While some folks enjoy fiber-optic speeds, other counties and towns across the USA are barely crawling.
This presents itself as a unique opportunity for the BBS community. BBS systems are low-bandwidth, and a perfect way to get people in these communities connected with others via forums, etc. We may not be able to solve the root problem, but I feel that the BBS community could very well be a tool being used by these underserved/unserved communities.
communities connected with others via forums, etc. We may not be able to solve the root problem, but I feel that the BBS community could very well be a tool being used by these underserved/unserved communities.
The question is, as always, how do we get them connecting?
That's definitely possible. But at the same time, why hasn't it happened already? Why haven't we seen people setting up BBSes in these communities with low-speed internet, after all these years?
That's definitely possible. But at the same time, why hasn't it
happened already? Why haven't we seen people setting up BBSes in
these communities with low-speed internet, after all these years?
Yea Why? Why hasn't it happened already? Is the BBS too boring? Not enough pretty pictures like the web has? I can't stand waiting for web pages to load. Even with a fast connection. If folks are still using dialup are they still using the web? That would make me nuts! So why aren't they using BBS's?? Maybe they don't know they exist? I don't know? I can't figure it out. Tell me.. what are your thoughts on the subject my dear Watson??
BBS's?? Maybe they don't know they exist? I don't know? I can't figure it out. Tell me.. what are your thoughts on the subject my dear Watson??
That's definitely possible. But at the same time, why hasn't it happened already? Why haven't we seen people setting up BBSes in these communities with low-speed internet, after all these years?
Yea Why? Why hasn't it happened already? Is the BBS too boring? Not enough pretty pictures like the web has? I can't stand waiting for web pages to load. Even with a fast connection. If folks are still using dialup are they still using the web? That would make me nuts! So why aren't they using BBS's?? Maybe they don't know they exist? I don't know? I can't figure it out. Tell me.. what are your thoughts on the subject my dear Watson??
Probably 95% of the population wouldn't have a clue what you meant if you walked up to them and asked what a BBS was.
Yea Why? Why hasn't it happened already? Is the BBS too boring? Not
do what i've done.
get a regular person you know, sit them down and have them visit a bbs and ask them what they think. then see if they continue to use them.
get a regular person you know, sit them down and have them visit a bbs and ask them what they think. then see if they continue to use them.
Re: New Data Suggests 162M Americans Don't Have Broadband Access
By: Hustler to dmxrob on Wed Apr 10 2019 10:22 pm
BBS's?? Maybe they don't know they exist? I don't know? I can't figure it out. Tell me.. what are your thoughts on the subject my dear Watson??
Probably 95% of the population wouldn't have a clue what you meant if you walked up to them and asked what a BBS was.
The step up from a BBS was the web-based discussion forum. Same coversations in an easier to view and edit format.
On 04-12-19 20:11, Moondog wrote to dmxrob <=-
The step up from a BBS was the web-based discussion forum. Same coversations in an easier to view and edit format.
On 04-13-19 08:07, dmxrob wrote to Moondog <=-
I have yet to find a web forum that I like in terms of design and function. However, you are correct - those were the next logical evolution.
The step up from a BBS was the web-based discussion forum. Same
coversations in an easier to view and edit format.
That's debateable, web forums are slow and cumbersome, if you ask me. ;)
On 04-15-19 10:03, Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Maybe sometimes, but often I haven't felt like they're too slow or cumbersome. Compared to a totally text-based BBS, web forums have some
features I like, such as the ability to add images inline in the
message, adding clickable HTTP links, etc..
Maybe sometimes, but often I haven't felt like they're too slow or
cumbersome. Compared to a totally text-based BBS, web forums have
some
I'm guessing you pick and choose messages, while I need to scan them all (to utilise the best threading processor I have access to - in my head ;) ).
On 04-16-19 09:46, Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Yeah, I often don't feel like I need to read every single message
that's posted. Not everything is very relevant to me. Maybe I got
used to reading newsgroups with Forte Agent, which lets you pick and choose messages to read.. My Synchronet message reader actually started out as a message lister, inspired by Forte Agent, where I could list
the messages in a sub-board and choose the ones I wanted to read.
