561 lines
32 KiB
Plaintext
561 lines
32 KiB
Plaintext
NUMBER OF LINES: 629
|
|
1 If you are in need of help, you need but ask.
|
|
2 Welcome to BWMS (BackWater Message System) Mike Day System operator
|
|
3 ************************* REMOVED: 14 DEC 82 ****************************
|
|
4 GENERAL DISCLAIMER: BWMS IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY INFORMATION PLACED ON
|
|
5 THIS SYSTEM.
|
|
6 BWMS was created as an electronic bill board. BWMS is a privatly owned
|
|
7 and operated system which is currently open for use by the general public.
|
|
8 No restrictions are placed on the use of the system.
|
|
9 It is intended that the system be normally used for messages and
|
|
10 advertisments by the users. As the system is privatly owned, I retain the
|
|
11 right to remove any and all messages from the system which are offensive
|
|
12 to me. Additionally because of the limited size of the system, it will be
|
|
13 periodically purged of older messages. (only 629 lines of data can be saved)
|
|
14 The saved information will be cycled to drive 'B' while the information on
|
|
15 drive 'B' will be archived, and a fresh disk will be installed in drive 'A'.
|
|
17 To leave a message, type 'ENTER' and use ctrl/C or break to get out
|
|
18 of the enter mode. The message is automaticly stored.
|
|
19 If after entering the message you find you made a mistake,
|
|
20 use the replace command to replace the line.
|
|
21 To exit from the system, type 'OFF' then hang up.
|
|
22 Type 'HELP' to see other commands that are available on the system.
|
|
23 ========================================
|
|
24
|
|
38
|
|
41
|
|
48 Today is a very depressing day. Health benefits have risen (again)
|
|
49 astronomically and I feel that getting ahead is an impossible task.
|
|
50 Please feel free to send me money and cheer me up. I imagine it could
|
|
51 even be tax deductible. Thank you for your consideration, Ronald Regan.
|
|
52 ************************************************************
|
|
53 to the new user:
|
|
54 When you get the ">" prompt, type DB (ret.)
|
|
55 you will then get drive B and all the old data.
|
|
56 \++\\+++\\+++\\\++\\+++\\++\\++\\+++\\+++\\++\\+\\++\\+++\++\\++\\++
|
|
68 ..................................................
|
|
75 ******************************************************
|
|
76 To CISTOP Mikey and all:
|
|
77 Subject: Things aren't always as they seem.
|
|
78 The statement awhile back that it isn't possible/
|
|
79 is very difficult to handle continuous serial input during
|
|
80 disk access got me thinking. (When anyone says something
|
|
81 is impossible, I can't resist not only doing it, but make
|
|
82 it look easy.)
|
|
83 The solution requires NO hardware modification
|
|
84 on essentially any computer with a 1771 or 1791. In case
|
|
85 you have never written drivers for these chips, ignore this
|
|
86 letter, as it will be relatively unintelligible.
|
|
87
|
|
88 SOLUTION:
|
|
89 When a sector write is requested, give the controller commands
|
|
90 to do the write, then poll both the serial chip and 1771 to
|
|
91 see which asks for service first. Between the time the 1771
|
|
92 asks for the first data byte and the time it MUST have it iss
|
|
93 actually 8 byte-times, or 512 microseconds using single-density
|
|
94 minifloppies. It would be easy to write a routine to stack
|
|
95 serial bytes in this time. So even if a serial byte came in
|
|
96 just before the 1771 needed service, everything would be ok.
|
|
97 Since there is only an 11 millisec delay for the actual
|
|
98 transfer, no serial bytes could be lost during the disk access.
|
|
99
|
|
100 A sector read is more complicated, due to the fact that the 1771
|
|
101 gives no advance warning of the availability of a byte. However,
|
|
102 you still have close to 64 usec to handle it. Do it the same as
|
|
103 the sector write above, except that if a serial byte is handled
|
|
104 just before the 1771 needs service, the 1771 won't be able to
|
|
105 transfer the data (it won't be serviced). In that case, the
|
|
106 LOST DATA status bit will be set, and the software need only run
|
|
107 the read sector command again at the next revolution of the disk.
|
|
108 Statistically, this mis-read will occur about 0.1% of the time
|
|
109 if the software is written correctly, but this misread will
|
|
110 always be detected and is always recoverable.
