin
Sorry, I will distinguish that. Every DOS BBS in my area is dead. I am
the only BBS remaining and I run a Windows BBS.
Ed Watson
A>You're running tbbs, right Ed?
A>
A>Tom - from com.bbs.tbbs
No I run PowerBBS96 for Windows v5.01 with PoWWWerWorkGroup.
Brian
> : BBS's died, and that doomed a BBS add-on like RIP from the get-go.
>
> RIP died because it rarely worked. I don't think I EVER saw a session
> with a RIP BBS that didn't have a few screwed up pages because of a
> single byte error. (RIP has no error correction.)
>
> Burned once, shame on me. Burned twice, shame on you. I am going to be
> VERY apprehensive when looking at the third iteration of RIP. They've
> already gotten too much of my money.
RIP was to be sure, problematic. After quite a bit of tinkering with it
I got it to work quite well on my system. However, when I upgraded to
Worldgroup, the vast majority (perhaps 98%) of my callers did so as
well. With a major portion of them being computer newbies, what they
really wanted was to never have to deal with that scarry old dos prompt.
Then, of course, they began to complain about the size of
Worldgroup....and they do have a point. RIP was small and very fast. RIP
and Telegrafix died, IMHO, because of their habit of announce now and
deliver 2 years later. By the time they deliverd RIP 2 technology (this
includes the RIPaint 2 package) I was deep into Worldgroup and really
had no time for it. I did receive my free upgrade to RIPaint 2, but
other than taking a quick look at it....it's been collecting dust on my
shelf ever since.
Quite a ride for RIP technology, a lightning fast ride to the top, only
to fall equally as fast. I think alot of it was their own fault though.
Brian Kile
Dennis N. Maidon
For all you you that have faith in RIP and have the need for a RIP drawing pgm,
I'll see my copy of RiPaint v1.50 along with upgrades to v1.54 for $50. That
includes manual and original diskettes.
I no longer support RIPSCRIPT in my doors and have no plans for such in the
future.
If interested sent email to dma...@tpboard.com.
Catlin
Does anyone have a new URL for THEBBSLIST ?? I have tried for the
past two days to access that site and get the following message:
File Not Found -The requested URL / was not found on this server.
Has Robert moved to a new location? I tried his link from several
other pages and still get the same message so I know the URL I am
using is (or was) a good one.
MaryLou
(mlw...@ix.netcom.com) real address
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISHING WELL SYSOPS' CORNER
"The BEST BBS Related site on the Internet!"
http://www.geocities.com/~sysopscorner
Featuring... Door of The Week - Available for download!
Gateway to the SysOps' Hangout Chat Lounge! Come On By!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Babylon (Ray)
On Tue, 24 Dec 1996, Jeff Woods wrote:
> Babylon (Ray) wrote:
> >
> > HTML is a very good protocol but it has a real problem with BBS's:
> > INTERACTION. It is not posible (currently) with HTML to do a real
> > teleconference or play most of the games on BBS's.
>
> IRC. We play graphical poker over the 'net WITHOUT Teleconference at
> irc.poker.net:6667. Others do the same.
>
IRC is not HTML. Most Web-newbies have never heard of IRC - Most never
will. (IRC is not a point and click type of thing.)
> > Web Lines is great, a superb product, but it is limited by what HTML
> > can do, as such a web user does not get the full effect when accessing
> > a BBS. The lack of interaction makes you feel very alone on the BBS,
> > even if there are a bunch of other people on-line.
>
> Obviously, you've never been ON the entire Internet. I've never
> understood why people paid Tessier those big bucks for WorldLink hours
> when IRC was free, with a couple orders more magnitude of users online.
I have to agree with you here. I never bought into the Worldlink (I
think you might mean Chatlink tho) thing either. Most of my users are
interested in talking to local users - people they know (for no extra cost).
I do know what IRC is, and I do know that it is free (aside from what you
pay your ISP) and I've been on the net for some time now. I think it is
very unappropriate for you to say that I obviously have never been on the
"entire" internet. If you have something constructive to say, great - if
you just want to put down someone, go back to your Poker IRC channel!
> You're falling inot the same trap -- trying to think like a BBS, rather
> than embracing the Internet for what it is -- a REPLACEMENT for the BBS.
The internet in a wonderful thing. It has thing that a BBS will never
have. But by the same token, the BBS has things that the internet will
never have. If the number of BBS users in my area is any indication, the
BBS is not going anywhere soon.
The internet is NOT a replacement for the BBS, nor is the BBS and
"replacment" for the internet. They are two differnt things that are
starting to somewhat merge.
I do embrace the internet. It has lots to offer, but on a differnt scale
so does the BBS.