Yeah, I often don't feel like I need to read every single message
that's posted. Not everything is very relevant to me. Maybe I got
The problem is that doesn't allow for thread drift or those unexpected useful gems hidden in messages. :)
On 04-16-19 21:23, Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Yeah, I often don't feel like I need to read every single message
that's posted. Not everything is very relevant to me. Maybe I got
The problem is that doesn't allow for thread drift or those unexpected useful gems hidden in messages. :)
That's true. :) Sometimes I do read through some messages on my BBS.
Nightfox wrote to MRO <=-
Even people who used to use BBSes back in the day might not be really interested in using them again. I told one of my co-workers about my
BBS, who used to use BBSes back in the day, and he played LORD on my
BBS for a few weeks or so and then stopped calling.
Yeah, I read or at least skim most messages. That's why I use offline mail - for speed and a better interface. Web forums, with their loading time in the order of _seconds_ really get in the way, and unlike offline mail,
I had a couple of long-time callers on my dial-up BBS, and when I took
a hiatus in 1999, brought the board back up as a telnet BBS. The time had come and gone for them, when I asked why they didn't want to call
again. BBSing was sort of a magical cross-roads of time, people and circumstance back in the 90s, I can see how people wouldn't want to be disappointed trying to re-create it once they'd moved on.
That's true. :) Sometimes I do read through some messages on my BBS.
Yeah, I read or at least skim most messages. That's why I use offline mail - for speed and a better interface. Web forums, with their loading time in the order of _seconds_ really get in the way, and unlike offline mail, where I can auto advance to the next area, I have to constantly go in and back out (with more seconds of loading at each operation). Sometimes I can use right click -> open in new tab to reduce this. Works on Facebook, except there, the scripting frequently shuffles the notification list (arrrrgh). But FB
I had a couple of long-time callers on my dial-up BBS, and when I took
a hiatus in 1999, brought the board back up as a telnet BBS. The time had come and gone for them, when I asked why they didn't want to call
again. BBSing was sort of a magical cross-roads of time, people and circumstance back in the 90s, I can see how people wouldn't want to be disappointed trying to re-create it once they'd moved on.
i have a computer problem and i'm reading through 100 'me too's' and there's 20 more pages of useless info. finding a useful resolution for my problem in my forum is like finding a needle in a haystack. maybe they need upvoting so good posts go to the top?
On 04-18-19 10:02, Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
@VIA: VERT/DIGDIST
Re: Re: New Data Suggests 162M Am
By: Vk3jed to Nightfox on Wed Apr 17 2019 07:33 pm
Yeah, I read or at least skim most messages. That's why I use offline mail - for speed and a better interface. Web forums, with their loading time in the order of _seconds_ really get in the way, and unlike offline mail,
For my BBS, I typically like to use the telnet interface. That seems
fast enough for me, and for a BBS, I like the text interface.
On 04-18-19 16:41, MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
i think the forum reading interface, while sounds good on 'paper', is
not an efficient, enjoyable way to read and search for information.
it also might compound with the type of people that frequent forums as well.
i have a computer problem and i'm reading through 100 'me too's' and there's 20 more pages of useless info. finding a useful resolution for
my problem in my forum is like finding a needle in a haystack. maybe
they need upvoting so good posts go to the top?
For my BBS, I typically like to use the telnet interface. That
seems
fast enough for me, and for a BBS, I like the text interface.
I find I don't feel as in touch with where I am on telnet, though at least at today's network speeds, it is fast and passes on those grounds. :) Back in the modem days, there were real delays in loading messages, especially at 300 or 1200 bps! :D
On 04-21-19 10:21, Heliarc wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Mailreaders are great for slow speeds. I don't feel "connected" to a
BBS with mailreaders. I can't see how the SysOP customized his/her BBS using a mail reader. I don't know why but I also feel like I might be missing a fellow user "paging" me. "Chatting" was a big deal back then. Today when I call a BBS I can see and hear the tumble weeds blowing.
lol I still love BBSin!
