Hey guys,
I was wondering what your preference and experience was with command line interface and graphical user interface. My first exposure to a computer was a PC Limited computer running MS DOS. I fell in love with CLI and didn't actually use a GUI OS until Windows 98SE when my parents bought an e-machine. It was
an okay experience. Windows didn't wow me like DOS did.

I kept using Windows like most people till I attended vo-tech and discovered Linux. That rush I got from DOS was back in full force. Computers felt exciting again. I was ecstatic that I could run and do anything I wanted from the CLI that would only work in the GUI on Windows.

Over the years I switched back and forth between Windows and Linux. The new GUI in Vista felt sluggish and slow. 7 was alright and felt like XP. But Linux felt a lot faster and speedier than either of the Windows out at the time. Then I saw Windows 8...

Windows 8 was the final straw for me in terms of using a GUI. The tiles are absolutely confusing and the placement of certain things is very unintuitive. I tried to help my grandmother with her Windows 8 computer and I had absolutely no idea wtf I was doing. I couldn't even find the shut down button even after looking online. This flicking the mouse to the rightof the screen like a tablet just to shutdown the computer is ridiculous. MS went too far with the GUI in 8. I've heard people who enjoy it, but I can't wrap my head around it. I never thought I would see the day where Linux made more sense to me than Windows.

So I mostly do muds and started getting into bbs to keep my CLI skills sharp. Sometimes I will surf the web with Lynx and play old DOS games in DOSbox. It's familiar territory to me and I feel more comfortable seeing black and white text than fischer price tiles.

Which do you prefer? I'd love to hear your stories and experiences and what programs you use. Consider this a nostalgia thread if you want because I feel nostalgic everytime I open a Terminal.

---
þ Synchronet þ Decker's Heaven -//- bbs.deckersheaven.com

Which do you prefer? I'd love to hear your stories and experiences and what programs you use. Consider this a nostalgia thread if you want because I feel nostalgic everytime I open a Terminal.

Much like you I started in DOS but on a Tandy 1000 TX that my dad bought for around $2000 from Radio Shack in the 80s He had a TRS-80, but I don't
remember it and I never saw it working. I remember my very first command on that Tandy, diskcopy b: a:

Prior to learning the command I played DOS games like Reader Rabbit, Math Blaster, and the favorite Starflight. Starflight came on two 5.25" disks.
The manual stated to copy the game to another disk because if you died, the game cannot be recovered. Hence the diskcopy command above to a 3.5" floppy, twice.

Shortly thereafter I started being able to read properly and started with the Tandy manuals. I saw GW-BASIC at one time but the first time I had to turn
off the computer to get rid of it off the screen. I didn't know how to exit it! But once I started reading the Tandy manual, I came across the BASIC manual and started to figure it out.

Slowly I progressed to different stages on the Tandy, but the real turning point, 1988-90 ( was age 6-8) I went to the library and in the juvenile
section was a BASIC programming book. I got that and man I flew from there.

I got started in BBSes because of my dad started calling some. It took me a few years to understand what was going on. I remember the Myself BBS (eastern North Carolina) that lasted for a long time and was my favorite BBS because I could understand it. Pig-Pen, Barber Shop, Slip Stream, Hawaiian Hang Time, The Abyss, Weather Station and many others that I can't
remember now.

All came into play when I hosted my first BBS using Wildcat and then JetBBS became the last one I used.

Then came a Packard Bell 486 and an Acer 75mhz, both with a custom
Windows 3.1 interface. The Acer was awesome as it came with a diary that could speak back what you wrote. I used it for crank calls a few times :). The internet with SLIP/PPP connections came through this first around 1994 using Coastalnet.

My first school writing project on Ronald Reagan let me come across whitehouse.com. The rest is history there. :)

Windows 95 was something drastically different not allowing me to use the command line as much which was odd. I got use to it for a bit (and the Weezer music video) and it allowed me to Shotgun modems easier than
Windows 3.1 for the internet.