|
|
111
|
|
112 Conclusion:
|
|
113 The software described above isn't "simple," but certainly
|
|
114 doesn't qualify as un-doable. Since it doesn't require
|
|
115 interrupts, DMA, wait-states, or anything else, most any system
|
|
116 could use it.
|
|
117 So why hasn't this been done before. Maybe it has. Then
|
|
118 again, I doubt it. Most software seems to be written to just
|
|
119 barely do the job, not anything else. Also, most disk drivers
|
|
120 are clones of each other, with little imagination. Anyway, if
|
|
121 any of you out there understand this, let's hear from you.
|
|
122 *********************************************************
|
|
123 I am not unaware of the afore mentioned technic, and in fact it can
|
|
124 be made to work in 'casual' type applications (I would say that this
|
|
125 system is probably a good candidate for that catagory). However, in
|
|
126 more intense applications a problem occurs: Communications has a very
|
|
127 interesting characteristic, it is VERY time dependant. You don't realize
|
|
128 the full extent of the implications of that statement until you've been
|
|
129 programing communications software for a few years. One major problem
|
|
130 that most who delve into this mess find difficult to understatnd
|
|
131 is that although the percentages of when something can go wrong seem
|
|
132 to be small and therefore easily handlable via recovery technics.
|
|
133 The problem is that things tend to run in patterns. That is that once
|
|
134 something happens it has a tendancy to repeat itself far more often
|
|
135 then it should by the laws of chance. Take for instance the above
|
|
136 problem with the 1771 servicing. (By the way it is not possible
|
|
137 to service a 1791 via status on a 2Mhz 8080/Z80 there is insufficient
|
|
138 time available, it has to be done via interupts or DMA.) The problem
|
|
139 is that the 5 inch disk drive is spun with a DC motor that is very
|
|
140 closly regulated (Better then 1%) in speed. What we have found to
|
|
141 happen is that if the incoming data steam occurs such that it hits
|
|
142 while the 1771 is trying to get service, the problem will stay as
|
|
143 the incomming data is also very closly controled in its speed.
|
|
144 (usaaly with a crystal). Once the two match up it tends to take
|
|
145 a while before they fall out of sync again. As such once the problem
|
|
146 occurs it tends to stick around for a bit. If you have some monsterous
|
|
147 disk ques this can be lived with since they will sooner or later
|
|
148 fall out of sync and the disk can be serviced. We found that it
|
|
149 a whole bunch simpler to just go use the interrupt servicing for the
|
|
150 disk instead as it worked correctly to begin with.
|
|
151 I do however use the status check in other things. My homebrew computer
|
|
152 that I use uses this method under CPM. The status loop used is as follows:
|
|
153 WRLOP MOV A,M!CMA!OUT DDATA!INX H
|
|
154 WRITE IN DSTAT!RAR!RAR!JNC WRLOP
|
|
155 RAL!JNC WRITE
|
|
156 RET
|
|
157
|
|
158 RDLOP IN DDATA!CMA!MOV M,A!INX H
|
|
159 READ IN DSTAT!RAR!RAR!JNC RDLOP
|
|
160 RAL!JNC READ
|
|
161 RET
|
|
162 Notice the CMA because of the inverted data put out by the 1771.
|
|
163 Be carfull when calculating the time to service, as the worst
|
|
164 case time must be calculated. That means a double pass though
|
|
165 the loop assuming status came true just after the first status check.
|
|
166 Also the 1771 must be serviced within 48 usec after the data ready
|
|
167 flag goes on or things will get lost. Even though the thruput is
|
|
168 at 64usec. Finally disk drives do not put out data at exactly 64usec,
|
|
169 but rather tend to drift a few Usec around it, so the time loop has to
|
|
170 acount for the min short time at 5% drift this is about 60usec min time.
|
|
171 Anybody else have thoughts along these lines about controler software?
|
|
172 **** The never to be forgiven CISTOP MIKEY **** 25 nov 82 *******
|
|
190 Yak, yak, yak. You should all be ashamed of yourselves! There ain't
|
|
191 no such thing as a "better" language--the whole thing is dependent
|
|
192 on 1.) the programmer, 2.) the application, and 3.) circumstances.
