BG> As you've doubtless already noticed, it did indeed end up in
BG> LOCSYSOP, which I presume is the first AREA: you have specified in
BG> your PQWK config.  Shit, and I though Bink and Squish were a PITA!

RS> I told you pure QWK systems were heaps simpler. One day you will
RS> agree |-)

BG> I do agree that QWK mail is simpler, and I've never suggested otherwise.

BG> However, leaving user-interfaces and other buzzwords aside, there are
BG> no QWK readers which come within cooee of the huge degree of
BG> configurability and versatility of a full-on point mail system.

I think you are missing the point there rather more than somewhat. With
say OLX you dont need to configure the vast bulk of it coz it has a
decent user interface right out of the box. So the fact that something
else can be configured to have some pale copy of a decent user interface
is quite irrelevant when comparing them. It needs to be configurable coz
its so damned deficient as supplied.

Just take the spelling checking alone. You dont need to a damned thing
with OLX, its just there. Endless farting around in a system where its
not, finding one, installing it, trying various alternative ones,
working around their quirks. And after all that effort, its still
significantly inferior, for example not ignoring the quoted blocks.

I dont even agree that a full point system is really that much more
versatile at all. About all you can do is use fake FROM fields. Wow.
IMO that doesnt warrant the much much higher effort get it up, let alone
the continuing irritation of the rather pathetic user interface you are
stuck with forever.

And some stuff is just grotty forever. Nothing like the elegant tagging
and untagging and pointer resetting in the areas you get with a decent
QWK reader and QWK door for example. Nothing remotely like it.

BG> A program's features are only features if I intend using them.

Obviously. Equally obviously if a particular feature that you do intend
using is missing you have to fart around endlessly trying to make up for
that deficiency. On something as trivial as a PERSONAL area for your own
mail or sorting the area.

BG> If not, they simply bloat the code and get in the way.

Using that argument you could justify sticking with Wordstar coz a
decent modern WP has lots of stuff you wont use. Its a silly argument.

BG> Don't worry Rod, I'm quite happy to stick with my OS/2 and all of
BG> this dinosaury old code,

Yeah, some people are natural born medievalists, some of them even have
funny ideas about 'correct' spelling too |-)

BG> and I promise not to try to convert you.

You are welcome to try, dont like your chances tho |-)

BG> I'll leave that task up to Russell (and wish him the best of luck
BG> too). ;-)

He's got buckleys too |-)

--- PQWK200