Vk3jed wrote to Nightfox <=-
grounds. :) Back in the modem days, there were real delays in loading messages, especially at 300 or 1200 bps!
On 04-21-19 08:34, poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Vk3jed <=-
grounds. :) Back in the modem days, there were real delays in loading messages, especially at 300 or 1200 bps!
3oo baud is the speed you read at - no one needs faster than that!
exercise is still important for overall health.
On 05-11-19 00:59, Porosz wrote to Vk3jed <=-
@VIA: VERT/CRYSTAL
Re: Re: Inventor of the Inter
By: Vk3jed to Nightfox on Sun Apr 07 2019 09:59 am
exercise is still important for overall health.
Basicly, your body is good at doing things, and responds accordingly.
I find I don't feel as in touch with where I am on telnet, though at least at today's network speeds, it is fast and passes on
those grounds. :) Back in the modem days, there were real delays in loading messages, especially at 300 or 1200 bps! :D
might be nice if there was a speed control where we could set a sped emulation to make it look like 2400 or such... i've seen similar on web
Re: Re: New Data Suggests 162M Am
By: wkitty42 to Vk3jed on Mon Jul 08 2019 12:35 pm
might be nice if there was a speed control where we could set a sped emulation to make it look like 2400 or such... i've seen similar on web
SyncTerm can do that. You can hold down control (or shift, or alt, I don't remember) and then press the up or down arrows to have it emulate a certain baud rate. If you have the bottom status bar enabled, it will show you (in parenthesis) what baud rate it's emulating when you change it that way.
SyncTerm can do that. You can hold down control (or shift, or alt, I
don't remember) and then press the up or down arrows to have it
emulate a certain baud rate. If you have the bottom status bar
enabled, it will show you (in parenthesis) what baud rate it's
emulating when you change it that way.
The BBS can send an escape sequence to control how fast SyncTERM displays text as well ("output emulation speed"): http://cvs.synchro.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/*checkout*/src/conio/cterm.txt
Re: Re: New Data Suggests 162M Am
By: Digital Man to Nightfox on Mon Jul 08 2019 04:42 pm
SyncTerm can do that. You can hold down control (or shift, or alt, I
don't remember) and then press the up or down arrows to have it
emulate a certain baud rate. If you have the bottom status bar
enabled, it will show you (in parenthesis) what baud rate it's
emulating when you change it that way.
The BBS can send an escape sequence to control how fast SyncTERM displays text as well ("output emulation speed"): http://cvs.synchro.ne t/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/*checkout*/src/conio/cterm.txt
That's cool. If a user isn't using SyncTerm though, would they see anything weird in their terminal if the BBS sends those sequences?
might be nice if there was a speed control where we could set a sped
emulation to make it look like 2400 or such... i've seen similar on
web
SyncTerm can do that. You can hold down control (or shift, or alt, I don't remember) and then press the up or down arrows to have it emulate a certain baud rate. If you have the bottom status bar enabled, it will show you (in parenthesis) what baud rate it's emulating when you change it that way.
On 07-08-19 12:35, wkitty42 wrote to Vk3jed <=-t
@VIA: VERT/SESTAR
Re: Re: New Data Suggests 162M Am
By: Vk3jed to Nightfox on Sun Apr 21 2019 08:29:00
I find I don't feel as in touch with where I am on telnet, though at least
today's network speeds, it is fast and passes on
those grounds. :) Back in the modem days, there were real delays in loading
messages, especially at 300 or 1200 bps! :D
might be nice if there was a speed control where we could set a sped emulation to make it look like 2400 or such... i've seen similar on web pages and it was ok but to do it in a real BBS environment would
possibly be pretty neat... i don't know that i'd limit file transfers
via speed control, though ;)
SyncTerm can do that. You can hold down control (or shift, or alt,
That's freakin AWESOME! I did not know about that feature! It's the Alt- key with up/down arrows to do it. 2400 seems painfully slow although I spent many hours watching that happen many years ago. 9600 seems like a "sweet-spot" that makes it seem like you're on a modem and yet not too painful.
