BBSers!
right
*squeal* *buzz* *SCREEEEEEEEECH*
+++
ATH0
NO CARRIER
We had an acoustic coupler for awhile. I think I could type faster than
it sent letters.
On Tue, 08 Oct 2024 02:07:34 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote:
We had an acoustic coupler for awhile. I think I could type faster than >>> it sent letters.
That's like 300 speed. ;)
Depends on how fast you can type :-)
300 baud is probably amazingly fast to hunt-n-peck typists.
And in the 80s, before GUIs were common and everything -even a lot of
games - were character-based, 300 baud was probably usable, if a bit
slow. Although I can't imagine using anything that pokey for
downloading stuff; even 28,8kbps was tedious at those speeds (the
original Doom Shareware took me over an hour to get, back in the day).
Even looking at images was a chore; you'd queue up two or three and
that would be it for the night ;-)
On Tue, 08 Oct 2024 02:07:34 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote:
We had an acoustic coupler for awhile. I think I could type faster than >> it sent letters.
That's like 300 speed. ;)
Depends on how fast you can type :-)
300 baud is probably amazingly fast to hunt-n-peck typists.
And in the 80s, before GUIs were common and everything -even a lot of
games - were character-based, 300 baud was probably usable, if a bit
slow. Although I can't imagine using anything that pokey for
downloading stuff; even 28,8kbps was tedious at those speeds (the
original Doom Shareware took me over an hour to get, back in the day).
Even looking at images was a chore; you'd queue up two or three and
that would be it for the night ;-)
On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 00:16:58 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 08 Oct 2024 02:07:34 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote:
We had an acoustic coupler for awhile. I think I could type faster than
it sent letters.
That's like 300 speed. ;)
Depends on how fast you can type :-)
300 baud is probably amazingly fast to hunt-n-peck typists.
I hunt and peck on smartphones since I have to have one hand hold it and while other hand type!
And in the 80s, before GUIs were common and everything -even a lot of
games - were character-based, 300 baud was probably usable, if a bit
slow. Although I can't imagine using anything that pokey for
downloading stuff; even 28,8kbps was tedious at those speeds (the
original Doom Shareware took me over an hour to get, back in the day).
Even looking at images was a chore; you'd queue up two or three and
that would be it for the night ;-)
Yeah, but you had those evil line noises!!!!!!!!!!!!
No, you didn't. Most modems supported the AT M0 command, which turned
off the speaker from the start. It was one of the first AT commands I learned, and boy howdy did I make sure every AT string I used included
it! That squeal people associate with the dial-up era of the Internet?
I never heard it.
On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 00:16:58 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 08 Oct 2024 02:07:34 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote:
We had an acoustic coupler for awhile. I think I could type faster than >>>>> it sent letters.
That's like 300 speed. ;)
Depends on how fast you can type :-)
300 baud is probably amazingly fast to hunt-n-peck typists.
I hunt and peck on smartphones since I have to have one hand hold it and while other hand type!
And in the 80s, before GUIs were common and everything -even a lot of
games - were character-based, 300 baud was probably usable, if a bit
slow. Although I can't imagine using anything that pokey for
downloading stuff; even 28,8kbps was tedious at those speeds (the
original Doom Shareware took me over an hour to get, back in the day).
Even looking at images was a chore; you'd queue up two or three and
that would be it for the night ;-)
Yeah, but you had those evil line noises!!!!!!!!!!!!
No, you didn't. Most modems supported the AT M0 command, which turned
off the speaker from the start. It was one of the first AT commands I learned, and boy howdy did I make sure every AT string I used included
it! That squeal people associate with the dial-up era of the Internet?
I never heard it.
On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 20:23:29 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 00:16:58 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 08 Oct 2024 02:07:34 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote:
We had an acoustic coupler for awhile. I think I could type faster than
it sent letters.
That's like 300 speed. ;)
Depends on how fast you can type :-)
300 baud is probably amazingly fast to hunt-n-peck typists.
I hunt and peck on smartphones since I have to have one hand hold it and while other hand type!
And in the 80s, before GUIs were common and everything -even a lot of >>>>> games - were character-based, 300 baud was probably usable, if a bit >>>>> slow. Although I can't imagine using anything that pokey for
downloading stuff; even 28,8kbps was tedious at those speeds (the
original Doom Shareware took me over an hour to get, back in the day). >>>>> Even looking at images was a chore; you'd queue up two or three and
that would be it for the night ;-)
Yeah, but you had those evil line noises!!!!!!!!!!!!
