HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: west@ponder.csci.unt.edu (Bruce West)
Subject: WHY IS VLT SOO BRAIN-DEAD!  [please read]
Organization: University of North Texas, Denton
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 07:47:07 GMT

    First, VLT is great - I love it!  Now, the problem...


** FIX THE DAMN REVIEW BUFFER -- ITS WORTHLESS RIGHT NOW!


    The reason for this is that if you, say, ls a huge dir.  You then wanna
step through your review buffer and choose which files to read or 
something (bad example, I know).  So you pop up the review window, and skip
up to the top of the directory listing.  You then go to your VLT window
and type this file.  Good.  Now, you want to "page down" in the review
buffer.  So you go up to the review buffer and BOOM.  It has now scrolled
down the length of the file you just read.  THIS IS USELESS, the review buffer
should scroll independently.  For example, you can't cat a huge file and at
the same time step through the review buffer -- it just keeps bouncing
around!
    FIX THIS PLEASE!  Or tell me how I can fix it!  This makes the entire
review system uterly worthless for any practical use.  I'm using the latest
version btw, on an A3000.

Ciao....


Jason B West



ps: Don't respond by email - I don't get my mail for some readson.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.datacomm
From: jagrizza@uncc.edu (James A Grizzard)
Subject: Re:  XPR-Bidirectional
Reply-To: jagrizza@uncc.edu
Organization: University of NC at Charlotte
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 01:55:14 GMT

In article 21976@freenet.carleton.ca, aa302@Freenet.carleton.ca (Russell McOrmond) writes:
>
>In a previous article, jagrizza@uncc.edu (James A Grizzard) says:
>>>Bi-modem isn't so complex.  The problem is that the author of Bi-modem has
>>>copyrighted the protocol, and if someone were to write a compatible Amiga
>
>>why??? if someone writes some code, and doesn't use the original bi-modem author's
>>code, how can that be violation of copyright?
>
>  Let's clear some of this up once and for all.
>
>  a) Yes, the word 'copyright' was not appropriate, and a patent on the
>protocol would be more appropriate.
>  b) The patent on this protocol is NOT in the public domain.  I do not at
>this point know WHERE it is, but this fact alone (That I don't know where
>it is) makes Bi-modem a non-issue.
>
[...]
>
>  The statement is this *WHY BOTHER*!!  I can't see that any single protocol
>implementation is worth the possible legal hassles if the specifications
>are not already released to the public domain.  It would be much easier for
>someone like myself or others to start from scratch and make sure that the
>protocol is released to the public domain so that someone can't try to
>screw everyone over.

but is it pattented?? there's a *BIG* difference between a copyright and a patent.

If this is patented, why didn't the company just patent the whole idea of
bi-directional transfers, to make things like hs/link, etc,, never have come around..

I don't think bimodem is patented... copyrighted, yes, but that doesn't prevent
reverse engineering, and the like....
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.datacomm
From: king@rtsg.mot.com (Steven King, Software Archaeologist)
Subject: Re: JRCOMM-blink
Reply-To: king@rtsg.mot.com
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 15:24:50 GMT

ac463@yfn.ysu.edu (Rich Yauman) publicly declared:
>A while back I asked why Blinking characters from IBM boards
>don't blink, and Jack gave a good explanation as to what made
>this unfeasable.  But how's this for an alternate.  Make it so
>what blinks on an IBM is italic or bold or some other attribute could
>be assigned to it, to make it so that even if we don't have blinking
>we do have something.  Possibly it could be a requester that could be
>set with the defaults, so that the user can select how he wants
>blinking text treated, or if he just wants it be treated the way it is now.

I believe JRComm uses bold for blinking characters.  (Based on an
observation while testing my BBS the other night.)  It's not very
noticable.  The Amiga's bold isn't a different intensity, just the
characters "smeared" a pixel or two over.  ATalkIII, at least the old
version I had, used italics.

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------+-----------------------
You know, this job would be a lot easier using PERL.   |      Steven King
                                                       |   Motorola Cellular
                                                       |   king@rtsg.mot.com
From: paulk@terapin.com (Paul Kienitz)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.datacomm
Subject: MagiCall
Date: 23 Nov 92 18:26:58 PST
Organization: BBS

I just tried out a neat new term program called MagiCall 1.0, which appears to
be from Denmark.  It's sort of like Term only simpler and less quirky and
generally easier to deal with, without, as far as I can see, really lacking
anything you would want because of that.  Unfortunately it has some of the
problems one would expect of a version 1.0 -- a Zmodem transfer put garbage
characters all over the screen and had a bunch of errors trying to bring the
transfer to an end (but the file got through intact).  Also the phonebook needs
some work, interfacially.  And the set of external emulation libraries (which
appear to be incompatible with those used by Term) don't include one for MS-DOS
ansi.

