From: william@cithara.login.qc.ca (William Ross)
Newsgroups: comp.bbs.waffle
Subject: Re: Offline Readers
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 93 22:04:07 EST
Organization: Organ Grinders Monkeys Union With Penguins As Mascots

foster@nzkites.UUCP (Foster Schucker) writes:
> russell@alpha3.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Russell Schulz) writes:
> > frampton@vicuna.ocunix.on.ca writes:
> > > It took me about an entire evening to configure Waffle.  Then another
> > > couple days to get everything working perfectly (cron, phone answering,
> > > polling, etc.).  About a week to get things *real* nice -- external
> > > commands, ANSI screens, etc.
> > 
> > is it just me, or are these features you're unlikely to be worried about
> > in an offline reader?  (no matter what you call it)
> 
> I'm suprised that it took 'another couple days' to get it working 
> perfectly.  When I set waffle up the first time it took about an hour.  
> Setting up the news feed took a few messages back and forth to John 
> (the feed sysadmin).  So to set it up as a news reader should take the
> average person about six hours tops.
>
> > > CIM, on the other hand, took me a total of 15 *minutes* to configure.
> > 
> > [if you pay me compuserve's rates, I'll write you a similar application
> > that dials your nearest pay-per-minute place.]  this is about the only
> 
> I use TAPCIS to call CI$.  It took about as long to set it up as it did   
> to get Waffle to work.   There is a number of addons to TAPCIS to make it 
> as useful as Waffle.  And they also take time to install and configure.
> 
> 
> > > Yes, Waffle is powerful.  But not everybody wants to run their own
> > > site.   

I tried to get one of my three users to set up waffle as a leaf site,
knowing his other alternative was a 160,00$ a year PCboard with a qwkmail
door that worked. He got part-way through the intro.doc and ran away frothing
at the mouth: "...I don't have a clue about usenet, uucp.. it's a foreign
language! Ferget it!"

Oh well, it's his money.

The net stumbling block to the NET is not waffle or its text.file mode of
installation, nor whether a qwk packet will ever marry USENET news; It's
that catch-all word INTERNET, and its glamourous and even criminal
associations with hacking, magnificant data transfer speeds and the like.

> From my point of view -- If you want a simple, the brain dead can install, 
> easy to use system to give you access to the "net" then you use Waffle.  

Brain dead; that's me! A self-taught, hacker (qualifications welcome).

The only brain-dead instruction that should go into future releases
(imho) is a wrap-around text.file explaining the necessity of pkzips -D
extraction option.

> If you want a complicated, custom, multi-bell and whistle system that 
> will allow you to have multiple users dialed in with full net access then
> you use Waffle.  

> The only difference is the amount of time that you spend in the configure 
> time.  
> 
> :-) :-) :-) IMHO I'd rather have someone on the net that has spend some
> time working on what they are using.  It cuts down on the BIFFS of the
> world.  :-) :-) :-) 
> 
> And since I'm on a roll, 99% of the questions that I've seen in c.b.w
> about Waffle have been answered with a variation of RTFM.  Maybe one 
> of the native english writers out there could write the ultimate Waffle
> document: "Everything you MUST know about Waffle for those people who
> refuse to read the documents." 

Why not develop an interactive user script for each of users who won't read
thee docs to learn how to download the messages they want to read and
reply to. Maybe there's more potential in the wolverine terminal option.
How about passing wolverine a few variable paramaters? Maybe in a future
release?... ;-)

> Thanks for your time


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
William Ross
cithara                 Specalists in asbestos underwear
                        since 1992                william@cithara.login.qc.ca
Newsgroups: comp.bbs.waffle