Gonna be using this on a regular basis, thanks! Hahahaha
talking more about how offline mail better manages the bigger delays of slow modem connections, bu making it one big delay (during the packet transfer) rather than lots of little delays between each message, which are just wasted time.
messagebase. It seems Synchronet's built-in functionality is faster at that though. Not too long ago, I saw that Digital Man was working on some updates to the stock reader that look fairly interesting (including a scrollable reader and message list enhancements), and I'm interested in working with that when it's ready.
Nightfox
messagebase. It seems Synchronet's built-in functionality is faster
at that though. Not too long ago, I saw that Digital Man was working
on some updates to the stock reader that look fairly interesting
(including a scrollable reader and message list enhancements), and
I'm interested in working with that when it's ready.
Would you know how we are going to get DM updates? Is there a new version od Synchronet on the way? "version 4"? Will it have an installer? What's the "skinny"??
might be nice if there was a speed control where we could set a sped
emulation to make it look like 2400 or such... i've seen similar on web
SyncTerm can do that. You can hold down control (or shift, or alt, I don't remember) and then press the up or down arrows to have it emulate a certain baud rate. If you have the bottom status bar enabled, it will show you (in parenthesis) what baud rate it's emulating when you change it that way.
might be nice if there was a speed control where we could set a sped
emulation to make it look like 2400 or such... i've seen similar on web
pages and it was ok but to do it in a real BBS environment would
possibly be pretty neat... i don't know that i'd limit file transfers
via speed control, though ;)
Hmm, that changed subject totally.
Not what I was talking about. I was
talking more about how offline mail better manages the bigger delays of slow modem connections, bu making it one big delay (during the packet transfer) rather than lots of little delays between each message, which
are just wasted time.
On 07-09-19 10:04, Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
When reading messages on my BBS, it doesn't really take any noticeable time (to me, anyway) to go from one message to the next. What does
take time though, is in my reader listing the messages (I like browsing the message list sometimes and choosing which messages to read). My
reader filters out messages that are marked for deletion, vote
responses, etc., so it has to load all the message headers and
eliminate those ones, and it can take a few seconds if there are a few thousand messages in a messagebase. It seems Synchronet's built-in functionality is faster at that though. Not too long ago, I saw that Digital Man was working on some updates to the stock reader that look fairly interesting (including a scrollable reader and message list enhancements), and I'm interested in working with that when it's ready.
When reading messages on my BBS, it doesn't really take any
noticeable time (to me, anyway) to go from one message to the next.
What does
That's today. I was making some reference to the modem days, where the time to display a message on a BBS was comparable to the time taken today to display a web forum post.
For me today, the advantage of offline mail over reading online is a better interface - I find it easier to navigate and keep track of where I am in the pile of messages, and I can scroll both up and down by the exact amount I want (1 line or 100 - doesn't matter), instead of having to re-display a long message that I want to look further up.. :)
remember him saying there would be a JavaScript script (or several JavaScript scripts) to support it, which I don't think have been put into the Synchronet CVS yet. But I assume all the changes will eventually be in the Synchronet CVS when it's all ready. I'm not sure (don't remember) if those new changes will be part of Synchronet 4 or if they'll be released sooner.
On 07-09-19 18:49, wkitty42 wrote to Vk3jed <=-
ahhhh, yes, that's a bit different... i did think you were looking to
make the experience more like the POTS days... oops! hehehehe...
On 07-09-19 18:33, Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Displaying posts on a web forum is typically fairly quick too, in my expericne.. Web forums can actually show a whole page of posts rather quickly (maybe 10 or 20 messages at a time).
I know what you mean though.. Loading and reading through a QWK packet
on a local machine is probably the fastest way to read messages. :)
For me today, the advantage of offline mail over reading online is a better interface - I find it easier to navigate and keep track of where I am in the pile of messages, and I can scroll both up and down by the exact amount I want (1 line or 100 - doesn't matter), instead of having to re-display a long message that I want to look further up.. :)
I think most user interface issues on the BBS side can potentially be fixed, too. My message reader for Synchronet (which has been available for about 5 years now) has a scrolling user interface, and Mystic BBS
also has a scrolling reader interface for messages. So you can scroll
up & down by one line or a page. And it looks like that's something Digital Man is working on adding to Synchronet as a stock feature, too.