|
|
193 There are great programs written in any language you care to name,
|
|
194 and there are just as many garbage programs. YOUR choice hinges on
|
|
195 YOUR needs and YOUR idiosyncracies--I'll handle my choice my way,
|
|
196 thank you. Are apples "better" than bananas? I'll bet some of you
|
|
197 would be prepared to give an answer. . . .
|
|
204
|
|
205 Language choices are based on personal comfort and ease (let's
|
|
206 ignore the dictates of employers here); what's available, what fits
|
|
207 with the system, how good the documentation is, how easy the words
|
|
208 are for the programmer to grasp or the recipient to read, etc., etc.,
|
|
209 etc. COBOL, bulky as it is, can be shown and explained readily to the
|
|
210 most violent technophobe (I learned it in '68, by the way, when there
|
|
211 was no such thing as a "personal computer."). BASIC, in all its forms,
|
|
212 is the best-documented "beginner's" language going; reference works
|
|
213 are even available at the most ordinary of bookstores. And so on and
|
|
214 so on--one can find a rationale to boost any language (or to knock it).
|
|
215 Why bother? Language X might have more features or power or portability
|
|
216 or whatever than language Y, but language Y might very well be the one
|
|
217 language one programmer finds easiest to use. I dare you to tell me
|
|
218 that X is better than Y for him.
|
|
219
|
|
220 Seems to me that any A-B comparison of languages that ignores all the
|
|
221 intangibles is essentially frivolous.
|
|
222
|
|
223 Pooh. --Shapiro 11/24: Happy turkey!
|
|
224 ----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
230 WHAT SHAPIRIO SAID ABOVE...I AGREE!!
|
|
231 **********************************************************
|
|
232 Cmon, now, it isn't all that hard to eliminate most of the
|
|
233 lost data, even with timing constraints. (see message above)
|
|
234 First, it is quite unlikely that two passes over the dis
|
|
235 k data will occur without a correct read (writes are easy, due
|
|
236 to the warning). If you really worry about getting too long
|
|
237 a queue of data due to an improbable event, do this: If the
|
|
238 queue ever gets above a certain size, say 30 characters for
|
|
239 example (a full second of data), then simply start ignoring the
|
|
240 serial channel. Sure, you'd lose data, but perhaps only once
|
|
241 in 10,000 disk reads. This is a lot better than now, where
|
|
242 each and every disk read causes the loss of serial data.
|
|
243 Since the data isn't critical anyway, you wouldn't care if
|
|
244 once a year the first x character in someone's message got
|
|
245 leted, right? Notice, however, that this would free up
|
|
246 hundreds of hours on this system over that year if people
|
|
247 pre-formed their messages.
|
|
248 The key here is to look for ways to do something, rather
|
|
249 than looking for reasons why it can't be done.
|
|
250 ******************************************************************
|
|
251 All the languages the same? -- Consider this:
|
|
252 All the other languages are simply programs
|
|
253 written in Assembly Language!!!!!!
|
|
254 ^****^*^*^*^***^*^***^*^**^**^^****^^^^^^^^^^^*******^***^*****^**^
|
|
255 That isn't really true. Many languages have been written in some other
|
|
256 language (or even the same language on another machine). Admittedly, they
|
|
257 all have to get translated eventually to a machine language object, but
|
|
258 that isn't assembly language. And don't forget the existence of machines
|
|
259 whose "Assembly Language" is a high level language...
|
|
260 {}{}{}{}{}{}{}{} Analog Alan {}{}{}{}{}{}{}{} 1417 26 Nov 82 {}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}
|
|
261 I been having troubles with the phoney lines from my place to this place,
|
|
262 wherever this place is. (I know about the cable problems under the Wil-
|
|
263 lamette.) I hear noise "bursts" on the line, loud ones. the only fix is
|
|
264 to keep calling back until I get a clean line. Would it do any good to
|
|
265 complain? And if so, to whom? I live in NE Portland. Any Ideas?
|
|
266 the Phantom Glitch, 11/26/82, 20:05
|
|
267 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
|
268 to: the Phantom Glitch
|
|
269 from: the Bell System
|
|
270 Yes, it can help to complain.
|
|
271 Start with the repair service at xxx-xxxx.
|
|
272 the cable under the river should not have any effect on calls from
|
|
273 north Portland to the Oregon City exchange, as all these calls go
|
|
274 by way of carrier systems.