But the weird thing is, there were NO DOCS in the archive!  If you wanna use
the powerful-looking rexx scripting stuff, you have to learn it from the
examples, apparently ...

The author's name is Stefan Stuntz.  As a version 1.0, it's not a winner yet,
but this will be one to watch.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.datacomm
From: peter@sdf.lonestar.org (Hoang Tran)
Subject: Re: Term 2.5 Suggestions
Organization: Best lil' ol' Pubnix in Texas
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 06:46:32 GMT

Ability to choose what the foreground and background colors of the compact
status can be.  Shrink the transfer window down.  And most importantly, reduce
its memory use.
-- 

peter@sdf.lonestar.org   
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.datacomm
From: pooler@vccnw07.its.rpi.edu (Robert Peter Poole)
Subject: Re:  XPR-Bidirectional
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 16:03:33 GMT

In article <jam.3167@jammys.ocunix.on.ca> jam@jammys.ocunix.on.ca (James McOrmond) writes:
>>Why is BiModem so complex?  You send a packet while recieving a packet,
>>If you have to Ack/Nack, you just have an Ack/Nack packet.  Communications
>
>Bi-modem isn't so complex.  The problem is that the author of Bi-modem has
>copyrighted the protocol, and if someone were to write a compatible Amiga
>protocol and didn't get his permission, they'd get sued so bad.  We would
>all as well be running an "Illegal" protocol.
>
>--
> James A McOrmond - Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA! - ZyXEL 16.8k V32bis Modem!
> Fidonet#1:163/165.0 - (613)521-0648 - VBBS Amiga Intuitionized BBS
> UUCP: Jam@Jammys.OCUnix.On.Ca - Amiga 3000T/25/5 - 383Megs

FALSE.  You can't `copyright' a protocol, only the code used to implement it.
If someone wrote a BiModem (probably calling it something else, since the name
might be a registered trademark) by reverse-engineering the BiModem protocol
standard, then it's perfectly OK.  There's plenty of legal precedent to
support that, software patents notwithstanding.  Now, if the guy who wrote
BiModem for the PC suddenly came up with a patent on the protocol, then you
might be screwed... but usually only big companies can get away with crap
like that.

Copyright law doesn't protect ideas or algorithms, only implementations (i.e.,
the expression of an idea).  That's why you can write a spreadsheet that reads
Lotus 1-2-3 files and get away with it.  Good thing most look-and-feel
copyright lawsuits have failed.
From: Ty_Sarna@fcircus.sat.tx.us (Ty Sarna)
Subject: Re:  XPR-Bidirectional
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.datacomm
X-NewsSoftware: BBX-UMB 0.26c beta (Nov 19 1992)
Date: 21 Nov 92 22:41:48 CST
Organization: The Flying Circus Amiga BBX, San Antonio, Texas


In <1992Nov19.182927.21976@freenet.carleton.ca>, aa302@Freenet.carleton.ca (Russell McOrmond) writes:
>   a) A patent does exist, and we can not find it.  So, someone programms an
> XPR bi-modem and gets sued for it once it is released.  Not only do they
> loose money from the lawsuit, but the protocol is still not available, and
> all time has been wasted.

It should be trivial to find out if there is a patent. In fact, I
believe paent holders are required toprotect their patent by mentioning it.

>   b) The patent does not exist and someone does not attempt to get one:  A
> retroactive scenario of the first possibility exists.

A retroactive situation can not exist by definition of a patent. If
another implementation was already in use or existed, it would qualify
as Prior Art, rendering the patent null.

>   c) someone tries to get a patent for the protocol, and in doing so ends 
> up in a legal battle with some other author.

Same as above.

>   The statement is this *WHY BOTHER*!!  I can't see that any single protocol
> implementation is worth the possible legal hassles if the specifications
> are not already released to the public domain.  It would be much easier for

Point is, if it IS a patented protocol, all of the above points could
very likely STILL apply to ANY OTHER protocol we might choose to
implement. So, why don't we do the legwork first, and if there is not
patent then we might as well do BIMODEM, and if there is, we have to
examine the impact (if any) that the patent has on ALL bidirectional
file transfer protocols.