Babylon (Ray)
Babylon (Ray)
On 24 Dec 1996, Michael Hajovsky wrote:
> In <32c0419a...@nntp.ix.netcom.com> Cat...@ix.netcom.com (Catlin)
> writes:
>
> > I hate to burst your bubble, Jeff, but my BBS is alive and well :)
>
> Exactly. Just as General Custer said it!
Well the army is building! My BBS is alive and well too!!!!!
Babylon (Ray)
(General Custer never used a BBS or the internet!)
Babylon (Ray)
On Wed, 25 Dec 1996, Jeff Woods wrote:
> Catlin wrote:
> >
> > >BBS's died, and that doomed a BBS add-on like RIP from the get-go.
> >
> > I hate to burst your bubble, Jeff, but my BBS is alive and well :)
>
> And how are you call stats compared to two years ago? There may still
> be BBS's operating,but they are FAR overshadowed by the Internet now.
I don't know about his stats, but my BBS has only gotten bigger in the
last 2 years! We will be adding internet e-mail and news groups soon,
not because of the "evil net" or anything, but just because this is what my
customers want, and you give your customers what they want.
I don't know what your problem is, you seem to have some sorta "the BBS
is dead, the internet is alive" thing to prove or something. Try
contributing something more useful and constructive for a change.
Babylon (Ray)
Arthur Marsh
Babylon (Ray) (bab...@swcp.com) wrote:
[edit]
: I don't know if RIP 3.0 is the answer or not. Maybe just a good ANSI
: telnet Netscape plug-in/Windows client. Really tho, the only way I see
: it really working and being accepted is if Telegraphix can make a deal
: with Netscape and have RIP 3.0 preinstalled as the Telnet (BBS??) plug-in
: for Netscape 4.0. This I doubt is going to happen, but we'll see. <G>
: Babylon (Ray)
Although commercial, Kermit '95 for Windows '95 and NT 3.51 or later is
a very competent telnet client able to be used as a Netscape plug-in.
Check http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/
--
Arthur Marsh, telephone +61-8-8370-2365, fax +61-8-8223-5082
art...@dircsa.org.au
.endofsig
Jerry
In article <32c30dab...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>, Cat...@ix.netcom.com
says...
[snip]
>Does anyone have a new URL for THEBBSLIST ?? I have tried for the
>past two days to access that site and get the following message:
For ISP's try http://www.thelist.com.
Jerry.
Angela Gartin & Mike Wendell
he probably reads boardwatch. :)
mike wendell
--
________________________________________________________________
/ Angela Gartin (angiew) & / The Apparatus BBS 704-372-7579 /
/ Michael Wendell (drmike) / MasterNet, Roadkill on Highway1Net/
/ em...@bellsouth.net / PoliticallyIncorrectNet & others. /
/_______________________________________________________________/
Babylon (Ray)
On Fri, 27 Dec 1996, Angela Gartin & Mike Wendell wrote:
> Babylon (Ray) wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 25 Dec 1996, Jeff Woods wrote:
> >
> > > Catlin wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >BBS's died, and that doomed a BBS add-on like RIP from the get-go.
> > > >
> > > > I hate to burst your bubble, Jeff, but my BBS is alive and well :)
> > >
> > > And how are you call stats compared to two years ago? There may still
> > > be BBS's operating,but they are FAR overshadowed by the Internet now.
> >
> > I don't know about his stats, but my BBS has only gotten bigger in the
> > last 2 years! We will be adding internet e-mail and news groups soon,
> > not because of the "evil net" or anything, but just because this is what my
> > customers want, and you give your customers what they want.
> >
> > I don't know what your problem is, you seem to have some sorta "the BBS
> > is dead, the internet is alive" thing to prove or something. Try
> > contributing something more useful and constructive for a change.
> >
> > Babylon (Ray)
>
> he probably reads boardwatch. :)
>
> mike wendell
>
I think you might be right. Remember when Boardwatch was a really cool
magazine? <G>
Babylon (Ray)
Dani el Snake
William McBrine
In alt.bbs.searchlight Babylon (Ray) <bab...@swcp.com> wrote:
: I think you might be right. Remember when Boardwatch was a really cool
: magazine? <G>
Nope. I *always* thought it sucked. :-/
--
William McBrine | http://www.clark.net/pub/wmcbrine/html/
wmcb...@clark.net | Vote Ralph Nader for President in 2000!
BIT...@whiner.com
Has weblines figured out yet how to interface the chat or games yet? I
talked to them many months ago and they alluded to the fact that they
were hoping to get the chat interface working soon.
fl...@citicom.com
>
> I don't know if HTML should rightfully be dead but I will point out that the
> only reason for HTML's widespread success is that the full specifications
> and sample source code to display HTML documents was made free in the
> public domain.
