Received: from  ([206.46.170.210])
 by fonix.org (wcSMTP v5.5.450.2)
 with SMTP id 847322265; Tue, 18 Feb 2003 22:47:05 +0000
Received: from BobDial ([67.248.207.234]) by pop017.verizon.net
          (InterMail vM.5.01.05.09 201-253-122-126-109-20020611) with ESMTP
          id 
          for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2003 16:47:02 -0600
Message-ID: 
From: "Bob Dial" 
To: 
References: 


Subject: Re: Fido Attachments/ALL
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 16:19:02 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at pop017.verizon.net from
[67.248.207.234] at Tue, 18 Feb 2003 16:47:00 -0600


----- Original Message -----
From: "D Angelich" 
To: 
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 12:27 PM
Subject: Re: Fido Attachments/ALL


> [fonix.photo]

Hello, Again!

>     There are three BBS's still operating within the local dialup that I
can
> access Fido.

That's unusual these days.  At one time we had over 100 locals but now there
are two and neither of them carry Fido or Wildnet, etc..  Just genealogy on
one and cooking echo on the other.  It's mostly internet relay with month to
month pay for the Barksdale AFB personnel who are here a while and gone TDY,
etc.  I used to play Scrabble on the  ON RAMP but haven't had time the past
couple of years.

>No tell me and it seems to me that before there where these
> transfer programs like x modem, z modem, y modem and what ever else check
> sum protocol program that's out there today.

Sure were, Dan. File Transfer Protocols.  X was popular until Z came along
and everyone switched to it because you could resume interrupted transfers
if you got cut off in the middle of a download, and it was the fastest at
the time, too.

>People used conversion programs
> to convert binary programs to ascii files and sent them as straight text
> files, in some cases as an attachment to a message in Fido. I've seen it
> done, I even received a few of the files like this.

Yes, I operated as a point off of the Regional Exec's board and used Front
Door etc. for FidoNet, Yahoo for an exchange.. can't recall all those names
now.  

When I was an assistant SysOp to Dark Star, a local BBSs, we got our feed
from the first node off the Chicago main frame.  We were first in Louisiana
to import daily UseNet feed and had UUCP installed on our Amiga hard drive.
Fun times!

>     It seems that the images are still sent in the RLE type of format so
> that different type of computers can receive them.

JPEG (or JPG) is the current universal read format for pictures, I think,
but I don't track the tech stuff as much as I used to.  GIF is still
preferred for some applications.  The Joint Photographers Group has made
another version, but it's for short movie (animation?) type stuff I gather.
That's about it.

As far as I'm aware Unix is the common denominator, like UUCP, for exchange
of information between all formats today.  I understand there is even one
that I can now emulate Amiga Intuition on this clone but there have been no
new programs written in so long that I'm not going to mess with it.  

Some of our techie types may be able to provide more up to date stuff!
Good to hear from you.  Have seen you more active posting and am enjoying
it.

