Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!isishq!f171.n221.z1.FIDONET.ORG!izot
From: izot@f171.n221.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Geoffrey Welsh)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.cbm
Subject: Re: A better C128 term (was Re: DesTerm gripes)
Message-ID: <2372.24724227@isishq.FIDONET.ORG>
Date: 18 May 89 01:00:14 GMT
Sender: ufgate@isishq.FIDONET.ORG (newsout1.25)
Organization: FidoNet node 1:221/171 - Izot's Swamp, Kitchener ON
Lines: 40


 > From: jgreco@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (Joe Greco)
 > Message-ID: <2543@csd4.milw.wisc.edu>
 
GW> ... C64 PunterNet nodes are second-class systems ...
 
JG > second class nodes on a third rate network....
 
   I made the mistake of expressing similar sentiments to Roman Kowalczuk in a 
much stronger way (sometimes it's hard to impress an idea on Roman), and he 
had the insensitivity to forward the message to Steve's BBS - publicly!
 
   Not surprisingly, Steve is quite upset at my comment...
 
 > am just wondering why I was stupid enough  to spend ANY money on BBS64
 > in the first place.
 
   Because it's the best there is for that hardware.
 
 > When he started PC-PN, most of us did not expect Steve to resume  work
 > on BBS64.  I'm not the only BBS64 owner that feels a little burned
 > about it.
 
   I know this is the wrong conference to be saying this in, but C64 users in 
general are miffed at the way some people are backing off development & 
support of C64 products... when you think of it, the C64 has had one of the 
longest and most productive lives of any microcomputer, and I think that C64 
users are spoiled by it. Look at the present support for early TRS-80 
products, the Mattel Aquarius, the Coleco Adam, the CompuColour II, the 
TI-99/4A... to this day C64 owners have it better off than owners of those 
machines ever did.
 
   Geoff
 


--  
 Geoffrey Welsh - via FidoNet node 1:221/162
     UUCP: ...!watmath!isishq!171!izot
 Internet: izot@f171.n221.z1.FIDONET.ORG