Don't forget the other reason for HTML's success....millions of people
not capable of anything more than clicking their mouses. My guess is
that when the "world wide wait" is no longer Vogue ie: everyone is doing
it, many of those clickers here now will no longer see the value in it.
I forsee the demographics changing from multimedia junky, mouse
clicking, barely able to turn the puter on, yuppies back to those of us
who got it all started. The people who are perpetually trying to squeeze
out that little bit more performance or stretch the limits of that new
technology. Those of us who arent dazzled by pretty pics alone....:)
Dam...that's all I got before my glass ball clouded up..
fl...@citicom.com
Jeff Woods wrote:
>
> Babylon (Ray) wrote:
> >
> > HTML is a very good protocol but it has a real problem with BBS's:
> > INTERACTION. It is not posible (currently) with HTML to do a real
> > teleconference or play most of the games on BBS's.
>
> IRC. We play graphical poker over the 'net WITHOUT Teleconference at
> irc.poker.net:6667. Others do the same.
>
poker....hmmmmm...
wow..I dont know why anyone would even bother calling a gaming bbs. And
the winsock/ISP/
IRC setup and cost are so much simpler than hitting a bbs with a dos
term prog.
> > Web Lines is great, a superb product, but it is limited by what HTML
> > can do, as such a web user does not get the full effect when accessing
> > a BBS. The lack of interaction makes you feel very alone on the BBS,
> > even if there are a bunch of other people on-line.
>
> Obviously, you've never been ON the entire Internet. I've never
> understood why people paid Tessier those big bucks for WorldLink hours
> when IRC was free, with a couple orders more magnitude of users online.
>
Whole different atmosphere, whole different animal alltogether.
> You're falling inot the same trap -- trying to think like a BBS, rather
> than embracing the Internet for what it is -- a REPLACEMENT for the BBS.
A replacement? You can't even compare them other that they are both
information accessed by a computer.
Dave Camp
>past two days to access that site and get the following message:
> "The BEST BBS Related site on the Internet!"
> http://www.geocities.com/~sysopscorner
> Featuring... Door of The Week - Available for download!
> Gateway to the SysOps' Hangout Chat Lounge! Come On By!
There's a site at "http://www.thebbslist.com" This might be the one.
Catlin
dc...@snowcrest.net (Dave Camp) wrote:
That's the one I was looking for, but unfortunately, it has been
removed from the itnernet. I heard from the owner today and the site
has been deleted.
MaryLou
Jeff Breitner
In article <32C546...@citicom.com>
fl...@citicom.com wrote:
> Don't forget the other reason for HTML's success....millions of people
> not capable of anything more than clicking their mouses. My guess is
> that when the "world wide wait" is no longer Vogue ie: everyone is doing
> it, many of those clickers here now will no longer see the value in it.
> I forsee the demographics changing from multimedia junky, mouse
> clicking, barely able to turn the puter on, yuppies back to those of us
> who got it all started. The people who are perpetually trying to squeeze
> out that little bit more performance or stretch the limits of that new
> technology. Those of us who arent dazzled by pretty pics alone....:)
> Dam...that's all I got before my glass ball clouded up..
I think you're not giving enough credit to those thousands of mindless
clickers out there. Much of the clicking is in search of "value", and if you
can serve it up to them in the form they are able to accept it, they'll clog
your network trying to get in.
Face it, the BBS interface is going the way of the telegraph. You're never
going to get much of the "mindless clicking crowd" to do much outside of
their browsers (or whatever takes the place of browsers).
KnightBird
On 30 Dec 1996, Dave Camp wrote:
> >Does anyone have a new URL for THEBBSLIST ?? I have tried for the
> >past two days to access that site and get the following message:
> > WISHING WELL SYSOPS' CORNER
> > "The BEST BBS Related site on the Internet!"
> > http://www.geocities.com/~sysopscorner
> > Featuring... Door of The Week - Available for download!
> > Gateway to the SysOps' Hangout Chat Lounge! Come On By!
>
> There's a site at "http://www.thebbslist.com" This might be the one.
THEBBSLIST seems to be down now. I do not know if that is a permanent
thing or not, but the sig below should tell you that I am concerned, that
is where my RGFAQ is kept and where the autoresponder is... I might have
to teach procmail how to do it on MY system!! <cringe>
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
KnightBird (Joe Carter) OFFICIAL Renegade FTP/WWW Coordinator
kngh...@teleport.com Renegade FAQ, email rg...@thebbslist.com
Kaat's Keep BBS 1-503-375-0567 FIDOnet 1:3406/7, RGSnet 50:260/100
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ "Standard disclaimer? Disclaim this!" \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
KnightBird
On Mon, 30 Dec 1996, Catlin wrote:
> >There's a site at "http://www.thebbslist.com" This might be the one.