|
|
275 If I knew where you were calling from, it might be possible to find
|
|
276 the trouble, and fix it. (Like maybe a phone number)
|
|
277 If no one complains, it is assume service is perfect.
|
|
278 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++PNB+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
|
|
279 to: the Bell System
|
|
280 from: the Phantom Glitch
|
|
281 Hi Bell! Nice talking to you. I am calling from xxx-xxxx (no joke).
|
|
282 Will try the repair service next time it happens. How does one explain
|
|
283 the wonders of telecommunications to repair people? If the person is
|
|
284 interested enough to call the number, he gets phunny noises, if he calls
|
|
285 back to tell of the phunny noises, he gets phunny noises.....
|
|
286 Yours in wonder,
|
|
287 the Phantom Glitch.
|
|
288 ==============================================11/27/82=16:12==============
|
|
289
|
|
290 ALL THIS CRAP ABOVE IS BORING ME TO DEATH!!! CAN'T ANYONE TALK
|
|
291 ABOUT ANYTHING JUICY AND SLOBBERY LIKE CRIME, SOAP OPERAS,
|
|
292 TC....
|
|
293
|
|
294 OH WELL...I GUESS THIS PLACE IS REALLY A DIVE FOR PSUDO-EINSTEINS....
|
|
295 GOODBYE
|
|
296 ***********************************************************************
|
|
297 This talk about pushing a pre-written message onto the
|
|
298 sytem ingnores one factor:
|
|
299 I (for one) never know what I'm going to say when I logon.
|
|
300 And it sometimes is very inconveinient to call back.
|
|
301 The system will definitly accept text as fast as I can type.
|
|
302 **********************************************************************
|
|
303 Please don't get me wrong, I am not saying that you idea's stink. In
|
|
304 fact, if anything they are fine. All I was trying to do was to let you
|
|
305 know that there were still some holes that needed to be filled in then
|
|
306 An interesting point was the loss you deem to be improbable, this is
|
|
307 actually not only probable, but does happen! I speek from experience
|
|
308 I have written, played with, and cursed at disk software since 1975.
|
|
309 I have also designed the hardware that the whole mish mash runs on.
|
|
310 While on a casual system like this it is perfectly aceptable to close
|
|
311 ones eyes to an occasional loss (after all who's to say that it might
|
|
312 be the phone line anyway?) but in business applications this is not
|
|
313 acceptable. Particularly since they don't go thru phone lines soemtimes
|
|
314 anyway, then what do you have it to blame on? As far as the mess in
|
|
315 refference to this system, It is rather moot anyway since I will not be
|
|
316 altering it anyway. Please note the much previous message about cost.
|
|
317 and I consider my time valuable, as such there has to be a very good
|
|
318 reason for me to dig into a very touchy part of the software on this
|
|
319 system. At any rate, As was indicated also in a very previous message.
|
|
320 It is possible to send a perpared message to this system by observing the
|
|
321 rules that govern it. That being to wait for each character you send to
|
|
322 be echoed back to you and you will be assured of no loss. If you check
|
|
323 that the character is valid you can even be sure of get the message thru
|
|
324 even if the line is noisy since you can erase it and resend it.
