| |
VK3KJC > BPQ 08.02.00 16:03l 35 Lines 1427 Bytes #-9744 (0) @ WW
BID : AF0475VK3KJC
Read: GUEST
Subj: Re: Solution to BPQ32
Path: DB0AAB<DB0AHO<DB0KFB<DB0CZ<DB0GE<DB0ME<ON6AR<WB0TAX<VK3BBS<VK3ATL
Sent: 000208/1252Z @:VK3ATL.#WEV.VIC.AUS.OC #:46355 [East Geelong]
From: VK3KJC@VK3ATL.#WEV.VIC.AUS.OC
To : BPQ@WW
Quoting:
> From: SM7UZI@SK7IQ.MALMOE.M.SWE.EU
> To : BPQ@WW
......
> >Unlike FlexNet which won't talk to the KAM because it doesn't have a
> >6PACK EPROM and never will have either as far as I know...!
> It is sad for all users of kantronics tncs! Kantronics once made their
> tncs support bpq kiss (x-kiss as they called it), doesn't understand
> why they don't want their tncs to support 6pack also. Maybe there are
> not enough money in such a projekt, kantroincs are after all much more
> commercial than most other constructers and manufacturers of packet
> equipment.
One factor stopping Flexnet becoming more popular and, therefore, more
attractive for companies like Kantronics to build it into their TNC's is
the myth that Flexnet does not work with KISS TNC's. This message is
being sent using Flexnet with a PacComm HandiPacket running in KISS mode.
Why not encourage those with KISS TNC's to use them with Flexnet, but also
point out to them that the performance might be better if their TNC had
6pack. This may encourage more users to put pressure on manufacturers to
support 6pack.
Another factor which discourages the use of Flexnet is the way that
Windows sometimes locks up when running Flexnet. This does not happen
running BPQ.
Cheers - Ken, Geelong, Victoria, Australia
Message timed: 22:51 on 08 Feb 00
Message sent using WinPack-PCF V6.51
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