:)
On 07-09-19 18:46, wkitty42 wrote to Nightfox <=-
yeah but that relies on the terminal doing it... i was thinking about a way for the BBS to transmit it like that so that it is not limited to
any terminal at all ;)
Displaying posts on a web forum is typically fairly quick too, in my
expericne.. Web forums can actually show a whole page of posts
rather quickly (maybe 10 or 20 messages at a time).
Define "quick". For me, web forums are often _tens_ of seconds per page.
That _really_ adds up, when you read dozens of threads. I'm probably particularly badly affected due to geography and the effect of multiple lots of 200mS RTTs from the other side of the world to display all of the elements of the page.
On 07-10-19 09:34, Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
For me, usually it's only a second or two at most to load a page of messages on a forum. Sometimes it doesn't even seem like that long.
If you're seeing forums take tens of seconds to load a page of
messages, I'd think something is wrong with your internet connection or the web site, or something in between..
That _really_ adds up, when you read dozens of threads. I'm probably particularly badly affected due to geography and the effect of multiple lots of 200mS RTTs from the other side of the world to display all of the elements of the page.
Perhaps, if there are lots of connections between you and the web
sites, or maybe a satellite connection or something in between you and
the web site..
BBSing, so I can be able to keep an eye when in chat. Would be good to fire something more retro as a terminal too. I could use tcpser and tty0tty to provide a serial link to the terminal.
On 07-24-19 09:55, Zombie Mambo wrote to Vk3jed <=-
@VIA: VERT/ZZONE
Re: Re: New Data Suggests 162M Am
By: Vk3jed to Heliarc on Tue Apr 23 2019 07:08 pm
BBSing, so I can be able to keep an eye when in chat. Would be good to fire something more retro as a terminal too. I could use tcpser and tty0tty to provide a serial link to the terminal.
This made me laugh because within the past two weeks I've purchased a
used Vic-20, got a vicModem for it, tape recorder, and a bunch of modules/cassettes... One of the cassettes was the original VicTerm.
I fired it up, took my landline phone, dialed a 209 bbs that supposedly supported 300bps still, got the answer tone, unplugged the handset cord and plugged into the vicmodem, and 10 seconds later after negotiation I was in 1982 all over again.
What made this even more nostalgic was that the Vic-20 only supports 22char col width and the bbs was made for 40. What fun!
Then I busted out the modem manual where they gave you a sample
"terminal" program for CBM basic. Using that I was able to understand
how to acces the VicModem from Basic, and I wrote a quick and dirty BBS for it, which i tested using my classic TRS80 Model 100 with built in 300bps modem.
Hilariously fun time.
This made me laugh because within the past two weeks I've purchased a used Vic-20, got a vicModem for it, tape recorder, and a bunch of modules/cassettes... One of the cassettes was the original VicTerm.
Re: Re: New Data Suggests 162M Am
By: Zombie Mambo to Vk3jed on Wed Jul 24 2019 09:55 am
This made me laugh because within the past two weeks I've purchased a u Vic-20, got a vicModem for it, tape recorder, and a bunch of modules/cassettes... One of the cassettes was the original VicTerm.
This sounds super fun.
I'm embarking on my own little journey into C64 nostalgia. I have the C64 an couple of 1541 drives. Currently trying to just get a video signal out to a I have the 8-pin DIN to RCA cable, which is plugged into an RCA/S-Video to H converter box. Currently just get the default output from the box to screen no signal from the computer.
The troubleshooting begins! :)
| Sysop: | Ragnarok |
|---|---|
| Location: | Dock Sud, Bs As, Argentina |
| Users: | 136 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 21:33:13 |
| Calls: | 15,171 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 19,858 |
| D/L today: |
105 files (8,420K bytes) |
| Messages: | 1,692,167 |