> Hello Donald.
>Another thought.  Lucida Console may not render ANSI stuff well.  Use 
HyperFont > instead.  It's made specifically for BBS type stuff and 
renders ANSI graphics > (and text) very well.  I have a HyperFont
package  available for download >(HYPRFONT.EXE) or if you like I can
send it to you  via e-mail. 

I just got your message, and tried to access ftp.sursum-corda.com using
Netscape Navigator.  I just get an error message saying it doesn't exist.
So send me the HyperFont program, in a zip file, via email at
donald.tidmore{at}fidotel.com.  If you are unable to get through to its mail
server, for any reason, then send the program archive to my
ktidmore{at}bellsouth.net address.  

Will try out the idea about using Lucida Console 18.  I have repeatedly
tried setting Screen Size and Buffer Size past the standard 80x25 settings
o the xp system, in Windows Explorer, when doing Right-Click/Properties
work on EXE files, such as the one for Qedit 3.0.  All that happens though,
is that the program keeps launching in a small window.  All one is able to
work on/see is 23 lines of data.  So I had to resort to running it
full-screen in order for it to be usable.  I don't know it is has any
bearing or not, but the system is formatted for NTFS.  Not my idea. That's
how Gateway sent the system, and buying PartitionMagic just for a single
use, to change the system to FAT32 just doesn't make much sense to me.  At
any rate, I might have the same problems using dos apps with a FAT32
partition anyway.

Don't suppose anyone has used programs like Dirmatch, from PC Magazine, on
Windows XP, and figured out why it is so slow to respond to keyboard key
movement.  I use that program a lot daily in batch files, and trying to do
file management between two directories used to be a piece of cake under
WIn-ME.  BUt is a pain in the butt under XP.  It is sort of like the key
presses go through molasses before they get acted upon.  Am wondering if
anyone knows if that could be due to the NTFS stuff, or if it is simply due
to the way Microsoft coded the CMD.EXE dos processor.

At any rate, the stuff about ANSI-based programs needing to be handled
differently was a good thing to think of.  I've tried running only LORD
4.07 beta under XP, dos games-wise, to date.  Every igm I've tried so far
shows up in the same 23-line viewable area dos window.  And trying to use
screen size like 80x30, up to 80x40, just gets ignored by the o.s when the
program is actually executed. However, Lord itself always runs full-screen
in a normal dos window.  But I don't know how one redoes a compilation to
get that sort of result in an igm.  Occurs to me that this is issue only
those using dos apps directly under XP experience.  If you were on xp
system, logged into bbs, using Telnet, I assume that every igm you are
playing would be in a normal full sized screen window.  Since I assume the
Telnet browser would control everything that occurs inside the telnet
session.

Thanks for the help.  Qedit 4.00 works under xp in a full sized normal
window, but I simply don't care for it as much.  They changed some stuff
between v3.0 and 4.0 that I never used or wanted.  So it is curious how
qedit 3.0 works one way under XP, and the other version works normally.  So
is there a way using Borland pascal 7.01 to compile programs to make sure
that they are executed in a normal sized 80x40 window, or perhaps smaller,
to make room for the Windows START toolbars lines?  Donald.


 If you want to
> download it, do it either from the BBS (bbs.sursum-corda.com) or from the ftp
> server (ftp.sursum-corda.com) (directory /public/fonts). Use binary transfer.
> Best regards,
> Marc
> ... You may be disappointed if you fail, but doomed if you don't try.

--- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag-5