🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Dec30.174906.18596@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>, knight@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Knight Before Christmas) writes:
|> I am basically looking for some BBS package that runs CORRECTLY under
|> MS Windows 3.1 enhanced mode.  I'd prefer to use Maximus BBS, which I
|> am most impressed with, but it only works under standard mode.

While I was waiting for a firmware upgrade to a new harddrive controller
which didn't like QEMM/Desqview, I ran my Wildcat 3.55P BBS (2 nodes) under
Windows 3.1 for a while (one local node, one com port locked at 19200 with
a V32bis modem, and a BinkleyTerm mailer frontend). While I can't say I 
particularly loved the speed of the sessions (I was, after all, running 
on only a 386DX-20), It was an acceptable stop-gap until I could run Desqview
again. Frankly, I'd recommend Desqview, as it's friendlier to comm-intensive
applications, and you can run Windows (albeit in standard mode... never tried
it in enhanced mode) from within a Desqview session). 
  The disclaimer here is that Wildcat is not free, nor is it cheap ( $99-$149
dollars for the single line version, depending upon what store you buy it 
in - I saw the $99 at Software Etc), and most utilities for it are also in 
the 50-99 dollar range. Figure a full setup with maintenance tools, and 
Fido-net style networking capabilities will set you back about 200-250. The
only good side of the cost is that they have provided excellent support to me
when I've needed it, including rebuilding my file database once when a 
drive glitch rendered it unreadable. Saved me at least 100 hours of having to
re-load all my files into the BBS. I'm sure others have had negative 
experiences, and it's not my aim to debate BBS software packages. Simply
put, I run Wildcat, and it worked fine under windows unattanded for a 
period of 2 months.
Cheers,
Kevin

-- 
Kevin Brokaw   (kevinb@csd.sgi.com)     | 
Product support engineer                | Sorry, this closet is for anxieties.
Silicon Graphics Computer Systems       | Pipe dreams are under the bed. 
(Forgive them,they know not what I post)| 

In article <1992Dec30.185932.17997@news.csd.sgi.com> kevinb@oblivion.csd.sgi.com (Kevin Brokaw) writes:
>In article <1992Dec30.174906.18596@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>, knight@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Knight Before Christmas) writes:
>|> I am basically looking for some BBS package that runs CORRECTLY under
>|> MS Windows 3.1 enhanced mode.  I'd prefer to use Maximus BBS, which I
>|> am most impressed with, but it only works under standard mode.
>
>While I was waiting for a firmware upgrade to a new harddrive controller
>which didn't like QEMM/Desqview, I ran my Wildcat 3.55P BBS (2 nodes) under
>Windows 3.1 for a while (one local node, one com port locked at 19200 with
>a V32bis modem, and a BinkleyTerm mailer frontend). While I can't say I 
>particularly loved the speed of the sessions (I was, after all, running 
>on only a 386DX-20), It was an acceptable stop-gap until I could run Desqview
>again. Frankly, I'd recommend Desqview, as it's friendlier to comm-intensive
>applications, and you can run Windows (albeit in standard mode... never tried
>it in enhanced mode) from within a Desqview session). 
>  The disclaimer here is that Wildcat is not free, nor is it cheap ( $99-$149
>dollars for the single line version, depending upon what store you buy it 
>in - I saw the $99 at Software Etc), and most utilities for it are also in 
>the 50-99 dollar range. Figure a full setup with maintenance tools, and 
>Fido-net style networking capabilities will set you back about 200-250. The
>only good side of the cost is that they have provided excellent support to me
>when I've needed it, including rebuilding my file database once when a 
>drive glitch rendered it unreadable. Saved me at least 100 hours of having to
>re-load all my files into the BBS. I'm sure others have had negative 
>experiences, and it's not my aim to debate BBS software packages. Simply
>put, I run Wildcat, and it worked fine under windows unattanded for a 
>period of 2 months.
>Cheers,
>Kevin
>
>-- 
>Kevin Brokaw   (kevinb@csd.sgi.com)     | 
>Product support engineer                | Sorry, this closet is for anxieties.
>Silicon Graphics Computer Systems       | Pipe dreams are under the bed. 
>(Forgive them,they know not what I post)| 


Question: Does WildCat still have that horrable message base system? I
was on "the" wildcat board for this area a while back. (It was the test drive
version BTW) And if there were replys to a message, you HAD TO read all
the messages in that thread before going to the next message. If there
were 20 some replys to a message about cross stiching, you were stuck reading
those things! I though Wild Cat was well done and I've always heard they
were well supported but the message base gave me the shivers!

Rob Merritt

In <1992Dec30.174906.18596@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> knight@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Knight Before Christmas) writes:

>Greetings, all.  I'm planning to start a BBS on my data line but I'm
>also considering that the most effective way for me to run this BBS
>without wasting my machine resources is to have it running under Windows 3.1.
>At least, I have a lot of Windows software I can use while my BBS is 
>running.

>First of all, Sorry to whomever wrote PBBS for Windows -- it glitched way
>too much on me.  

>I am basically looking for some BBS package that runs CORRECTLY under
>MS Windows 3.1 enhanced mode.  I'd prefer to use Maximus BBS, which I
>am most impressed with, but it only works under standard mode.

This is news to me.  I've run Maximus 2.0 in a DOS box in Enhanced
Mode under Windows 3.1.  It not only runs correctly, but you can run
multiple lines if you set it up right, with real-time chat between the
nodes.

-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.

In article <1992Dec30.204220.9141@apgea.army.mil>, rcmerrit@apgea.army.mil (Robert C. Merritt <rcmerrit>) writes:
|> Question: Does WildCat still have that horrable message base system? I
|> was on "the" wildcat board for this area a while back. (It was the test drive
|> version BTW) And if there were replys to a message, you HAD TO read all
|> the messages in that thread before going to the next message. If there
|> were 20 some replys to a message about cross stiching, you were stuck reading
|> those things! I though Wild Cat was well done and I've always heard they
|> were well supported but the message base gave me the shivers!

I would imagine the simple answer would be no, it isn't still that way, but 
honestly, in the 3+ years I've been running a Wildcat system, the message 
system NEVER operated in that manner. This would take me back to version 
2.10, and the test drive release at that time, (late 89/early 90), which
was based upon release 1.13. You do have the option of reading replies in 
order when reading messages, but it is not the default mode of operation
for reading messages. The default mode is non-threaded, sequential reading, 
and effective with version 3.00 of Wildcat, each message area is an individual
B-tree indexed database (prior versions kept one database combining all message
areas). The concept of joining conferences (or sub-boards) was introduced
in V3.0.
Cheers,
Kevin 

-- 
Kevin Brokaw   (kevinb@csd.sgi.com)     | 
Product support engineer                | Sorry, this closet is for anxieties.
Silicon Graphics Computer Systems       | Pipe dreams are under the bed. 
(Forgive them,they know not what I post)|