|
|
325 ****** THE EVERLOV'EN CISTOP MIKEY **** 28 NOV 82 ******************
|
|
326 **==****==**==**==**==**==
|
|
327
|
|
328 CISTOP AND ALL OTHERS-
|
|
329 THANKS FOR THE INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM. I COULDN'T SEE THAT
|
|
330 CSECTION OF THE HELP LIST BECAUSE IT WAS CUTTING THE FIRST FOUR
|
|
331 LETTERS OFF...BUT THANKS FOR THE HELP. IS THERE ANYWAY TO DELETE
|
|
332 MORE THEN ONE LINE AT A TIME.???
|
|
333 ALSO, ALL USERS THAT HAE TROUBLES _WITH THESE DAMN PHONE
|
|
334 LINES ARE NOT ALONE...IT TAKES ME 5 MINUTES PER LINE!
|
|
335 THAT IS REALLY TRUE TOO..>.I HAVE GOTTEN THE WORST CONNECTIONS
|
|
336 SOMETIME...IT IS REALLY TERRIBLE. A AM IN MILWAUKIE AND I SEEM
|
|
337 TO ALWAYS GET BAD CONNECTIONS WITH THIS NUMBER ONLY...DON'T
|
|
338 ASK ME WHY...I DON'T REALLY KNOW. BY THE WAY, LISTENING T_
|
|
339 TO THAT WHOLE LANGAUGE BULL--IITS LIKE LISTENING TO A SOAP OPERA!
|
|
340 LET PEOPLE CHOSE WHAT LANG. THAY WISH! I HOPE THIS THING
|
|
342 CAME OUT CLEAR...I AM WORKING ON A FAULT CIRCUT!
|
|
343 HAVE A HAPPY DAY(OR SHOULD I SAY WEEK!) HAVE A GOOD ONE YA ALL!
|
|
344 * RICK *
|
|
345 **==**==**==**==**==**==**==
|
|
346
|
|
347 Again, let us discuss languages. After hearing a lot of blather
|
|
348 about which language is !@#$%^&* bad, let's ask a question:
|
|
349 what do you really want in one? If none is perfect, let's design
|
|
350 one that is.
|
|
351 a few suggestions of mu own: compatible with existing ones (sorry,
|
|
352 this means BASIC), easy to learn (no strange semicolons at the end
|
|
353 of lines), expandable (user defined 'macros' that can then be used
|
|
354 as regular command
|
|
355
|
|
356
|
|
357
|
|
358 ??? the phone lines strike again ???
|
|
359 to continue: 'macros' that then look like regular commands, BOTH a
|
|
360 ************************************************
|
|
361 NO, ON MORE THEN ONE LINE MAY BE DELETED AT ONE TIME (THE LINE(S) DELETED
|
|
362 MESSAGE IS LEFT OVER FROM THE OLDER SOFTWARE WHICH I NEVER CHANGED.)
|
|
363 In regard to the phone line problems, I am really in a quandry (as opposed
|
|
364 to a quarry) as to what or where the problem is. I have not recently
|
|
365 experienced this problem, but I have observed it occuring when others
|
|
366 use the system. When I listen to the signal when this is happening
|
|
367 I don't hear anything grossly bad. since everything from here to the
|
|
368 exchange is two wire, i should be able to hear any noises caused by
|
|
369 the defective line. Possibly the exchange has a bad hybrid that is
|
|
370 sometimes getting hooked into this line. It would be noisy, but many
|
|
371 poeple would accept it for voice, but of couse my poor ol' computer
|
|
372 would hate it. HOW ABOUT IT > PNB < WHAT IS YOUR DIAGNOSIS?
|
|
373 (For those of you who are not aware, PNB really is PBN nice to know
|
|
374 big brother (mother?) is watching huh? ha ha.)
|
|
375 I make the assumption of bad exchange equipment based on the info that
|
|
376 if they call back they can sometimes get a 'good' line. Is the switching
|
|
377 random? or does it tend to select the same lines if it can?
|
|
378 I generally call from two different phones xxx-xxxx (same exchange)
|
|
379 or xxx-xxxx (portland exchange) or yeah, also xxxxxxx or xxxxxxx which
|
|
380 although are diff lines, they run to the same location and exchange.
|
|
381 I have not encountered any problems per say recently that I can remember.
|
|
382 **** The CISTOP MIKEY OF BACKWATER **** 29 NOV 82 *****************
|
|
383
|
|
384 ===========================================================================
|
|
385 To add to general information bank on phone lines--no problems (none!) from
|
|
386 NW 222- exchange.
|
|
387
|
|
388 Further thoughts on this language controversy blather: 1.) How would you
|
|
389 all feel about some standardized vocabulary conventions for an extensible
|
|
390 language like (dare I say it?) FORTH or STOIC? Seems to me words would be
|
|
391 relatively easy to load, and could be defined either for beginners (using
|
|
392 BASIC terms even, Mikey) or for the unintelligible cryptic elegance freaks.
|
|
393 Seems to me that writing conventions would eliminate all the objections
|
|
394 that these languages are unreadable. 2.) Why not look at all this from the
|
|
395 perspective of what will be possible five years from now? We should be
|
|
396 able to get all the speed and memory our little hearts desire, and there
|
|
397 will be relatively little need for the low-level languages now in vogue,
|
|
398 except maybe for teaching theory. Super-high-level language chips are not
|
|
399 only possible but probable, and goodbye abstruse syntax. The pioneers only
|
|
400 used hand tools and horses because they couldn't get Stanleys and Moto
|
|
401 Guzzis. . . . --Shapiro, again, post turkey, pre workweek
|
|
402 ==========================================================================
|
|
403 Thanks for the information. I believe that there should definately be
|
|
404 several different languages...as there are many different experience levels
|
|
405 and many different uses for each one! The current system isn't that bad!