No, you didn't. Most modems supported the AT M0 command, which turned
off the speaker from the start. It was one of the first AT commands I
learned, and boy howdy did I make sure every AT string I used included
it! That squeal people associate with the dial-up era of the Internet?
I never heard it.
No, not the modem connection audio. The line noises that lag and even
disconnect your connections. If the dial-up modem didn't have error
corrections like my 2400 modems, then you get bunch of characters on
screen if using text mode connections like in BBSes with terminal
clients like $^UY&HW24tr856g65 (pretend some of these are extended ASCII
characters too). :(
Oh, that.
I was fairly lucky; I never had significant problems with line noise
(then again, as noted, the majority of my modeming-years were in an
era where modems _did_ have built-in era correction).
On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 20:23:29 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 00:16:58 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 08 Oct 2024 02:07:34 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote:
We had an acoustic coupler for awhile. I think I could type faster than
it sent letters.
That's like 300 speed. ;)
Depends on how fast you can type :-)
300 baud is probably amazingly fast to hunt-n-peck typists.
I hunt and peck on smartphones since I have to have one hand hold it and while other hand type!
And in the 80s, before GUIs were common and everything -even a lot of >> >> games - were character-based, 300 baud was probably usable, if a bit
slow. Although I can't imagine using anything that pokey for
downloading stuff; even 28,8kbps was tedious at those speeds (the
original Doom Shareware took me over an hour to get, back in the day). >> >> Even looking at images was a chore; you'd queue up two or three and
that would be it for the night ;-)
Yeah, but you had those evil line noises!!!!!!!!!!!!
No, you didn't. Most modems supported the AT M0 command, which turned
off the speaker from the start. It was one of the first AT commands I
learned, and boy howdy did I make sure every AT string I used included
it! That squeal people associate with the dial-up era of the Internet?
I never heard it.
No, not the modem connection audio. The line noises that lag and even >disconnect your connections. If the dial-up modem didn't have error >corrections like my 2400 modems, then you get bunch of characters on
screen if using text mode connections like in BBSes with terminal
clients like $^UY&HW24tr856g65 (pretend some of these are extended ASCII >characters too). :(
Oh, that.
I was fairly lucky; I never had significant problems with line noise
(then again, as noted, the majority of my modeming-years were in an
era where modems _did_ have built-in era correction). Disconnects were actually fairly uncommon for me. And software existed to automatically
redial if there was a disconnect, so even when it did happen it wasn't
more than a momentary annoyance.
Maybe it was more of an issue on the Apple ][; I really don't
remember. It may or may not have had error-correction; I have no idea
as to the specs or capability of the modem I used. (I dont' even know
the brand). But, I think, between the wonderousness of just being
able to connect to another computer, and the fact that I didn't make
much use of the thing, I've no recollection as to how often I had to
redial because my connection got unceremoniously dumped whilst
browsing some BBS. It may have happened -it probably did- but it
didn't stick with me as some tremendous disadvantage.
Honestly, given the limited capability of the Apple ][, the computer
probably froze long before the line noise had a chance to kill any connection. ;-)
We had an acoustic coupler for awhile. I think I could type faster than
it sent letters.
That's like 300 speed. ;)
Depends on how fast you can type :-)
300 baud is probably amazingly fast to hunt-n-peck typists.
I hunt and peck on smartphones since I have to have one hand hold it and while other hand type!
And in the 80s, before GUIs were common and everything -even a lot of
games - were character-based, 300 baud was probably usable, if a bit
slow. Although I can't imagine using anything that pokey for
downloading stuff; even 28,8kbps was tedious at those speeds (the
original Doom Shareware took me over an hour to get, back in the day). >>> Even looking at images was a chore; you'd queue up two or three and
that would be it for the night ;-)
Yeah, but you had those evil line noises!!!!!!!!!!!!
No, you didn't. Most modems supported the AT M0 command, which turned
off the speaker from the start. It was one of the first AT commands I learned, and boy howdy did I make sure every AT string I used included
it! That squeal people associate with the dial-up era of the Internet?
I never heard it.
Then you were never properly IN the dial-up era of the Internet!!