> protocol is released to the public domain so that someone can't try to
> screw everyone over.

A patent can't be in the "public domain".  Something is either patented
or it isn't.  The patent may in fact be "freeware" in effect (like one
of the Unix authors (I think it was Ritchie) did with a unix techniqued)
due to the author declaring that there is no license fee, but the
technique is still patented. 

>   Now, if someone else wants to do the foot-work to get the protocol's patent
> released to the public domain, then please do so.  I doubt if any of the

Are you certain it's patented? If so, it's VERY important that we
investigate the patent before anyone decides to do ANY bidirectional
protocol, since it may be covered under the patent. We could likely get
the patent overturned on triviality for a broad patent or sinply do
things diferently for a very specific one, but we STILL need to
investigate. Do you see my point?


::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
::    Ty Sarna, Postmaster       The Flying Circus BBX, San Antonio, TX ::
:: Ty_Sarna@fcircus.sat.tx.us      512/697-9134 (USRobotics Dual Std)   ::
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.datacomm
From: KRC@ECLX.PSU.EDU (Keith R. Connors)
Subject: NULL Modem - IBM <> Amiga
Organization: Penn State Engineering Computer Lab
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 17:45:28 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.24


Hello...

A while back I remember seeing a post about NULL Modem connections
between Amiga and IBM....of course at the time, I did not forsee having
both the machines in the same house.  Of course, things happen....anyway,
I'd like some information about the connection so I can build it!  
I figure that I could figure it out, but rather than reinvent the wheel, and
run the risk of damage to either machine, I figured I'd post here first.

Rather than tie up bandwidth again with this thread, please send me E-Mail...if
I receive a nice, descriptive listing of the NULL modem connection, I will 
post it here!

Thanks so much!

		Keith Connors		krc@eclx.psu.edu
From: jgrimm@TorreyPinesCA.ncr.com (Jeffrey Grimmett 9999)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.datacomm
Subject: Re: DLG Utilities
Date: 16 Nov 92 20:00:49 GMT
Organization: NCR (Torrey Pines Development Center)
Disclaimer: This posting does not necessarily reflect the opinions of NCR.

Quoth ree88132@zach.fit.edu (Keith Ledig):

]> I need.  Either I am unaware of how to configure it correctly or I
]> need utilities.  Could any kind DLG sysop please direct me to a source
]> of Utilities (in the USA, Please).  I FTP'ed over to wuarchive and they

I and a few others are trying to organize a central DLG watering hole as
you read this.  Hopefully soon.

]> Namely I am looking for a util that will swap the name  <-> handle so I can
]> use fidonet.  I set it up so their handle is their name on my board, ie

The proggy you are looking for is called AliasHack and works quite nicely.
My roomie has her system set up similar to yours, with handles in the
realname field and real name in the handle, and she just recently joined
Fido as well.

]> Keith Ledig   ree88132@zach.fit.edu         [Tech-Forum BBS 407-722-4400]

-- 
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@*************************************************
Jeff Grimmett [SuperBitMap BBS]          * fido!1:202/1401.0 [619-460-7290]
jeff_grimmett@f1401.n202.z1.fidonet.org  * jgrimm@TorreyPinesCA.ncr.com
 The opinions expressed in this message are thoughtful, reasoned, and logical.
      	It goes without saying that they are not those of my employer.
*******************************************************************************
From: erd@kumiss.cmhnet.org (Ethan Dicks)
Subject: Re: Systems with networking standard
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.datacomm
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: 22 Nov 92 19:14:29 EDT
Organization: Not an Organization

Val Kartchner (val@news.ccutah.edu) wrote:
: 
: I think that standard networking is important in a computer system.  I've
: brought it up before, and I'll bring it up again.
 

:  Is there some hardware guru who could build us an
: inexpensive bus type network interface?  It wouldn't have to be expensive
: or fast, but it should allow aa large number of computers to connect.  The
: parallel and serial ports are usually used, but has anyone considered the
: disk drive port?