But running my old school DOS apps/games became a problem. QBASIC
worked of course, but I couldn't create a Windows app with it. Eventually my dad bought Visual C++ and BASIC 3.0 for me (and I was a jerk at the time because I wanted QuickBASIC to compile my .BAS programs). I got use to
them a bit.

I didn't realized I missed DOS so much until I tried search through directories, or had to use the ugly Windows Defrag and MS Antivirus and F-PROT gave problems. The DOS version of Defrag was easily understood and worked
well, as well as the MS Antivirus suite at the time. Drive compression was awful looking and slow compared to that of MS-DOS 6.20-22 (big fiasco there remember?).

My BATCH files weren't quite the same and finding drivers sucked using Windows but overall it was a decent experience. But then came 1998. That was a complete turning point for my life.

In 1998 my sister went to NC State University, the home of RedHat. I bought the box of RedHat 5.2(?) because I thought it was completely odd using another operating system that's not Windows or DOS. What is this?! I heard of UNIX but not LINUX. Is it the same? We shall find out!

Mount point / what? What format how? fdisk is not the same as on DOS!
What the... Confusion ensued and I gave up for a few weeks, never getting it installed, but certainly blowing away my system multiple times. Trying to recover a NON-DOS partition using FDISK was a beast at the time. I gave up until one day I pulled the manual out of the box. OOOOoohh!

It was like reading Tandy manuals all over again. I completely delved into
it, going back to Windows lots of times because I couldn't figure out SLIP on RedHat at the time. I eventually gave up on Redhat and said it wasn't ready for primetime.

Then I wandered into Walden Books one time (around year 1999-2000). I
admit this freely, and with much guilt, that I owe them money. I saw a box of SuSE Linux, the lizard! I took the CDs out of the box (along with several stickers) and promptly took them home to install them.

They worked and I was in business. I don't remember much from that time but I got great at using Linux as got hired because of it, plus other skills in Windows and stuff and some programming.

I'm super comfortable in a command line interface and cut my teeth on it. I prefer a mix of command power and gui ease and use OS X mainly now,
though I can make any OS dance if I wanted to (and I don't want to because I'm lazy).

And actually, my experience in DOS impressed people as most candidates' range of knowledge doesn't go super deep, especially outside of what is taught in schools.

Anyway, a bit off-topic at times, but that's my command-line/gui history.
There is a lot more, but meh, that's all for now. :D I'm at work.

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital 52 BBS

Re: CLI vs GUI
By: physalis17 to All on Thu Nov 13 2014 03:15 pm

Hey guys,
I was wondering what your preference and experience was with command line interface and graphical user interface.

Which do you prefer?

I use both, all day, every day. If I only had one or the other, I'd be very handicapped in my productivity. I use Windows (7 and 8) as my desktop OS, but I
always have 2-3 Windows command prompts open and 2-3 putty and/or syncterm sessions, so I really couldn't do without either interface.

digital man

Synchronet "Real Fact" #23:
1584 Synchronet BBS Software registrations were sold between 1992 and 1996. Norco, CA WX: 61.3øF, 79.0% humidity, 3 mph SE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net

physalis17 wrote to All <=-

Hey guys,
I was wondering what your preference and experience was with command
line interface and graphical user interface.

Whichever works. For a personal system, I like a GUI. If I'm pushing out a config to a farm of systems, nothing beats an /etc directory full of text files.

Most of the time, I use a GUI to open multiple CLI windows. :)

Windows 8 was the final straw for me in terms of using a GUI. The tiles are absolutely confusing and the placement of certain things is very unintuitive. I tried to help my grandmother with her Windows 8 computer and I had absolutely no idea wtf I was doing.