On Sat, 12 Oct 2024 02:14:31 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
I never had good and fast dial-up modem connections due to crappy copper >phone lines and far away to central offices (COs). I couldn't even get
DSL. Not even IDSL.
Like I said, I was fairly lucky in that regard. Although conditions
started seriously degrading by the 2010s. I was still on DSL, and due
to rotting copper, when my normally solid connection dropped down to
almost dial-up speeds.
I never had dial-up for my Apple //c. I got an internal Zoom (Hayes >compatible) 2400 modem for my IBM PS/2 model 30 286 10 Mhz PC. It was >Prodigy (still remember my TGSV85B ID) and BBSes. :)
I recall trawling computer magazines looking for adverts featuring
Bulletin Boards in my area. Or ringing up the telephone operator to
confirm that a certain exchange would count as a 'local' telephone
call and not incur extra charges.
(although I suspect most of those memories are from my PC days. I know
I used the modem with the Apple ][ - including bulletin boards- but
mostly it was connecting directly to friends' PCs)
The modem didn't really gain importance to me until I discovered the
Internet (which at first I _didn't_ use a modem to connect to). But
after I did, my addiction to Usenet made that modem incredibly useful
;-)
On Sat, 12 Oct 2024 02:17:50 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
Speaking of action games, what games did you play over dial-up? For me, >Duke3D, DOOM, Heretic, BattleZone, MotoRacer, Diablo, Warcraft, Quake, etc.
If you mean direct connect (as opposed to dial-up Internet), then
pretty much Doom. I think we tried Falcon 3.0 (or some flight sim?)
and Wing Commander Armada, and a few others here and there (thinking
back, I remember Witchhaven briefly entertained us) but mainly I
remember playing a lot of Doom.
(Also, on occasion, BBS Door games and MUDs)
(Also also, table-top RPGs via chat ;-)
Although, once the Internet / TCP-IP took off and became the primary
method of interconnect, it was an entirely different story. Quake,
Quake II, Diablo, Tribes, Unreal Tournament, Mechwarrior II, Need for
Speed (in its various iterations but I've particularly fond memories
of Porsche Unleashed) and a host more games. During the late 90s and
early 2000s, if a game I bought had a multiplayer component, I at
least _tried_ it.
But that modem... it definitely affected the experience. Especially
after other players started getting faster cable/DSL connections while
I remained one of the laggards on POTS.* 200ms+ ping-times were the
usual for dial-up, but when playing against 5ms cable-internet
bastards, you really felt the difference ;-)
I eventually soured on multiplayer gaming, partly because the gameplay
no longer appealed to me (for a huge variety of reasons), and a lot
because of the changing culture
[e.g. the advent of the potty-mouthed ten-year old]
but the less-than-stellar experience of playing on dial-up definitely influenced me too. By the time I eventually upgraded to DSL, I had
been broken of the habit. It's not that I don't play multiplayer games
at all anymore... but it's an incidental "let's see what it's like" or
a "hey Bob, just for the fun of it let's play GTA5 Online for a night"
rather than a lifestyle thing like it used to be.
-----------
* yes, pedants, I'm well aware that DSL is on POTS** too
** Plain Old telephone Service, in case you didn't know. Analog
signals sent over copper wire. As opposed to fiber or internet over
cable TV
I didn't do newsgroups until I got to college. My friend told me to use
Tin. I am still using it and many other text mode programs today. :P
On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 00:16:58 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 08 Oct 2024 02:07:34 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote:
We had an acoustic coupler for awhile. I think I could type faster than >>> >> it sent letters.
That's like 300 speed. ;)
Depends on how fast you can type :-)
300 baud is probably amazingly fast to hunt-n-peck typists.
I hunt and peck on smartphones since I have to have one hand hold it and while other hand type!
And in the 80s, before GUIs were common and everything -even a lot of
games - were character-based, 300 baud was probably usable, if a bit
slow. Although I can't imagine using anything that pokey for
downloading stuff; even 28,8kbps was tedious at those speeds (the
original Doom Shareware took me over an hour to get, back in the day).
Even looking at images was a chore; you'd queue up two or three and
that would be it for the night ;-)
Yeah, but you had those evil line noises!!!!!!!!!!!!
