Elvis Hargrove wrote in a message to David Calafrancesco:

 EH> Hah! You made the same mistake I did. I tried to use high
 EH> end SCSI hosts and had HELL with that.  Then I stumbled onto
 EH> som el-cheapo Future Domain hosts that had agile ROM
 EH> addresses.  I might have given up a tad of buss speed, but I
 EH> got rid of that gnawing pain in the backside from having
 EH> ROMS scattered all over my high-memory area.  I will admit
 EH> to have wasted hundreds of hours of time picking around in
 EH> himemory for a better 'fit' but once I found it I considered
 EH> it time well spent, and with nominally 615K free and
 EH> everything I needed loaded, I blithly marched on enjoying
 EH> the best of both. SCSI, and a stable LAN. 

The recent Adaptec 1542s and 2930s that came with my SCSI CD-ROM burners over
the past three years were the first _non_ Future Domain SCSI hosts I have had. 
I have been running FDs since way back in the 8 bit days. My third hard drive
was a SCSI back circa 1985-7. Most of the drives since have all been SCSI as
well. 

 EH> No, but I stressed my MIND the first time the FD mailer
 EH> started shipping out Netmail as fast as I was writing it! 
 EH> I'd forgotten that the mailer was up and running in a closed
 EH> window and couldn't figure out where my netmail had gone! I
 EH> knew I'd WRITTEN them, but the messages wern't in the
 EH> outbound! 

hehehe... the be all and end all reason to use OS2 in a nutshell.
Multithreaded OSes are neat. Last I checked I had 60+ programs running 180+
threads doing nothing manual except having a single TimEd session open. 

-> All of KA9Qs features (except it's ability to drive HAM radio packet
-> modems) is built into Warp (all flavors).

 EH> I wasn't aware of that, but thinking back I guess you're
 EH> right.  KA9Q was always somewhat of a mystery to me.  I DID
 EH> run it, but I never fully trusted it. Anything that
 EH> consistently makes a QEMM exception error after running for
 EH> an hour, is suspect!

-> Do you share the TCP/IP connection among all the systems on your LAN?

 EH> Frankly, modems are too cheap to justify that, and I'm not
 EH> masochist enough to do that to myself.   But I have
 EH> considered Injoy to help IREX dial more effectively. My BBS
 EH> OS is a somwhat bastardized mix of Ver 3 with WARP imposed
 EH> upon it. (I'm not proud) When I complete the update to Warp
 EH> 4 I'll be more confident about letting IREX take command of
 EH> the mail scheduling.

 EH> And since most of the REST of my LAN consists of Dos boxes
 EH> and Uncle Billy's stuff, the TCIP connections are not really
 EH> needed.  As I build more OS/2 workstations to replace the
 EH> Dos machines, I may go that route. (If I can hold off buying 
 EH> (If I can hold off buying The Lady a Mac......)

You are misunderstanding what InJoy and TCP/IP would be doing for you.
Currently you have multiple modems and use them at different times to access
the net. But only the one system can access the net at any point in time. I
use a single modem on one system and any of the 6+ systems I have here are
connected to the net. Almost anything you can do with a local PPP connection
you can do through InJoy's IP Masquerading. You can even share the uplink with 
a Mac as long as it can speak TCP/IP over EtherNet. 

Dave Calafrancesco, Team OS/2
dave@drakkar.org

... They got the library at Alexandria, they're not getting mine! 
--- 
209/7211