It'll sink in. I was lost with Windows 8 on a non-touch display, and one of
the first things I did was to download a start menu. Windows 8.1 on a
Surface 3 was like night and day. With a touch interface and a pen, it's a
lot more intuitive. With 8.1 the start menu from the desktop opens the tile screen, which ends up being a full screen start menu.


--pF




... (Organic) machinery
--- MultiMail/Win32 v0.50
þ Synchronet þ realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org

Re: CLI vs GUI
By: physalis17 to All on Thu Nov 13 2014 03:15 pm

I dont know about you but I'm the opposite. Coming from someone who is a Linux die hard (including CLI), windows 8 is da bomb. Took some getting used to but the live tiles are definately intuitive. Love having all my applications in one place. I run a Vm for Linux now.

---
þ Synchronet þ -=The Wastelands BBS=- -=wastelands-bbs.bet=-

Re: CLI vs GUI
By: physalis17 to All on Thu Nov 13 2014 15:15:09

I was wondering what your preference and experience was with command line interface and graphical user interface. My first exposure to a computer was a PC Limited computer running MS DOS. I fell in love with CLI and didn't actually use a GUI OS until Windows 98SE when my parents bought an e-machine. It was an okay experience. Windows didn't wow me like DOS did.

My dad always had a computer around, so I grew up using computers. My first experiences with computers were using a command line interface. I remember being very young (3-6 years old) using my dad's LNW kit computer, then the Apple 2 computers at school learning about computers by playing Logo, Oregon Trail, etc.. Much of my early computer experience was with PCs running DOS though. Since I was young, it was farily easy for me to get used to command lines and learn how to use them. I was still fairly young when Windows 3.0 and 3.1 came out though, and I thought GUIs were pretty cool. In 1996, I finally was able to buy a new computer that was capable of running Windows fairly well. I install MS-DOS 6.22 and Windows 3.1 on it, and I switched between the two environments, depending on what I wanted to do - DOS was still better for games back then, so I'd spend a lot of time in DOS when I was gaming, but I would go into Windows for getting on the internet and browsing the web, newsgroups, etc..

I agree with what Digital Man has said, that I think both command line and GUI are useful, and I don't think I'd want to do without either. Both have strengths & weaknesses. GUIs have the ease of use factor, but there are powerful things you can do with a command line (such as batch scripting & automation, etc.). Windows 8 might be ugly, but I don't think it's a reason to abandon GUIs altogether. There are other GUI operating systems you can use.

I once heard people joke that a GUI is simply a way to display multiple command terminals on the screen at the same time. ;)

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion BBS - digitaldistortionbbs.com

physalis17 wrote to All <=-

Hey guys,
I was wondering what your preference and experience was with command
line interface and graphical user interface.

I'm still a huge CLI user myself, in fact the only reason I use a GUI half the time is so I can open more xterm windows (can't be arsed to used screen/tmux most days).

I started out with CLI systems (Coco 2, Coco 3, MC-10, TRS-80 Model III, Tandy 1000rl), and found myself using the Workbench shell a fair bit when I upgraded to an Amiga. I still used DOS frequently when I upgraded to a Windows 95 machine. I eventually wiped Win95 in favour of Slackware (from a Walnut Creek CDRom!), and used the CLI out of necessity because I couldn't get X to work.

When I went back to Windows, I still used the CLI frequently, as I was into game console backup devices at the time, and most of the tools needed a DOS environment. Nowadays, I use Debian and Solaris, and find myself in the CLI more often than not... I write a lot but am easily distracted, so I often boot into command-line only mode and bash away in a text editor.







... MultiMail, the new multi-platform, multi-format offline reader!
--- MultiMail/Win32 v0.49
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion BBS - digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Digital Man to physalis17 on Thu Nov 13 2014 06:30 pm

I use both, all day, every day. If I only had one or the other, I'd be very handicapped in my productivity. I use Windows (7 and 8) as my
desktop OS, but I always have 2-3 Windows command prompts open and 2-3 putty and/or syncterm sessions, so I really couldn't do without either interface.