No, you didn't. Most modems supported the AT M0 command, which turned
off the speaker from the start. It was one of the first AT commands I >learned, and boy howdy did I make sure every AT string I used included
it! That squeal people associate with the dial-up era of the Internet?
I never heard it.
Still, I stayed on dial-up for a long time (albeit with a faster 56K >modem)... well into the 2000s. The Internet was still _usable_ at
those speeds, and as for downloads? I'd just queue everything up and
let it run overnight.
On Wed, 09 Oct 2024 17:02:09 -0400, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
Still, I stayed on dial-up for a long time (albeit with a faster 56K >>modem)... well into the 2000s. The Internet was still _usable_ at
those speeds, and as for downloads? I'd just queue everything up and
let it run overnight.
The year 2000 (or was it 1999?) is when I got SDSL 768Kbps installed. >Upgraded from USR 56k.
I was ecstatic with (a little) less than T1 speeds. After that, I only
used my USR for fax. Can you believe we *still* fax?
Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
...
Then you were never properly IN the dial-up era of the Internet!!We had an acoustic coupler for awhile. I think I could type faster than
it sent letters.
That's like 300 speed. ;)
Depends on how fast you can type :-)
300 baud is probably amazingly fast to hunt-n-peck typists.
I hunt and peck on smartphones since I have to have one hand hold it and while other hand type!
And in the 80s, before GUIs were common and everything -even a lot of
games - were character-based, 300 baud was probably usable, if a bit
slow. Although I can't imagine using anything that pokey for
downloading stuff; even 28,8kbps was tedious at those speeds (the
original Doom Shareware took me over an hour to get, back in the day). >> >>> Even looking at images was a chore; you'd queue up two or three and
that would be it for the night ;-)
Yeah, but you had those evil line noises!!!!!!!!!!!!
No, you didn't. Most modems supported the AT M0 command, which turned
off the speaker from the start. It was one of the first AT commands I
learned, and boy howdy did I make sure every AT string I used included
it! That squeal people associate with the dial-up era of the Internet?
I never heard it.
Let's fix that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xalTFH5ht-k :)
It's funny to read the auto text (subtitle/closed captioning)s. :D
Speaking of action games, what games did you play over dial-up? For me, >Duke3D, DOOM, Heretic, BattleZone, MotoRacer, Diablo, Warcraft, Quake, etc.
On Wed, 09 Oct 2024 17:02:09 -0400, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
Still, I stayed on dial-up for a long time (albeit with a faster 56K
modem)... well into the 2000s. The Internet was still _usable_ at
those speeds, and as for downloads? I'd just queue everything up and
let it run overnight.
The year 2000 (or was it 1999?) is when I got SDSL 768Kbps installed. Upgraded from USR 56k.
I was ecstatic with (a little) less than T1 speeds. After that, I only
used my USR for fax. Can you believe we *still* fax?
On 10/13/2024 5:58 AM, Zaghadka wrote:
On Wed, 09 Oct 2024 17:02:09 -0400, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
Still, I stayed on dial-up for a long time (albeit with a faster 56K
modem)... well into the 2000s. The Internet was still _usable_ at
those speeds, and as for downloads? I'd just queue everything up and
let it run overnight.
The year 2000 (or was it 1999?) is when I got SDSL 768Kbps installed. Upgraded from USR 56k.
I was ecstatic with (a little) less than T1 speeds. After that, I only
used my USR for fax. Can you believe we *still* fax?
I work with lawyers (clerical in a DA's office). We still mail physical paper documents.
Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com> looked up from reading the entrails of
the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs say:
On Wed, 09 Oct 2024 17:02:09 -0400, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
Still, I stayed on dial-up for a long time (albeit with a faster 56K >>modem)... well into the 2000s. The Internet was still _usable_ at
those speeds, and as for downloads? I'd just queue everything up and
let it run overnight.
The year 2000 (or was it 1999?) is when I got SDSL 768Kbps installed. >Upgraded from USR 56k.
I was ecstatic with (a little) less than T1 speeds. After that, I only
used my USR for fax. Can you believe we *still* fax?
It still fulfills a need - to send a copy of a physical document that
the sender is retaining - like a Doctor sending a prescription renewal
to a Pharmacist.
Beats having to pick up the physical scrip, taking it to the pharmacy,
then either waiting or coming back a couple days later.