Regards

Bob

>
>        Dan.
>
> http://www.angelfire.com/linux/16_bit_os/faf/danindex.htm
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bob Dial" 
> To: 
> Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 12:57 PM
> Subject: Re: Fido Attachments/ALL
>
>
> > [fonix.photo]
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: 
> > To: 
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 5:22 AM
> > Subject: Re: 50-500mm Sigma Lens
> >
> >
> > > [fonix.photo]
> > >
> > >  Da> So who ever runs this don't like attachments??
> >
> > >  >
> > >  > Yes - I got the attachment OK. It was more than 400k
though and not
> > sure
> > >  > how that sits with the rules and regs here.
> > >  > Regards
> > >  > Chris
> > >  >
> > >
> > >  The attachment was so large it overflowed my 640k dos memory space,
> > >  requiring a reset of the dos computer.  Above is how your messages
are
> > >  received by one using a text based system.
> >
> > Everything on Fido should originate as text, not HTML, and attachments
are
> > not allowed.  This has been stated on a number of occasions in the past
> but
> > manages to come up again and again.  Confusion rises due to so many
using
> > Internet connections.  Lots of FidoNet Photo participants also use other
> > group sites for posting mutual interest photographs and are welcome to
> then
> > discuss them here on FidoNet.  When a message arrives from a gateway
site
> > such as Fonix thru Chris or Tom Lebens site at Fanciful the traffic gets
> > intertwined and sometimes may appear that photo echo members are sending
> > attachments through the echo.
> > That isn't the case.  For sure, attachments are not carried on the
relays
> to
> > Zone 1, 2, or 3, which encompass most of the world.
> >
> > What does happen is that attachments posted to FidoNet cause hangups
that
> > delay mail exchanges when the operational software goes about stripping
> them
> > from the body of text messages.  It's a futile cycle which never
> > satisfactorily may get the attachment further than into a trashcan
> somewhere
> > along the line.  Post pictures to an Internet site operated for that
> > purpose, then if you wish it is fine to discuss those posted pictures in
> the
> > Photo Forum of Fido.  The pictures never belong in a FidoNet post.  Post
> > pictures to a dedicated picture site and give its URL so that anyone
> > interested may go directly to it for viewing.
> >
> > If anyone has questions about this please contact either Stu Turk or
> myself
> > by independent E-Mail.  Such things used to be done by NetMail but that
> > applies only to those accessing the echo thru FidoNet BBS
locations--which
> > isn't many, now.
> > E-Mail can reach us either way so it would be appreciated if that medium
> is
> > used for personal information topics to the moderators.
> >
> > >  unnecessary HTML because one wanted to use the Rich Text format of
the
> > >  Outlook Express to create a pretty email, then attach a picture to
the
> > >  bottom and it becomes undecipherable.
> >
> > Exactly correct!
> >
> > >  This is FIDO, attachments are allowed in some conferences, not this
> > >  one I believe. (Ruling moderators please)
> >
> > I'm not aware of any FidoNet Tags which allow large file attachments.
> > Perhaps some areas now allow music files, which is more of the
same--large
> > files not designed to be carried on the FidoNet Backbone.  We do not
allow
> > attachments in Fido messages because they cannot be handled properly on
a
> > text based system with the programs currently in use to move Fido
traffic.
> >
> > >Remember FIDO and BBS's were
> > >  set up to handle Unix compatable 7 bit characters, requiring one of
the
> > >  bits out of each 8 bit byte as a steering bit, and even use of the
> > >  extended character set was illegal. Using a program such as UUE/D one
> > >  could encode and decode executable files and pictures, changing their
8
> > >  bit characters to 7 for transmission and restoring them to 8 bit at
the
> > >  receiver.  Using programs such as C-Split one could break those giant
> > >  encoded messages into acceptable sized chunks of data to be handled
by
> > >  the FIDO sysops as they spent their own money on long distant calls
> > >  transferring your messages for you as a hobby.  Back then it was
> > >  considered inconsiderate to send mail that someone else was paying to
> > >  deliver, unless it was appropriate and fit with in the limits of
> > >  responsible behavior.  A 400,000 byte picture file is larger than
most
> > >  executable programs were and is even to large to fit on the 360K
floppy
> > >  in use during the hey day of FIDO.
> > >
> >
> > Again, technically accurate information!  That is the way Fido was
> > structured.
> >
> > >  Just because Microsoft has made it so easy to click on the attachment
> > >  button, doesn't mean it's the right thing to do unless you are
sending
> > >  an email over the inter-NET. You might be receiving your photo echo
> > >  messages in email from the your FDO source. You might have the latest
> > >  whiz bang computer and feel a need to show off it's prowess, however
I
> > >  know some folks who are still receiving their FIDO Net traffic over
the
> > >  old BBS path, folks who are also using old Apple's, dos based PC's
and
> > >  even one guy still using an old TI from Texas Instruments.  Making
the
> > >  assumption that everyone has the latest whiz bang computers leaves
> > >  those folks out in the cold.  If one has a picture they want others
to
> > >  see, post it someplace and place the URL of where it can be seen in
> > >  your message.
> > >
> >
> > Comprehensive and precisely correct, Sir!  Thanks for taking time to
cross
> > the T's and dot the I's for those who were unaware.  Using Tom's
> volunteered
> > Fanciful site to distribute the FidoNet Photo Echo was a move to insure
> that
> > everyone who had been a member could continue to participate even though
> > their local BBS site was no longer in operation.  Without the gateway
> > locations which import Fido and put it out to mail servers, anyone who
> > wished to follow the traffic would have to call LD at their own expense,
> > twice a day, to do so.  That is not a satisfactory solution for many of
> us.
> > Thanks to Tom and Chris, we only pay for ISP connections and they pick
up
> > the other expenses -- which are considerable!
> >
> > If your ISP allows Telnet or similar usage you may also participate in
the
> > Photo Echo through such excellent sites as Doc's Place which has been as
> > flawless as any other over a span of many years.  As you should know,
QWK
> > packets, or live online reading and replies are also possible at Doc's,
> > Fanciful, Fonix, and other sites set up to provide those services.  Your
> > choice.
> >
> > FidoNet is an entity unto itself.  The Internet is a means of travel and
> > distribution, so far as Fido is concerned.  
> >
> > Thanks, Bobfer, for the explanations.  Feel free to get grumpy any time
> you
> > like!
> >
> > Bob Dial, Co-Moderator
> > FidoNet Photo Echo
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5