CT>> Why is that? (at the risk of going off topic)  Is it because most
CT>> of the BBS coders (such as Scott) have concentrated on OS/2, or it
CT>> is that "TAPI thing" again? 
BJ> Simple.  There is no 100% working equivalent replacement for OS/2's 
BJ> SIO/Vmodem written for NT or 95.
So you've tested COM/IP?
Dale
--- Msged/NT 4.20 beta 2
(1:379/45@fidonet)
---------------