That's me as well. I got started on MS-DOS 5. I didn't have Windows until a little later. I remember installing Slackware really early on, '96 or so. I loved the command line at the time, and GUI interfaces were really primitive, and didn't substantially improve my productivity at the time. Multitasking had a way to go as well.

98 was the first OS where I found myself spending more time in the GUI than down in a command shell. X Windows had the same sort of problems compared to Windows 98 that Windows 3.1 and 95 had to DOS. Less efficient, more hoops to jump through to do the same work.

My favorite OS all around is OS X. Unfortunately, I don't have a Mac anymore so I'm stuck with Windows 8 and my headless Linux box. I like the flexibility to have multiple ssh sessions running at a given time and still be able to at a glance see my music playing, or hop over and check my email. The GUI is a far more powerful tool for simultaneous task execution than a single command window will ever be.

That said, some days I get less done than I used to, simply because I'm juggling too many things at once. That's hardly the machine's fault though, it's my workflow at fault.

Xir
Sysop, Bayou Connection

---
þ Synchronet þ Bayou Connection - SHV - gumbo and gators, sometimes at the same meal

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: vaclav to physalis17 on Fri Nov 14 2014 08:22 am

I started out with CLI systems (Coco 2, Coco 3, MC-10, TRS-80 Model III, Tan

dy

Sweet. I also started out on a Coco2, upgrading in '86 to a Coco3. Ran OS9 and subscribed to the Rainbow. :-)

---
þ Synchronet þ Emerald Hill - bbs.emeraldhill.org

Re: CLI vs GUI
By: physalis17 to All on Thu Nov 13 2014 03:15 pm

Hey guys,
I was wondering what your preference and experience was with command line interface and graphical user interface. My first exposure to a computer was PC Limited computer running MS DOS. I fell in love with CLI and didn't actua use a GUI OS until Windows 98SE when my parents bought an e-machine. It was an okay experience. Windows didn't wow me like DOS did.

When I first started playing with computers, I used Windows 3.1 and did not know any dos commands. When I was in school, I also used the Apple 2, 2g, and was introduced to the Macintosh. Most of my experience in the 90s was with GUIs. I did eventually become very proficient in DOS. In the early 2000's I started playing with Linux and was quite frusterated with the terminal because none of the commands I knew from DOS worked. Of course Linux is now the
main OS that I use and I can quite easily use the command line. I find it quite useful for some tasks. I mainly use the GUI and always have, but I do like being able to work on CLI. I have also played around with QBASIC and installed FreeDOS alongside PuppyLinux on an old Dell, which I use to test my programs.


---
þ Synchronet þ The Retro Archive - bbs.retroarchive.org

Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Mr. Cool to physalis17 on Sat Nov 15 2014 04:11 pm

like being able to work on CLI. I have also played around with QBASIC and installed FreeDOS alongside PuppyLinux on an old Dell, which I use to test m programs.

What kind of programs do you have?

---
þ Synchronet þ -=The Wastelands BBS=- -=wastelands-bbs.bet=-

Re: CLI vs GUI
By: physalis17 to All on Thu Nov 13 2014 03:15 pm

Both, either/or, depending on what my objective is. Started out with 6809E-based TRS-80 "Color Computers" ("COCO") from Radio Shack in the 1980's. By the time I had a COCO3, I was using an OS called OS-9. It was a "UNIX-like" RTOS that supported multi-users and "multi-tasking". I called many BBS's on it, ran my own BBS, and used my sister's VAX/VMS account that she had at a local university. Her account had BITNet/Internet, so it wasn't long before I was all over the place. Back in those days, you could just finger a system, talk (UNIX), Phone (VMS), a user on another system and you could get them to create you an account on their system easily. I was also a member of a BBS called the "Mars Hotel" (mars.ee.msstate.edu), where lots of "information" was traded. Don't look for this BBS as it is long defunct. This was in the late 80's, when hardly ANYBODY -- and I mean ANYBODY -- in the general popupulation knew what the hell the internet was. Gawd, I kick myself in the rear now for not capitalizing on it back then. So, I started out with CLI: RSDOS, OS-9, VMS, and UNIX.