|
|
406 We probably all agree that it could use some improvement(Along with the
|
|
407 phone lines!), but we *can* get alone with it. I still haven't heard a
|
|
408 good idea that is foolproof. We could develop a general all purpose
|
|
409 language, but that would have to be 128k alone! Maybe we could narrow
|
|
410 the number of languages down and somehow get alittle continutity in them.
|
|
411 Maybe we could also narrow the file structures down and input and output
|
|
412 types too. But afterall, the current system isn't that bad.
|
|
413 ` ` +RICK+
|
|
414
|
|
415 **==**==**==**==**==**==**
|
|
416
|
|
417 For Sale...Medium duty trailer. $100.00-a good deal. Good for
|
|
418 carrying wood or dirt or whatever. Complete with add-on sides.
|
|
419 Contact Rick on this system for more details.
|
|
420
|
|
421 **==**==**==**==**==
|
|
422
|
|
423 HEY, Rick...Tell me more about your trailer. Rodman
|
|
424
|
|
425
|
|
426 **==**==**
|
|
427
|
|
428 RODMAN-
|
|
429 WELL, AS FOR THAT TRAILER...
|
|
430 IT IS A 4X7X1 FOOT TRAILER. IT HAS
|
|
431 WOODEN SIDES THAT CAN BE PUT ON AND THAT
|
|
432 MAKES IT ABOUT 4 FEET TALL INSTEAD OF 1.
|
|
433 IT IS A MARTAIN GREEN AND IS ALL SEET
|
|
434 UP WITH LIGHTS, REFLECTORS, AN@D THE
|
|
435 LIKE. IT HAS A GOOD STRONG AXLE WITH
|
|
436 GOOD TIRES THAT DO THE JOB! I'M NOT
|
|
437 SURE WHAT ELSE YOU WANT TO KNOW. ANY
|
|
438 COMMENTS? wE USED IT FOR EVERYTHING
|
|
439 FROM WOOD HAULING TO`DIRT MOVIN'.
|
|
440 IT WAS A CHARM...NOW WE HAVE A
|
|
441 TRUCK THAT DOES THE JOB. ARE YOU
|
|
442 (STILL) INTERESTED??
|
|
443 RICK
|
|
444
|
|
445 P.S.-WE LIVE NEXT TO GLADSTONE AND
|
|
446 MILWAUKIE IN OBSCURE JENNINGS LODGE
|
|
447 IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT IT.
|
|
448
|
|
449 **==**==**==**==**==**==**==
|
|
450
|
|
451 Backwater is better than television to amuse oneself when one has nothing
|
|
452 better to do.....I enjoyed the description of the hardware involved. Does
|
|
453 any of this explain the spelling errors in C.M.'s messages? That aside,
|
|
454 it is enjoyable, and I vote for the proper language for the proper appli-
|
|
455 cation (I write about 8 myself). And as for pre-writing messages, forget
|
|
456 it, you never know what you might want to say once you read the stuff
|
|
457 on this board!!!
|
|
458 *************the Great Gazorbawitz********11/30*********
|
|
459 In regard to the spelling errors in C.M.'s messages; No, non of the afore
|
|
460 mentioned info provides any insight as to the wherefor of the spelling errors.
|
|
461 On second thought... since I own this system... I DO NOT HAVE SPEELING ERROS
|
|
462 IN MY TEEXT! IT IS THE CIORRECT SPEELING AS DEFINED BY THE LAWS (That I have
|
|
463 just created.) OF THIS SYSTEM! (There do you think that gets me off the hook?)
|
|
464 As for launguages, I would tend to agree with the apparent general consenses
|
|
465 that a 'good' laungauge is one you like and can work with for your application.
|
|
466 Indeedy, one of the more heavily used langauges (particularly in the US)
|
|
467 is not only unstructured, but continuosly redefinable with new words beeing
|
|
468 continuosly added in as they are needed to express a concept, and old ones
|
|
469 being droped as they are no longer needed. I am of course speaking of the
|
|
470 English language! We seem to do passibly well with it, so tell me, when will
|
|
471 computers understand us!!!
