Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!maverick.ksu.ksu.edu!unlinfo.unl.edu!hoss!greg
From: greg@hoss.unl.edu (Life...)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: Re: Apple ][ BBS Software
Message-ID: <1991Jun12.204412.19814@unlinfo.unl.edu>
Date: 12 Jun 91 20:44:12 GMT
References: <1991Jun11.173335.11016@clark.edu>
Sender: news@unlinfo.unl.edu
Organization: GBBS/ACOS Sysop Support
Lines: 64
Nntp-Posting-Host: hoss.unl.edu

apollo@pro-hindugods.cts.com (Amrit Chauhan) writes:
>greg@hoss.unl.edu writes:
>>gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) writes:

>>>Tell me one thing, Greg -- What sort of BBS would have such limited
>>>permanent storage?

>>Well, a non-network, non-file, message oriented system can run rather well
>>on a limited storage system of one 5.25" disk.  I know one system which
>>runs on that setup, and it is even on a C=64.  GBBS can make it on 2 5.25"
>>disks.

>The point here is, how many systems actually run on this type of
>configuration?  Yes, it would be nice to have it configurable, but for the
>vast majority, probably over 95% of all boards, a large message base, and an
>even larger file section exists...agreed?

I wouldn't agree with that figure of 95%.  That percentage isn't accurate
for this community.  However, let's not get into another Arbitron-type
argument.

In fact, GBBS definitely does not force you to use such a small storage
system.  You can configure it to use every storage device that you can
fit into ProDOS 8.  (SCSI.PART recommended for any 8-bit Apple BBS which
runs off of a hard drive.)

>How many boards out there run only
>on a 3.5 or a 5.25 inch disk ONLY?

Mine runs on 1 3.5", 1 800K RAMdisk, with 1 5.25" for some applications
not run with the board, but which I find useful to have handy.  With 9
message areas, I still have lots of free space.  I know of a C= EBBS 64
that runs off 1 5.25" disk, 5 message areas.  Another system ran on 2
5.25" drives on a Franklin.  One system ran practically the same setup I
have until he got himself a hard drive.

>GBBS may offer it for 3.5 or 5.25 inches, but it is not overwhelmingly used. 

But it is nice to have the option.  You can't deny such systems exist.

>>>I think Morgan is quite reasonable in requiring
>>>a hard disk.

>That he is.  Again, very few systems run off little disk storage.  If you
>want to run a SMALL board, then don't buy ProLine...ProLine was not meant to
>be used as a very, very, very SMALL board.  If you don't want networking
>capabilites, and a very limited message base, then go with GBBS.

You are getting insulting again.  Your repeated use of "very" implies a
system which is only capable of storing two messages, one of which is
feedback.  Also, I would not classify the message system of GBBS as "very
limited".

>ProLine:  apollo@pro-hindugods                | Amrit S. Chauhan
>Internet: apollo@pro-hindugods.cts.com        | Voice: 313/644-2971

I reread the ProLine manual.  Very little of the manual is about ProLine
itself.  Most of it is just a listing of all the shell commands available.

--
///   ____   \\\ "The major problem--one of the major problems, for there are
| |/ /    \ \| |       several--one of the many major problems with governing
 \\_|\____/|_//            people is of whom you get to do it, or more to the
greg \_\\\/ hoss.unl.edu    point, who gets people to let them do it to them."