Graduated HS and joined the Army in the early 90's. Scored excellent on the ASVAB and my recruiter said I could do anything I wanted to do. My electronics score was perfect. So, what did I decide to do? Enlist for Airborne Infantry, so I could "jump out of planes and blow shit up". Actually, more of a reason why chose that was because the Army College Fund offered more of an incentive. Did that fun stuff for four years with the 82nd Airborne, got out, and decided I would do something more technical in the military while going to school. So, I joined the Air Force (guard) and chose Satellite Communications. While at tech school for SATCOM in the mid 90's, one of my instructors was talking about this clone of UNIX called Linux. I immiedietly got started on it and downloaded all the necessary files for Slackware. Thought it was really cool running that OS that I used to connect to on my own computer. Even obtained the BBS program that Mars Hotel ran on and got it working.

Ran BBS's all my life. In the early days it was for communication with others and fun, these days it is more for just personal nostalgia. Ran a FIDO board (using Synchronet!) in the early 90's while I was in the Army. It was cool because I taught my family and friends back home how to call local boards and use FIDO to send netmail, so we conversed that way for free!

My lineage is RSDOS, OS-9, VMS, UNIX, MSDOS, Win 3.11, Win 95/98/XP, etc. These days it is almost purely OSX because I am lazy. ;-)

Switched to Macs a couple years ago and I am not going back. Hell my Macs run Windows better than PC's do!

-Misfit

---
þ Synchronet þ Emerald Hill - bbs.emeraldhill.org

Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Ronald Reid to Mr. Cool on Sun Nov 16 2014 02:35 am

What kind of programs do you have?

I have a number of unfinished projects such as a POS program I was making just just for fun, an application launcher for the command line, an unfinished, but functional game, and other bits of code for projects.


---
þ Synchronet þ The Retro Archive - bbs.retroarchive.org

Re: CLI vs GUI
By: physalis17 to All on Thu Nov 13 2014 03:15 pm

I cut my teeth on MS-DOS. Most of time was spent on online services, BBSes and DOS games. When Prodigy came out with additional features that were only compatible with Windows, that's when I started using Windows 3.1. Even when Win95 came out I was still using DOS but primarily for gaming. By the time I upgraded to Windows 2000, I no longer used DOS.

I work in network infrastructure, so most of the work I do is CLI-based. There exists JAVA interfaces for configuring the equipment but CLI is the fastest way to get the work done. Troubleshooting is best done by CLI also.

---
þ Synchronet þ Capitol Shrill BBS - Washington, DC - capitolshrill.com

Which do you prefer? I'd love to hear your stories and experiences and what programs you use. Consider this a nostalgia thread if you want because I feel nostalgic everytime I open a Terminal.

Much like you I started in DOS but on a Tandy 1000 TX that my dad bought for around $2000 from Radio Shack in the 80s He had a TRS-80, but I don't
remember it and I never saw it working. I remember my very first command on that Tandy, diskcopy b: a:

Prior to learning the command I played DOS games like Reader Rabbit, Math Blaster, and the favorite Starflight. Starflight came on two 5.25" disks.
The manual stated to copy the game to another disk because if you died, the game cannot be recovered. Hence the diskcopy command above to a 3.5" floppy, twice.

Shortly thereafter I started being able to read properly and started with the Tandy manuals. I saw GW-BASIC at one time but the first time I had to turn
off the computer to get rid of it off the screen. I didn't know how to exit it! But once I started reading the Tandy manual, I came across the BASIC manual and started to figure it out.

Slowly I progressed to different stages on the Tandy, but the real turning point, 1988-90 ( was age 6-8) I went to the library and in the juvenile
section was a BASIC programming book. I got that and man I flew from there.