|
|
472 **** THE NEVER TO BE FORGIVEN CISTOP MIKEY (YUP YUP YUP) *** 30 NOV 82 *****
|
|
473
|
|
474
|
|
475 ******************************************
|
|
476 apple ii mother board for sale !!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
477 ******************************************
|
|
478
|
|
479 48 k ram / applesoft or integer in rom
|
|
480
|
|
481 LOWER CASE ADAPTER / FULL DOCUMENTATION
|
|
482
|
|
483 works perfectly- just add keyboard and
|
|
484
|
|
485 power supply.......
|
|
486
|
|
487 call glenn at xxx-xxxx
|
|
488
|
|
489 **********************************************************************
|
|
490 Used Atari 16K memory boards for sale -- reasonable!
|
|
491 ALSO, SOME SOFTWARE (COMMERCIAL)
|
|
492
|
|
493 Call: xxx-xxxx or xxx-xxxx
|
|
494
|
|
495 _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
|
|
496
|
|
497 I tell ya, I think we have all decided on what to do about the language
|
|
498 problem we have. We cannot do anything about the phone lines, or about
|
|
499 Cist-op Mikey's spelling errors, so let's come up with a new topic??!!
|
|
500 I suggest maybe some good jokes?! Anyone got any? You know one other
|
|
501 thing that really irks me is that Vic Atiyeh is raising the taxes(After saying
|
|
502 he wouldn't) again. They never learn(i.e. Ballot #3). That just kills
|
|
504 me! And then the good ole Gas Guys are out trying to put a 9 cent gas tax
|
|
505 on us. Like(to be a Val)-I'm totally sure! How bogus. And we as
|
|
506 Tax payers have a lot of voice in things like that. We can yell and
|
|
507 holler all we want...we put ballots on the measure and someone always
|
|
508 finds something that *might* go wrong with them. That kills me.
|
|
509 Sometimes the public can never win. Half of us can never agree and
|
|
510 get something accomplished. We elect people to represent us and they
|
|
511 raise our taxes for our good...how lovely and quaint. I think I might
|
|
512 have to sell my terminal/computer and invest in this guy who thinks he
|
|
513 can invent a money tree ! ! ! !
|
|
514 Happy spending(and tax time
|
|
515 again...)
|
|
516 Rick
|
|
517 Maybe somebody can give our government the boot...to cut the defict in a nice
|
|
518 manner...
|
|
519 **==**==**==**==**==**==**
|
|
520
|
|
521 *******************************************************************
|
|
522 My original comments concerning loss of character at the beginning
|
|
523 of the line in auto-send mode was not specifically directed at this
|
|
524 system (In fact, I've never tried it on this system (didn't expect
|
|
525 it would work anyway)). My intention wasn't to change existing
|
|
526 software or hardware, but to remind someone who may be building
|
|
527 a bbs someday that there are certain capabilities that a bbs
|
|
528 should have that aren't necessarily obvious now. It's a lot easier
|
|
529 to do it right the first time, rather than retro-fit a patch to
|
|
530 existing software. In fact, I suggest you don't change this
|
|
531 system: It serves it's purpose. The time required to change it
|
|
532 would be better spent on a totally new system anyway.
|
|
533 Perhaps we should generate a Christmas wish list for
|
|
534 bbs's: What do we want in them? Perhaps an easy form of
|
|
535 autologon, etc. Hardware capabilities are increasing all the time.
|
|
536 Why waste them on incomplete software?
|
|
537
|
|
538 (P.S. Waiting for a sent character to echo has its own problems:
|
|
539 What about glitches? Also, I called a BBS in Boston. The signal
|
|
540 took about .5 seconds to echo, which would translate to a baud rate
|
|
541 of 20 baud if the software wasn't very smart. Normally you'd
|
|
542 never see these delays if you only called local systems.......
|
|
543 I use modem7 as a terminal emulator: It accepts CTRL-S and CTRL-Q
|
|
544 as X-ON and X-OFF (which is an accepted standard) How about telling
|
|
545 the connecting system to stop sending characters with CTRL-S if an
|
|
546 unusual delay was about to occur? (such as a disk access, etc.)