On Sat, 12 Oct 2024 19:39:33 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
I didn't do newsgroups until I got to college. My friend told me to use >Tin. I am still using it and many other text mode programs today. :P
I started using Usenet when I was in High School. I had a tech savvy
friend who introduced me to it.
On Sat, 12 Oct 2024 20:13:39 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Oct 2024 02:17:50 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
Speaking of action games, what games did you play over dial-up? For me, >> >Duke3D, DOOM, Heretic, BattleZone, MotoRacer, Diablo, Warcraft, Quake, etc.
If you mean direct connect (as opposed to dial-up Internet), then
pretty much Doom. I think we tried Falcon 3.0 (or some flight sim?)
and Wing Commander Armada, and a few others here and there (thinking
back, I remember Witchhaven briefly entertained us) but mainly I
remember playing a lot of Doom.
Nah, that's like direct serial connection. I remember parallel cable
could be used for DOOM back in 1994! It actually worked, but slow. I
tried to find it but https://archive.org/details/cdrom_201511 is >temporarily down. :(.
Well, only in the sense that the modem connected to the serial port.
[Oh boy, those were the days when you had to know the IRQ
and port assignments for your serial ports. I am NOT unhappy
that little bit of trivia has escaped my brain]
You could do a direct connect between two computers via serial (either
by a null-modem cable or parallel if you were hacky) but modems meant
you didn't have to be in the same room. It did limit you to just two players... but then so did serial connects.
It being the early days of multiplayer, my friends and I shared a
couple of walkie-talkie radios (as we lived in nearby apartments) that
had _just_ enough range to allow us voice communications. ;-)
We had an acoustic coupler for awhile. I think I could type faster than
it sent letters.
That's like 300 speed. ;)
Depends on how fast you can type :-)
300 baud is probably amazingly fast to hunt-n-peck typists.
I hunt and peck on smartphones since I have to have one hand hold it and while other hand type!
And in the 80s, before GUIs were common and everything -even a lot of
games - were character-based, 300 baud was probably usable, if a bit
slow. Although I can't imagine using anything that pokey for
downloading stuff; even 28,8kbps was tedious at those speeds (the
original Doom Shareware took me over an hour to get, back in the day). >>> Even looking at images was a chore; you'd queue up two or three and
that would be it for the night ;-)
Yeah, but you had those evil line noises!!!!!!!!!!!!
No, you didn't. Most modems supported the AT M0 command, which turned
off the speaker from the start. It was one of the first AT commands I >learned, and boy howdy did I make sure every AT string I used included
it! That squeal people associate with the dial-up era of the Internet?
I never heard it.
I loved that noise. Especially the *ping* *ping* of 52K.
Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
On 10/13/2024 5:58 AM, Zaghadka wrote:
On Wed, 09 Oct 2024 17:02:09 -0400, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,I work with lawyers (clerical in a DA's office). We still mail physical
Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
Still, I stayed on dial-up for a long time (albeit with a faster 56K
modem)... well into the 2000s. The Internet was still _usable_ at
those speeds, and as for downloads? I'd just queue everything up and
let it run overnight.
The year 2000 (or was it 1999?) is when I got SDSL 768Kbps installed.
Upgraded from USR 56k.
I was ecstatic with (a little) less than T1 speeds. After that, I only
used my USR for fax. Can you believe we *still* fax?
paper documents.
And faxes?
What did you use for it back then?
On Sat, 12 Oct 2024 19:39:33 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
I didn't do newsgroups until I got to college. My friend told me to use >>Tin. I am still using it and many other text mode programs today. :P
I started using Usenet when I was in High School. I had a tech savvy
friend who introduced me to it.
On Tue, 15 Oct 2024 00:50:04 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 ><candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> wrote:
Mike S <Mike_S@nowhere.com> wrote at 11:46 this Sunday (GMT):
On Sat, 12 Oct 2024 19:39:33 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
I didn't do newsgroups until I got to college. My friend told me to use >>>>Tin. I am still using it and many other text mode programs today. :P
I started using Usenet when I was in High School. I had a tech savvy
friend who introduced me to it.
Hey same, but I just stumbled into it.
Which just brings up the question:
How does one _stumble upon_ Usenet in 2024? Especially the text
newsgroups. It's such a tiny, outdated community, and the learning
curve -compared to other networks- is much higher; you have to find
(and sign up for) an NNTP host, get the software, configure the
software... It's just far more effort than most people would ever
bother to perform for what is, essentially, the same experience you'd
get from Reddit or any web-forum.