I got started in BBSes because of my dad started calling some. Ittook me a
few years to understand what was going on. I remember the Myself BBS (eastern North Carolina) that lasted for a longtime and was my favorite BBS because I could understand it. Pig-Pen, Barber Shop, Slip Stream, Hawaiian Hang Time, The Abyss, Weather Station and many others that I can't
remember now.

All came into play when I hosted my first BBS using Wildcat and then JetBBS became the last one I used.

Then came a Packard Bell 486 and an Acer 75mhz, both with a custom
Windows 3.1 interface.The Acer was awesome as it came with a diary that could speak back what you wrote. I used it for crank calls a few times :). The internet with SLIP/PPP connections came through this first around 1994 using Coastalnet.

My first school writing project onRonald Reagan let me come across whitehouse.com. The rest is history there. :)

Windows 95 was something drastically differentnot allowing me to use the command line as much which was odd. I got use to it for a bit (and the Weezer music video) and it allowed me to Shotgun modems easier than
Windows 3.1 for the internet.

But running my old school DOS apps/games became a problem. QBASIC
worked of course, but I couldn't create a Windows app with it. Eventually my dad bought Visual C++ and BASIC 3.0 for me (and I was a jerk at the time because I wanted QuickBASIC to compile my .BAS programs). I got use to
them a bit.

I didn't realized I missed DOS so much until I tried search through directories, or had to use the ugly Windows Defrag and MS Antivirus and F-PROT gave problems. The DOS version of Defrag was easily understood and worked
well, as well as the MS Antivirus suiteat the time. Drive compression was awful looking and slow compared to that of MS-DOS 6.20-22 (big fiasco there remember?).

MyBATCH files weren't quite the same and finding drivers sucked using Windows but overall it was a decent experience. But then came 1998. That was a complete turning point for my life.

In 1998 my sister went to NC State University, the home of RedHat. Ibought
the box of RedHat 5.2(?) because I thought it was completely odd using another operating system that's not Windows or DOS. What is this?! I heard of UNIX but not LINUX. Is it the same? We shall find out!

Mount point / what? What format how? fdisk is not the same as on DOS!
What the... Confusion ensued and I gave up for a few weeks, never getting it installed, but certainly blowing away my system multiple times. Trying to recover a NON-DOS partition using FDISK was a beast at the time. I gave up until one day I pulled the manual out of the box. OOOOoohh!

It was like reading Tandy manuals all over again. I completely delved into
it, going back to Windows lots of times because I couldn't figure out SLIP on RedHat at the time. I eventually gave up on Redhat and said it wasn't ready for primetime.

Then I wandered into Walden Books one time (around year 1999-2000). I
admit this freely, and with much guilt, that I owe them money. I saw a box of SuSE Linux, the lizard! I took the CDs out of the box (along with several stickers) and promptly took them home to install them.

They worked and I was in business. I don't remember much from that time but I got great at using Linux as got hired because of it, plus other skills in Windows and stuff and some programming.

I'm super comfortable in a command line interface and cut my teeth on it. I prefer a mix of command power and gui ease and use OS X mainly now,
though I can make any OS dance if I wanted to (and I don't want to because I'm lazy).

And actually, my experience in DOS impressed people as most candidates' range of knowledge doesn't go super deep, especially outside of what is taught in schools.

Anyway, a bit off-topic at times, but that's my command-line/gui history.
There is a lot more, but m

Wow... starflight... haven't though of that in a long time...

That was one of the best games there ever was for dos.

Sure the graphics were nothing to write home about, but the game play was great. -Denny

Denny's Computers - Not for profit computer repair - dpccom.blogspot.com

---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net

I was wondering what your preference and experience was with command line interface and graphical user interface. My first exposure to a computer
was a PC Limited computer running MS DOS. I fell in love with CLI and
didn't actually use a GUI OS until Windows 98SE when my parents bought an e-machine. It was an okay experience. Windows didn't wow me like DOS did.

