| |
W0RLI > BPQ 17.08.99 22:15l 134 Lines 4873 Bytes #-9921 (0) @ WW
BID : C0B9W0RLI
Read: DL7AMN DB1RAS GUEST
Subj: Re: BPQ x FlexDigi
Path: DB0AAB<DB0KFB<DB0CZ<DB0GE<DB0IZ<ON6AR<WB0TAX<N7NEI<N7FSP<W0LVJ<KB7CNN<
WA7SJN<N7YSS<K7IQI<W0RLI
Sent: 990817/1633 49338@W0RLI.OR.USA.NOAM
<sm7uzi@sk7iq.malmoe.m.swe.eu> babbled again in message news:sm7uzi6399...
> >> If you really got win95 stable enough for node work am I very
impressed!
> >> You maybe could share what configuration changes etc you ahve made?
> >It is very easy, I will tell you how to do it:
> >Place CD into CD Drive.
> >Run the setup program.
> >Accept all defaults.
> >Done.
> >You have a stable system.
> Are you out of your mind!
> Win95 stable enough for a node?????
> You are not by any chance a m$-employee?
I am not an employee at all.
But you knew that already.
> >Install BPQ.
> And set the thousands of parameters required!
Perhaps you should study BPQ a bit.
You ignorance is showing very badly here.
> Which not most node operators are capable of doing, misconfigured bpq
nodes is
> not very unusual.
>
> >Connect radios.
> >Done.
> >You have a working node.
> Maybe a working pakcet driver but nothing than a bad working net/rom node.
> Net/rom will never make it possible to get a good node network, the
routing is
> of net/rom is the problem.
>
> >If you don't like BPQ, install SNOS instead.
> >Simple.
> Not very simple compared to other solutions and bad working!
Have you ever tried SNOS? It is not BPQ, nor is it NET/ROM.
It is simple, and interoperates with both BPQ and NET/ROM.
Here it is running in Windows 98 and in DOS, both work the same.
But you do not know anything about this. Perhaps best not to say anything.
Did you even try DIGI? Even simpler solution, no network parameters at all.
Oh, I'm sorry, certainly "FlexDigi" is much better than everything.
> >> I think you should take a look at linux!
> >I did that.
> >Maybe another 2-3 years it will be useful for real work.
> >For now it can only be used as a server. Makes a good server.
> No only, but is is very good and cheap for web servers etc.
> But also if you want to use a pc for heavy calculations, much faster than
> windows.
Another silly comment. The speed of heavy calculations depends on
the processor, memory and compiler. Period. Simple to do in Windows,
because much better compilers are available. But you know that, of course.
> The major problem with linux at least here is security problems caused by
> linux users who don't upgrade their servers, use dangerous imap servers
etc,
> don't have the time or knowledge required. You have to fix known problems
very
> fast, but some propel don't realise that. That causes problem for many
more
> than them selves, their computer is used for varius attacks on other
systems in
> the area.
Proves again my point. With windows you do not have these problems.
> >No way to get any useful work done with it because there are
> >almost NO applications available yet. If you think differently,
> >tell me where to get good ham radio software and software for
> >creating music, for a start. I need to move my .sf2 files to
> >Linux, how is that done? Where can I find applications that
> >will install without missing libraries, crashes, system hangs?
> There are rather much applications by now, but not as many as there should
be.
> Im stuck with windows since I can't find the right applications for any
other
> os. Linux would otherwise have suited me very well.
> I think flexnet will be avaliable for linux soon!
>
> There are some I guess.
You "guess"?
I "guess" there are not, since I have in fact tried to find them.
Maybe someday ... but not now.
> But the windows installation programs is often not very good either.
Your lack of experience is again showing.
> >How about a useful interface? KDE has so many bugs it is
> >almost useless, GNOME is not much better. You know a
> >better choice?
> >If you think Linux is useful, that may explain why you think
> >Flexnet is better than BPQ: simple lack of knowledge.
> No that is not the reason.
> It has something to do with the routing of flexnet compared to the net/rom
> routing, that flexnet allows you to get a node network with working
routing.
Tell me where is an example of such a network. I have tried to use several
of them, and in no case is it simple, or usually even POSSIBLE to find out
how to make connections. You tell me how to connect to some WORKING
Flexnet network, I will try it, then maybe I believe you. I find many
NET/ROM
networks which work very well. Perhaps your title on this bulletins
says it all: "FlexDigi" ... not a real network at all, just some extended
digipeating capability. How *do* you route NET/ROM node broadcasts
through a FlexDigi "network"? You never did answer this.
> And also that the packetdriver part of flexnet is much better than bpqs.
> But to discuss that with someone who thinks win95 is stable is a bit
> overkill.
You are confused again. I did not say that I "think" it is stable, nor did
Dave. We said we "observe" that it is stable, since it does not crash as
often as other nodes we have tried.
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