Jeff Easton and I have come up with the first (almost second) draft of
a proposal to interconnect Amigas via a twisted-pair ArcNET adapter
for the parallel port, using the COM20020 chip.  The chip itself is
90%+ of the hardware required to implement ArcNET.  Some glue logic
is needed to allow the CPU to access the chip's registers, a 20Mhz
clock is required, as well as some media interface circuit.  There
is a single chip, +5v only RS-485 driver chip which costs <$2 in
quantity 1.  The COM20020 costs ~$10-$15 each.  A TTL clock oscillator
or a 20Mhz crystal are <$5.  The hardware is available and cheap.  There
is no software.

Jeff and I have been discussing for some time how the software would
work.  One possibility is to simply wait until such time as C= releases
the next AS225 package and write a driver.  Another possibility is
to adapt DNet/ParNet.  A third possibility is to adapt AmigaNOS.

I am quailified to write the software; I have insufficient time
right now (I may have more time in the upcoming months, however).
I do have the parts *in my house* to assemble a few prototypes.
What *I* need most is some idea about which direction to take.
(second most is an example of using the CIAs in a system friendly
manner :-)  I think I need input more than I need assistance right
now; perhaps as the project gets a more solid definition, additional
labor might be useful.

Comments?  Suggestions?  Flames?


-ethan


Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.datacomm
From: hibrown@vidar.albany.edu (Herb Brown)
Subject: GPFax class 2 generic 
Organization: State University of New York at Albany
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 18:49:38 GMT

Is the class 2 generic GPFax software available through mail-order?
This is the version that presumably will work with ZyXEL modems.

If so, from whom? 

Thanks,

Herb


-- 
Herb Brown  Math Dept  The Univ at Albany  Albany, NY 12222  (518) 442-4640
Director,                                          hibrown@math.albany.edu  
Computer Assisted Instruction in Mathematics       hibrown@csc.albany.edu
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: gwalborn@cs.pitt.edu (Gary Walborn)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.datacomm
Subject: Re: Supra 14.4K ROM updates
Summary: For better or worse?
Keywords: Supra, 14.4, ROM, update
Date: 16 Nov 92 16:19:19 GMT
Organization: Univ. of Pittsburgh Computer Science

To whom it may concern:

	Is anyone else having serious problems with the new ROM's from
SUPRA.  I have just remove my second set of Caller ID ROMs and re-installed
the original ROMs.  I just don't seem to get the reliability that I have
with the old ROMs.

	As soon as I started using the new ROMs, I experienced difficulty
in connecting with a number of modems which I use frequently.  When I
put the old ROMs back, the problem disappears.  Similarly, the new ROMs
seem to have a tendency to hang the modem.  Very often I will get an
indication of a transmission error (TE) or a retrain sequence (RT).
When this happens, the modem becomes 'hung' and never seems to recover.
Usually the computer on the "other end" times out and hangs up.
I also have experienced occassional "hang ups" where the modem simply
disconnects with no warning or apparent malfunction.

	For the moment, I have removed the "J" ROMs and re-installed
the "F" ROMs.  The modem actually seems to work better with the older
version.  AM I ALONE WITH THIS PROBLEM?  Supra even sent me a second
set of ROMs, claiming that they had a problem with "some" of the new
ROMs.  The new ROMs didn't help at all!  I feel like I have wasted the
$20 upgrade price.

Thanks for any advice,

Gary Walborn <gwalborn@cs.pitt.edu>
(216) 726-8450
From: olsen@sourcery.mxm.sub.org (Olaf Barthel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.datacomm
Subject: Re: Term 2.4a - some comments
Distribution: world
X-NewsSoftware: GRn 1.16e (7/4/92) by Mike Schwartz & Michael B. Smith
Date: 14 Nov 92 22:24:45 CET
Organization: MXM Barthel & Paesler

In article <BxKnHJ.540@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> djkucera@cayley.uwaterloo.ca (Dylan Kucera) writes:
> 1) XPR ZModem still craps out when using serial.device, and putting only a
> minimal amount of strain on the system (hard-drive access.)  Sure, using
> baudbandit.device does the trick, but baud bandit doesn't allow sending of
> breaks, which means I'm stuck in one UNIX session!  I hope that this can be
> remedied through implementation, rather than it being the serial.device alone.
> (Please, any reponses I HAVE set up HIGH-SPEED MODE, and set term's priorty
> WAY UP, so that is NOT the problem)

   Careful please, the `high speed mode' switch disables features of the
serial.device one can normally not do without if data is to be transferred
using a phone line. Also, playing with the `term' program priority may take
some time to find the optimum settings. As for my A3000 I have set the program
priority to 5 -- no trouble so far.