|
|
547 )
|
|
548 **********************************************************
|
|
549 Jokes he says? and then talks about taxes?
|
|
550 Please, no swearing on this system.
|
|
551
|
|
552 Waiting for a charactor to echo does not necessarily mean 20 baud
|
|
553 on a 1/2 second line: you can speed that up if the line is fairly
|
|
554 good by only waiting after each line, and only correcting the lines
|
|
555 that are bad. Note also, that the best method for one medium such
|
|
556 as local phone lines is not usually the best for another, such as
|
|
557 satelite lines, or something like say a disc or casette tape.
|
|
558 A long haul call is inherently expensive, so an expensive but fast
|
|
559 and accurate protocal is correct, but an elaborate method is not
|
|
560 appropriate on a system using less expensive media, and used by
|
|
561 unskilled people, or by those of us who have widely differing systems.
|
|
562 But don't assume ctrl-S & -Q are exactly standard. We also have to deal
|
|
563 with another "standard": ACK-NACK, as well as several escape sequences.
|
|
564 There can be no "standard" BBS, because it has already been defined,
|
|
565 unfortunately, in several different ways; therefore all standards must
|
|
566 conflict with all others. (And these others already exist!!)
|
|
567
|
|
568 As to getting another line between where ever you are and this system:
|
|
569 from ESS (computer controlled) offices, you get a randomly selected,
|
|
570 different trunk each time. (Actually, ESS uses a linked list, and you get
|
|
571 whichever trunk has been idle the longest.) From most of the other, older
|
|
572 systems such as SXS, you will usually get the same one again, because
|
|
573 they select trunks from a list of most to least preferred. Unless someone
|
|
574 else gets the bad one, you get it next time.
|
|
575 a few ESS exhanges: 656,657,655;282,284,285,286;222,241;224,242;232,238.
|
|
576 a few SXS or XBAR: 252,253;255,256;760,761,281,283
|
|
577 Gresham and Beaverton are not Ma Bell, but are GTE and are mostly what
|
|
578 they call EAX: this is also computerized. Most noises are in the trunks
|
|
579 between exchanges, because these are the longest runs.
|
|
580 If you can not talk with this system, listen to the line, and then call
|
|
581 repair service and complain: but be sure to tell them what is wrong,
|
|
582 however you are then talking only to a (usually rather dumb) clerk,
|
|
583 so be explicit in your complaint: cross-talk, noise, hissing, distortion,
|
|
584 clicks, "down in the mud". The phone system is designed to talk on, so
|
|
585 don't expect perfect data, however data is becoming more common and the
|
|
586 design is starting to include it.
|
|
587 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++PNB+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
|
|
588
|
|
589
|
|
590 Hello Rick,
|
|
591
|
|
592 How are things going your way? whati kind of comp do you have now?
|
|
594
|
|
595
|
|
596
|
|
597 ` Tom
|
|
598
|
|
599
|
|
600
|
|
601 ********************************j******j*********************
|
|
602
|
|
603 Tom my man,
|
|
604 What is up with you? Haven't been around lately. I saw you tried Talk
|
|
605 but that was the last of you. What have you been doing on the computer?
|
|
606 Been on any timesharing system? We are really into apple software now,
|
|
607 so not much RSTS/E is going on. I do monitor my account however. Are you
|
|
608 ever allowed to log-on. You should put ACU on another account...althought,
|
|
609 our generation is somewhat gone on that system! Oh well, I still got TALK..
|
|
610 Anyway, later...
|
|
611 Rick....
|
|
612
|
|
613 **--**--**--**--**--**--**--**--
|
|
614
|
|
615 No swearing...Okay.
|
|
616 What do you call a guy with no arms and legs in a pool(we want his name now.)??
|
|
617 -----Bob....
|
|
618 What do you call a girl with only one leg...??
|
|
619 -----Ilene....
|
|
620 What's the nickname for a girl with only one leg???
|
|
621 -----Peg...
|
|
622
|
|
623 **--**--**--**--**--
|
|
624 so you want jokes??? What do you get when you cross an apple with a nun?
|
|
625
|
|
626 ---------a personal computer that won't go down on you.....
|
|
627
|
|
628 Do you know what it says on the bottom of Polish Coke bottles?
|
|
629 --------OPEN OTHER END..... **WE NEED MORE SPACE!! !!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|