From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com
Subject: Re: TBBS versus RA/Netware
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 14:52:48 GMT

In article <1992Nov17.184131.60943@cc.usu.edu>, sl9dm@cc.usu.edu writes:
> In article <721643537snx@sound.demon.co.uk>, Rob@sound.demon.co.uk (Robert J Barth) writes:
>> OK, here's my situation:
>> I'm running RemoteAccess (great s/w!), and I have:
>> 2 lines, both Courier Dual Standard V32bis/HST,
>> and they both run under desqview                   = 1 machine
> Check..
> 
>> Upgrading to 3 lines would mean either...
>> a. Netware, with Server, CDrom Server, 3 nodes     = 5 machines
>> b. Netware Lite, Lantastic etc, 3 peer-peer nodes  = 3 machines
>> c. TBBS ???                                        = 1 machine <grin>
>   d. RemoteAccess?                                   = 1 machine <grin>
       -----------                                      -----------------

WRONG......

> 
>> What would I need ? Multiplexors ? I've got the 2 external DSs, and
>> an unlimited supply of internal 144's.... would I be able to use these
>> or would they have to be external + 16550 chips ?
> 14.4k internals HAVE a 16550 chip on them! and RemoteAccess can be set up to
> handle up to I think it's either 99 or 150 lines at once. only time you need

Hey I want to see this. 99 or 150 lines on internal modems on one machine.

> more than 1 machine is if you have used all your options on 1 machine (32 com
> ports with IRQ sharing & Non-Standard COM addresses (Com14?))

Or is it 32 lines on one machine with internal modems?????? I still want to
see this :-) :-) :-)

> YOu have RA running fine with 2 lines, just add another DIR, another CONFIG.RA
> and any changed .RA/.BBS files to that directory. Bruce Bodger (RemoteAccess
> Help for the USA) runs like 5 or 6 lines on his 1 machine (2 numbers. 1 for
> 9600+ callers and the other for 3/12/24 callers)
> 
> 
>> Useability ? Can I configure menus / screens / routes / message / file areas
>> as nicely as I can in RemoteAccess ?

TBBS has much flexibility in presenting menus/screens/file areas/etc.

> Sorta, but for one thing, TBBS is *NOT* Desqview capible. This I hear from my

Doesn't have to be Desqview capable. Running RA under Desqview is only required
because of the limitations of RA. TBBS runs multi-user without the requirement
for the additional complexity/overhead of something like Desqview.

> old boss, who hear from AUTHOR! for Another, TBBS has a limit of 64
> message/file areas I belive the count is. and cann't go above 62,000 messages

You 'believe' wrong. With Topic based messaging the number of message areas
that could be defined is something on the order of 15,000,000 and there's
really no limit to file areas, other than disk space :-).

> TOTAL.   IMHO It's best to stick with RA!
> 
>> 
>> Please, anyone with experience with BOTH RA & TBBS would be wonderful

I run two TBBS boards. One with 8 lines on a 386SX and one with two on a 
386DX with 14,400 modems and a CD-ROM. Both work great, are easy to maintain
and expand (and I don't have to worry about either one of them staying up if
I go out of town for a week or two).

> I've had experience, and IMHO, TBBS SUCKS!

If your technical ability tracks your ability to explain what's required to
run alot of lines on RA, I can understand your bad experience...

> -- 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This Personal opinion junk was brought to you by one of the following Folks:
> 
> In the BBS World: The Master Ninja
> in the REAL world: Dan Egli
> on the Internet: SL9DM@CC.USU.EDU
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------


   John Rice        K9IJ     |  "Did I say that ?" I must have, but It was
   rice@ttd.teradyne.com     |   MY opinion only, no one else's...Especially
   Alpine Village BBS        |   Not my Employer's....
   708-438-5065 (data)       |   Purveyor of Miracles,Magic and Sleight-of-hand