-> Why put the BBS on the DOS machine? OS2 can run the BBS software
-> without even noticing it is there.

Well, firstly: 

The BBS has been on a Dos machine for thirteen years and if I tried to
tell you how little downtime it's had in all those years you likely
wouldn't believe me. I don't fix what aint broke, but I DO fix what IS
broke....... immediately.  Suffice it to say that including power
failures and crapped out modems, it hasn't been DOWN over 24 hours total
in all those years.

-> Didn't ever get the Lantastic to stabilize for me, but back a decade
-> ago when I had my old network running (arcnet under DOS

Lantastic is the beauty of MY operation having been just as stable as
the BBS for most of that time. It was Arcnet at first, and one remote
work station still IS! The main backbone is Co-Ax with switching hubs at
appropriate locations for twisted pair bridging drops. THe whole mess is
dead reliable and Lantastic shares the system with Netbio/Netbui
stations without complaint.

-> went to a standalone DOS server model using Netware Lite and even
-> went to the extreme of yanking the video card out of the server for 6
-> months.

My BBS ran for years like that with the only access being via the LAN.
It has a mono monitor on it now and even a keyboard (Sometimes) but it's
seldom turned on. I'm acsessing it now from a Dos only WS four rooms
away, and even have a WS node on my back porch! (Running Desqview quite
happily I might add.)

-> If you go with an OS2 native BBS you can run 4  analog modems, a
-> couple of virtual nodes, a dozen windows of tossers,

Yep!  I fully understand and certainly agree! However we don't NEED four
modems anymore as four callers A DAY are a lot these days.  The new BBS
*IS* OS2, and I wouldn't run anything else if I didn't need Uncle
Billy's software to deal with the %(^&$ Web effectively. You'd get no
argument from ME about OS/2 being the best OS, but this is the LAN echo,
and I was answering the lady's question about HOW to effectively use
OS/2 to connect with her old Dos machine. IMHO Lantastic does it
admirably. and at practically no cost as regards system overhead.  The
OS/2 machine certainly doesn't notice the overhead, and a properly set
up Dos machine is hardly affected at all.

Actually, I guess the LAN software isn't as important as properly
utilizing a memory manager that lets it all load hi for Dos.
QEMM-386 _NON_ stealth lets Lantastic, DesqView, a spelling checker, a
couple of Professional Write windows and a thesaurus all run on a Dos
box (Literally, housed in a plywood box nailed to my porch wall) a
386-40 with four megs of RAM (Eight is better) for MONTHS at a time.
It hasn't been reboooted since the last power failure last August.

-> news pullers, ftp clients and other detritus and even handle your
-> wife's business

Yep!  It's interesting to watch IREX bring in the mail, while a caller
is online with MAX (Two modems) Squish tossing, Seal in it's Dos window
stashing files and me online via the LAN looking at the logfiles, or
writing NetMail on FrontDoor's Editor.  OS/2 's definitely cool.

-> found that the biggest thing is more memory is great but having a
-> huge fast pipe for tossing makes the most improvement in speed.

Which brings us to the subject of moving the stuff around the system....

Planet Connect. I know you remember that.  Remember how picky the
downlink software was?  Didn't  even like to share with a VGA card.

Well, I ran Tommy Brown's downlink software on a 386-33 using DesqView
(And QEMM-386) with Squish tossing SIMULTANIOUSLY across the LAN to the
machine that actually hubbed the mail out. I was getting the mail out to
the nodes by ten thirty or eleven oclock from the morning mail run, and
the ONLY way I could do it was via Lantastic.

BTW, KA9Q was the only software I ever ran that absolutely refused to
stabilize with Lantastic.  We probably COULD run it under OS/2 but there
are much better programs out there now.......

Regards,

Elvis

 ^..^
--- FidoPCB v1.5 beta-'j'
102