From: rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly)
Organization: The Man With Ten Cats
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 14:18:21 GMT
Reply-To: rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly)

In article <1993Jan5.014830.28185@news.columbia.edu> lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner) writes:
>In article <9301040835.57@rmkhome.UUCP> rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly) writes:
>>
>>Brooklyn Bridge does it by have a slave and a master mode.  You run it
>>directly on one machine to have it become a slave, and you boot the
>>other side with a special device entered in config.sys.  When it boots
>>up, the device configures the serial port for 115,000 baud, and then goes
>>out over the serial line and seeks out the devices on the other side.  It
>>then allocates appropriate device letters.
>
>LAPLINK is craftier/cruftier, since it starts at a slow rate like 9600 and
>then sends in enough of itself as one of those executable files you can
>describe in ASCII and save as a .COM file, such as the one I posted a few
>months back, etc.  Then they run that executable, and it and the other side
>test the line reliability, raising it up to 115,200 baud if the line is
>worthy of it, etc.  You need not modify anything, and after the fact, you
>now have a replicated \ll3 directory on the end where you typed the CTTY
>command.

Yup.  LAPLINK is newer technology.  Brooklyn Bridge is somewhat tedious to
get running, but it does do the job once it has configured itself.

>>>DR-DOS can do this as a standard option if enabled.  BTW, DR-DOS is totally
>>>compatible and is a replacement system for all *documented* features.
>>
>>Except for certain nasty things that Microsoft has done with Windows 3.x.
>
>What things?  DR-DOS was upgraded in April 92.  You could get the update
>from many places as a .ZIP file, and registered users and VARs (like me)
>were quickly sent the "commercial" patch disk to make it official.  Since
>then, newer releases, unofficially known as "6.01" have come out that are
>identical to a system patched up the old way.  As far as I know, there is
>no Windows 3.1 problem with this newer DR-DOS.  If you have anything specific,
>I can call the 800 number and inform Novell/DRI of the specific problem, which
>they will respond to.  They even send out Beta-test disks to vars/developers, 
>unlike Microsoft whose update process consists of literally nothing for 2.5
>years between 4.01 and 5.0, etc.  (End users can't use the 800 number generally
>but vars can :-).)

I guess I just heard old news.

Of course, Microsoft will probably cook up something for Windows 3.2. :-)

>I have heard of a problem with Daceasy as an application running under
>Netware Lite under DR-DOS 6.0 that is apparently an undocumented feature of
>MS-DOS 5.0, but this has zilch to do with Windows.  Anyone with any knowledge
>of any of these MS zingers is encouraged to contact DRI, as a better O/S will
>be the result.  I can pass it along personally if the 800 number is an issue.
>
>BTW, the PC-GEOS people seem to prefer DR-DOS also, and of course they are
>yet another anti-Windoze faction.

PC-GEOS seems to be a nice, fast product.  They learned a lot from their first
versions that ran on the C64 and the Apple II.  Hopefully, they will get more
support from the major software houses.

-- 

Rick Kelly    rmkhome!rmk@merk.com    merk!rmkhome!rmk    rmk@frog.UUCP