I was command line for many years before GUI was even an acronym. Started on a
Commodore VIC-20, then Apple //c, then 286-PC. It wasn't until the 386 that I even used a GUI.

Back then, it was Windows 3.1 at work, but I used VM386 at home, until OS/2 was
available and switched to that. NT 4.0 server was solid, but OS/2 was a far better DOS multitasker which ran my BBS much better.

Most people agree, Windows XP and Windows 7 are both nice interfaces and work. Windows 8 just plain sucks. I understand what they were trying to do, but it was a total failure and should have never been released. I'm technical and that interface is just a confusing mess. My desktop will never be a tablet, not do I want it to be.

I still run Windows 7 here, and have a few VMs running Server 2008R2, OS/2 ECS,
XP, and Ubuntu.

Even with regards to non-PC based systems, I use a combination of GUI and command line to get things done. It just depends on what is easier and makes the most sense.

For instance, when setting up a LAN-LAN VPN on a Cisco ASA, I use the GUI and command line at the same time to complete the setup. Some parts are easier using their perspective interfaces.

- Mark

--- WWIVToss v.1.50
* Origin: http://www.weather-station.org * Bel Air, MD -USA (33:1/3.0)
þ Synchronet þ curmudge.hopto.org

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Mark Hofmann to Physalis17 on Tue Nov 25 2014 02:13 pm

Back then, it was Windows 3.1 at work, but I used VM386 at home, until OS/2 was available and switched to that.

I loved OS/2 - for running DOS and OS/2 apps nothing could compare. I used a DOS window for most of my terminal app work, an OS/2 window to run BlueWave and OS/2 apps, a DOS VDM that included MS-DOS and Lantastic drivers to connect my OS/2 box to the BBS box running DOS, and could run OS/2 GUI apps on top of that.

This was on a 486DX50 with 12 megs of RAM.

It wasn't until Windows95 came out that I ended up ditching OS/2. Getting TCP/IP running on OS/2 was a pain, and at that point hardware became powerful enough to overcome the difficulties with multitasking DOS apps in Windows.

Most people agree, Windows XP and Windows 7 are both nice interfaces and work. Windows 8 just plain sucks.

Stick with it. 8.1 feels faster than 7, and the re-added "start menu" turns the tile page into a full-screen start menu. I hated Windows 8.0, but 8.1 just feels different.

---
þ Synchronet þ realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Mark Hofmann to Physalis17 on Tue Nov 25 2014 14:13:00

work. Windows 8 just plain sucks. I understand what they were trying to do, but it was a total failure and should have never been released. I'm technical and that interface is just a confusing mess. My desktop will never be a tablet, not do I want it to be.

Windows 8.1 can boot directly into desktop mode, so all is not lost. Also, with an add-on like the free Classic Shell, you can have a classic Start menu again:
http://classicshell.net/
So it's not all that bad. I still use Windows 7 on my home PC for now though. I don't think Windows 8.1 is compelling enough to make me want to upgrade right now.

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion BBS - digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Poindexter Fortran to Mark Hofmann on Tue Nov 25 2014 13:43:31

I loved OS/2 - for running DOS and OS/2 apps nothing could compare. I used a DOS window for most of my terminal app work, an OS/2 window to run BlueWave and OS/2 apps, a DOS VDM that included MS-DOS and Lantastic drivers to connect my OS/2 box to the BBS box running DOS, and could run OS/2 GUI apps on top of that.

This was on a 486DX50 with 12 megs of RAM.

It wasn't until Windows95 came out that I ended up ditching OS/2. Getting TCP/IP running on OS/2 was a pain, and at that point hardware became

I thought OS/2 was great back in the day. You're right about TCP/IP on OS/2 though. A couple years ago, I installed OS/2 in a VM, and I forgot that you had to restart the PC in OS/2 just to change the IP address.