What makes somebody one day say, "Hey, I've heard about this Usenet
thing, I think I'll look into it?" when there are so many easier -and >arguably more rewarding- options?
On Tue, 15 Oct 2024 00:50:04 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07
<candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> wrote:
Mike S <Mike_S@nowhere.com> wrote at 11:46 this Sunday (GMT):
On Sat, 12 Oct 2024 19:39:33 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
I didn't do newsgroups until I got to college. My friend told me to use >>>>Tin. I am still using it and many other text mode programs today. :P
I started using Usenet when I was in High School. I had a tech savvy
friend who introduced me to it.
Hey same, but I just stumbled into it.
Which just brings up the question:
How does one _stumble upon_ Usenet in 2024? Especially the text
newsgroups. It's such a tiny, outdated community, and the learning
curve -compared to other networks- is much higher; you have to find
(and sign up for) an NNTP host, get the software, configure the
software... It's just far more effort than most people would ever
bother to perform for what is, essentially, the same experience you'd
get from Reddit or any web-forum.
What makes somebody one day say, "Hey, I've heard about this Usenet
thing, I think I'll look into it?" when there are so many easier -and arguably more rewarding- options?
On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 00:00:47 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
What did you use for it back then?
Maybe an older edition of the client I use now, which is Agent. If
Agent wasn't a thing back then, then I just don't remember.
On 10/15/2024 7:25 PM, Ant wrote:
Mike S. <Mike_S@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 00:00:47 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
What did you use for it back then?
Maybe an older edition of the client I use now, which is Agent. If
Agent wasn't a thing back then, then I just don't remember.
Is Agent still being updated?
Forte is kaput, very recently though. Agent hasn't been updated in over
a decade before that though.
On Tue, 15 Oct 2024 20:04:13 -0700, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action, >Justisaur wrote:
On 10/15/2024 7:25 PM, Ant wrote:
Mike S. <Mike_S@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 00:00:47 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
What did you use for it back then?
Maybe an older edition of the client I use now, which is Agent. If
Agent wasn't a thing back then, then I just don't remember.
Is Agent still being updated?
Forte is kaput, very recently though. Agent hasn't been updated in over
a decade before that though.
Having little need for the binaries function, I'm still on v3.3!
Can't use if for email anymore though, since all the email sites want a >security protocol it doesn't do.
Xocyll
Being fascinated with BBSes and finding one with a link to USENET?
Binaries?
On Tue, 15 Oct 2024 13:30:27 -0500, Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Binaries?
Binaries are definitely still a thing on Usenet and it is safer then torrents. But I am more curious as to why anyone significantly younger
then me would come to Usenet for messaging groups though.
Mike S <Mike_S@nowhere.com> wrote at 12:59 this Wednesday (GMT):
On Tue, 15 Oct 2024 13:30:27 -0500, Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Binaries?
Binaries are definitely still a thing on Usenet and it is safer then torrents. But I am more curious as to why anyone significantly younger
then me would come to Usenet for messaging groups though.
maybe bc I dont rly have friends irl lol
candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> wrote:
Mike S <Mike_S@nowhere.com> wrote at 12:59 this Wednesday (GMT):
On Tue, 15 Oct 2024 13:30:27 -0500, Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Binaries?
Binaries are definitely still a thing on Usenet and it is safer then
torrents. But I am more curious as to why anyone significantly younger
then me would come to Usenet for messaging groups though.
maybe bc I dont rly have friends irl lol
R we not yo friends irl? :P
On Sun, 20 Oct 2024 02:13:11 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> wrote:
Mike S <Mike_S@nowhere.com> wrote at 12:59 this Wednesday (GMT):
On Tue, 15 Oct 2024 13:30:27 -0500, Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Binaries?
Binaries are definitely still a thing on Usenet and it is safer then
torrents. But I am more curious as to why anyone significantly younger >>> > then me would come to Usenet for messaging groups though.
maybe bc I dont rly have friends irl lol
R we not yo friends irl? :P
I'd offer to be your friend, but I'm pretty sure I am neither real nor
alive.
It's hard being a figment.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 483 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 160:30:50 |
| Calls: | 9,594 |
| Files: | 13,676 |
| Messages: | 6,149,317 |