-- 
Olaf Barthel       | Internet: olsen@sourcery.mxm.sub.org
Brabeckstrasse 35  |           o.barthel@a-link-h.comlink.de
D-3000 Hannover 71 |           cbmvax.commodore.com!cbmehq!sourcery!olsen
MXM, ECG127        |   Z-Netz: O.BARTHEL@A-LINK-H
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Ceci n'est pas une signature.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.datacomm
From: labenrsa@ICIL64.CILEA.IT
Subject: Re: SANAII slip driver
Organization: CILEA - v R. Sanzio 4 - Segrate - ITALY
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 11:00:14 GMT
Reply-To: labenrsa@ICIL64.CILEA.IT

In article <8f3gbMa00hsBIt13Rf@cs.cmu.edu>, Michael Witbrock <mjw+@cs.cmu.edu> writes:
>
>In case no one noticed, the recently uploaded SANAII dev stuff (on
>various sites) includes slip and cslip drivers.  [....]

Anything capable of using the parallel port? (Would be very useful for
both testing SANA-compliant network SW when no ethernet cards are available,
and much faster than slip over RS232).

BTW : Is anybody working on a SANA-II-sort-of- DNET or PARNET?

-------------
Andy Zanna                              SDEVAX::ZANNA@icil64.cilea.it
From: xde@xtxde.chi.il.us (Dave Evans)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.datacomm
Subject: Re: Best High Speed Modem Deal?
Distribution: world
X-NewsSoftware: GRn 1.16f (10.17.92) by Mike Schwartz & Michael B. Smith
Date: 18 Nov 92 16:09:55 CDT
Organization: Not

In article <BxwCxx.F7w@news.iastate.edu> madsen@cs.iastate.edu (Dave Madsen) writes:
> In article <1992Nov17.174805.871@head-cfa.harvard.edu> dj@head-cfa.harvard.edu (Diab Jerius) writes:
		[ Top deleted ]
> 
> Will this modem work with the generic version of GPFax? (ie. does it
> have the Rockwell chipset?)
> 

	Don't know about working with gpfax, but it does NOT have the
Rockwell chipset. It does work with a copy of Afaxdemo I have, but
I haven't had a chance to see about the gpfax...
-- 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Dave Evans    |     xde@xtxde.chi.il.us   | +++      ATH             |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Voice/Data/Fax   812/877-4476                  NO CARRIER             |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: NEWAGE@cup.portal.com (John - Ferraris)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.datacomm
Subject: vt220 emulation
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 92 19:20:32 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Distribution: usa

Can anyone suggest a good vt220 emulation term program?

Please respond via email since I do not currently have the time to keep up
with my amiga news groups.

Thanks,

jbf
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.datacomm
From: ptrei@bistromath.mitre.org (Peter Trei)
Subject: Experience with Digicom Foxplus v.32b/v.42b modem (~$250) sought.
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 15:00:36 GMT

     Digicomm has lowered the price on its v.32bis/v.42bis modem, the
Scout Plus, to $199 (internal), and (I think) $245 external. I'm
considering getting one. Does anyone have experience, good or bad, in
using this model on an Amiga? I want to set up a leaf usenet node.

							Peter Trei
From: Ty_Sarna@fcircus.sat.tx.us (Ty Sarna)
Subject: Re:  XPR-Bidirectional
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.datacomm
Distribution: world
X-NewsSoftware: BBX-UMB 0.26c beta (Nov 16 1992)
Date: 17 Nov 92 12:36:04 CST
Organization: The Flying Circus Amiga BBX, San Antonio, Texas


In <jam.3167@jammys.ocunix.on.ca>, jam@jammys.ocunix.on.ca (James McOrmond) writes:
> Bi-modem isn't so complex.  The problem is that the author of Bi-modem has
> copyrighted the protocol, and if someone were to write a compatible Amiga
> protocol and didn't get his permission, they'd get sued so bad.  We would
> all as well be running an "Illegal" protocol.

You can't copyright a protocol. You can copyright a specific
implementation, but not the protocol itself. So, unless the authors
*patented* the protocol, you can implement it if you like (and if they
did patent it, likely all other bidirectional protocols are illegal to
implement too).

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
::    Ty Sarna, Postmaster       The Flying Circus BBX, San Antonio, TX ::
:: Ty_Sarna@fcircus.sat.tx.us      512/697-9134 (USRobotics Dual Std)   ::
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::