| |
SM3LKS > BPQ 11.01.99 16:11l 109 Lines 3641 Bytes #-10146 (0) @ WW
BID : 27917_SM3LKS
Read: GUEST
Subj: Re: bpq selfinstaller.
Path: DB0AAB<DB0FSG<DB0SL<DB0RGB<DB0ABH<DB0SRS<DB0MW<DB0ERF<DB0NHM<DB0FC<
DB0HES<OZ7BOX<OZ5BBS<OZ4PAC<OZ4BBS<OZ4BOX<OZ3BOS<OZ3BOL<OZ3BOD<SK6FV<
SK6YW<SK6SA<SK6LK<SM7FEJ<SK7HR<SK7GC<SK5AS<SK5BN<SK5UM<SK5AE<SK5BB<
SK4HC<SM4UMY<SK4KS<SK4WV<SM4TYA<SM3ESS<SK3BG<SK3UB<SK3JR<SM3LKS
Sent: 990110/1524Z @:SM3LKS.Z.SWE.EU #:27917 [Ostersund] FBB7.00g $:27917_SM3LK
From: SM3LKS@SM3LKS.Z.SWE.EU
To : BPQ@WW
SM7UZI wrote:
>>Obsolete ?, not at all.
>>How can a program that still follows the standard for NetRom and AX25
>>become obsolete ?
>The packet driver part of bpq isnt as good as other packet driver.
Hmm, what exactly is it that makes BPQ less good ?
Have you ever tried BPQ, and really made it work ?
Not just running it with the standard settings supplied with the software ?
Perhaps you are just trying to promote FlexNet and just making guesses about
BPQ, or just repeating what other FlexNet-fans told you ?
>The new thenetnode uses a new verison of net/rom which works much better, than
>the old bpq version.
What version of TheNet ?
What is better ?
I have tested them all, and the performance is the same as the
older versions of TheNet, and also the same as BPQ.
No gain in performance was made in our area.
Performance improvement less than a few percent is not what I call better.
Not when we still uses 1200bps.
Is it a new version out there that is newer than 2 years ?.
Where ?
And, wasn't it FlexNet we were discussing, not TheNet ?
>Evern for thoose who still for some strange reason wants so use net/rom is bpq
>to old.
Ahh, it is the NetRom-protocol you are against....
>>The only way I can see it is obsolete is that it is not maintained anymore.
>It is not as good as other net/rom nodes, why use it?
Hmmm, I thought that you just said:
"Evern for thoose who still for some strange reason wants so use net/rom..."
You does not promote FlexNet very well, are you ??
Come with some GOOD arguments.
Just because a program is not maintained any more does not automatically
make it obsolete. It just may be perfect, whithout bugs, and no more
driver needed.
>>This program is still perfect if you have an older computer and want to
>>run a NetRom-node.
>Why would you like to use a old and bad working node.
>It is better with no node at all.
I did not realize that BPQ was THAT bad.
OK, we will dismantle every node, and BBS, that uses BPQ, WITHOUT replacing it
with another node.
What will the result be ?
NO working packet-network in many areas.
>>It even runs on an 8086, can Flexnet do that
>Yes!
OK.
>>I know Linux can't It is still a lot of 8086, 80286 and 80386 out there that
>>runs as a NetRom-node, and BBS-software also.
>With a 286 oe 386 works flexnet fine.
OK.
>>Just because you have a newer computer that can run newer software is
>>no excuse to tell other people that the software they use is out of date.
>No new computer is neded.
You are the first to tell us that it runs on 8086 and newer computers.
Have you tried it on these computers ?
>The reason why bpq is so widly used isnt because is is better than other
>program.
>It is because it once was a good node, and most hams are very conservative and
>the lack of knowledege is also a strong reason.
It was the ONLY program for a while.
No, it is not better than any other programs.
It just doing its job as good as any other software.
So why abandon it ?
>>73 de SM3LKS
>>Sysop SK3JR and SK3UB BBS'es, SK3JR-9 and SK3UB-1 NetRom-nodes (BPQ+DRSI)
>>(DRSI-card is also known as obsolete by some "progress-people")
>Now can they be used with flexnet.
>So get rid of bpq and install flexnet.
I will newer get rid of it until someone manages to tell me why BPQ is out
of date.
Just because I can use DRSI with FlexNet is not good enough.
As long as the nodenet works fine I will use BPQ, I will change when it
comes a nodeprogram that performs better. (Not just a little better)
The other programs I have tested have just the same performance as BPQ.
..<snip>...
73 de SM3LKS.
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