> >
> That's the one I was looking for, but unfortunately, it has been
> removed from the itnernet. I heard from the owner today and the site
> has been deleted.
Damn. He could/should have told me.
R. Scott Perry
In article <32C543...@citicom.com>, BIT...@WHINER.COM says...
>Has weblines figured out yet how to interface the chat or games yet? I
>talked to them many months ago and they alluded to the fact that they
>were hoping to get the chat interface working soon.
Yes. The 32-User and higher counts of WebLines include "Module
Emulation"... the FIRST program ever, on any platform, to allow WWW users to
run existing programs. It lets WWW users use the teleconference, as well as
many different games, account modules, etc.
-Scott
R. Scott Perry
>> > HTML is a very good protocol but it has a real problem with BBS's:
>> > INTERACTION. It is not posible (currently) with HTML to do a real
>> > teleconference or play most of the games on BBS's.
Actually, the very first release of WebLines last year included the ability
for dialup users and web users to interact via paging, E-mail, forums, and
now teleconference and even multi-player games! For further information, go
to http://www.fcc.com/weblines/index.htm
-Scott
arachnid
Jeff Breitner wrote:
> Face it, the BBS interface is going the way of the telegraph. You're never
> going to get much of the "mindless clicking crowd" to do much outside of
> their browsers (or whatever takes the place of browsers).
Yes you are. You can find most anything on a local BBS besides that you
can
on the 'net. For example, "DragonSword" is a multiplayer game for
PowerBBS. Is
it mindless? Somewhat but people like to play it. FIDOnet... is it
mindless?
No. On a PowerBBS using PowerAccess, do you click a mouse button to
view the message conference? Yes. Could I play the DragonSword PowerBBS
game
over the 'net? Sure, just set up a ICE.NFS server and have everyone else
as clients... easy. The Internet could be used as one big instant fun
GUI
game networking system
arachnid
Jeff Breitner wrote:
> Face it, the BBS interface is going the way of the telegraph. You're never
> going to get much of the "mindless clicking crowd" to do much outside of
> their browsers (or whatever takes the place of browsers).
No.... You can find most anything on a local BBS besides that you can
Brian
> Yes. Could I play the DragonSword PowerBBS game over the 'net? Sure, just > set up a ICE.NFS server and have everyone else as clients... easy. The >Internet could be used as one big instant fun GUI game networking system
As long as you're comfortable with watching a couple birthdays go by
before you could even hurt the dragon's feelings. :) A very SLOW
animal...this Internet thing.
Brian Kile
--
"Why do we park on driveways and drive on parkways?"
William McBrine
In alt.bbs.searchlight Brian <kbr...@brainerd.net> wrote:
: A very SLOW animal...this Internet thing.
No, it isn't. If you're experiencing slowness, blame your ISP, not the
Internet as a whole.
David G.
Something definatly needs to be done with the Internet Explorer's version
of Telnet as well...if they could do it for Netscape they could easily
integrate it into the explorer....and of course there's the ever present
"FREE" aspect of the Explorer that I've always cottoned to. :)
Arthur Marsh <art...@gateway.dircsa.org.au> wrote in article
<59rrtd$7...@gateway.dircsa.org.au>...
천리안 NEWS GROUP 이용자
David G. (dto...@telis.org) wrote:
: Something definatly needs to be done with the Internet Explorer's version
Paul Blitz
rsc...@fcc.com (R. Scott Perry) wrote:
>> What terminal software supports HTML though? Are there any
>> plug-ins for Netscape which will allow it to call a BBS and
>> act like a terminal?
>There is no terminal software to my knowledge that supports HTML. However,
>there is no need for one! You can just run Netscape (or Mosaic, IE, etc.)
>by dialing into the BBS and starting a SLIP/PPP session, and then connect to
>the BBS via the web browser. Simple.
ROFL!!
There are many people at the level where they can just manage to
install a custom Banancom.... and can thus just manage to connect to a
BBS.
There are also slightly more "able" people who can install a
fully-customised ISP package (where it just asks for your name &
password) & get online that way.
But what you suggest is NOT simple for most of the above....
======================================
Paul Blitz, Winchester, England
paul....@enterprise.net
The Cardboard Box BBS: +44 1962 880278
======================================
Debra Ver
Mustang's WIN Server has both. An ANSI terminal mode and a HTML interface.
You download their graphical client that comes with a browser and other
clients including chat, messages, and a terminal mode. If you're a
beginner, it can work as is. But it can work by establishing a virtual
Winsock, letting more advanced users run their own TCP apps. I've seen
better chats, such as U and I's graphical chat (http://www.uandi.com), that
you can run through the browser instead of the client.