Stick with it. 8.1 feels faster than 7, and the re-added "start menu" turns the tile page into a full-screen start menu. I hated Windows 8.0, but 8.1 just feels different.

Recently I found the free Classic Shell, which gives you a more classic Start menu for Windows 8.1:
http://classicshell.net/

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion BBS - digitaldistortionbbs.com

I got started in BBSes because of my dad started calling some. Ittook me a few years to understand what was going on. I remember the Myself BBS (eastern North Carolina) that lasted for a longtime and was my favorite
BBS because I could understand it. Pig-Pen, Barber Shop, Slip Stream, Hawaiian Hang Time, The Abyss, Weather Station and many others that I
can't remember now.

Would that happen to have been Weather Station in Maryland? If so, that was/is
me.

- Mark

--- WWIVToss v.1.50
* Origin: http://www.weather-station.org * Bel Air, MD -USA (33:1/3.0)
þ Synchronet þ curmudge.hopto.org

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Nightfox to Mark Hofmann on Tue Nov 25 2014 04:35 pm

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Mark Hofmann to Physalis17 on Tue Nov 25 2014 14:13:00

work. Windows 8 just plain sucks. I understand what they were trying
to do, but it was a total failure and should have never been released. I'm technical and that interface is just a confusing mess. My desktop will never be a tablet, not do I want it to be.

Windows 8.1 can boot directly into desktop mode, so all is not lost. Also, with an add-on like the free Classic Shell, you can have a classic Start menu again:
http://classicshell.net/

+1 for Classic Shell (actually Classic Start Menu, I don't use the Classic Explorer or Classic IE options).

So it's not all that bad. I still use Windows 7 on my home PC for now though. I don't think Windows 8.1 is compelling enough to make me want to upgrade right now.

I've upgraded most of my PCs to Windows 8.1 with Classic Start Menu now.

digital man

Synchronet "Real Fact" #78:
172 Synchronet Match Maker registrations were sold (@$69) between 1995 and 1996.
Norco, CA WX: 71.0øF, 17.0% humidity, 4 mph WNW wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Digital Man to Nightfox on Wed Nov 26 2014 11:26 pm

I've upgraded most of my PCs to Windows 8.1 with Classic Start Menu now.

I'm going to upgrade my VM host/desktop to 8.1 over the next few weeks. I'm going to use one of the start menu add-ons, as the tile menu seems great for touch screns (I like it a lot on a Surface) but for a desktop non-touch monitor it seems less efficient than a start menu.

I do like going to the start menu and typing the first few letters into the search bar instead of looking for an icon -- that may be the way of the future for me. I prefer keeping my hands on the keys as much as possible.


---
þ Synchronet þ realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Poindexter Fortran to Digital Man on Thu Nov 27 2014 08:05 am

I'm going to upgrade my VM host/desktop to 8.1 over the next few weeks. I'm going to use one of the start menu add-ons, as the tile menu seems great
for touch screns (I like it a lot on a Surface) but for a desktop non-touch monitor it seems less efficient than a start menu.

I do like going to the start menu and typing the first few letters into the

Like always, i'm only going to upgrade when i have a need to upgrade.
I'm still using win7 enterprise, and i havent hit a wall with it and it doesn't annoy me.

i'm not the type of person to upgrade 'just because' , but i do check out whats new just the same. i just don't keep it.
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Mro wrote to Poindexter Fortran <=-

Like always, i'm only going to upgrade when i have a need to upgrade.
I'm still using win7 enterprise, and i havent hit a wall with it and it doesn't annoy me.

Win7's got a lot of life left in it; the only thing compelling me to move
to 8.1 is that we're starting to run it at work and it's nice to keep my
OSes consistent. Although, I'm doing most of my work on the BBS in an XP VM these days.

8.1 on a non-touch screen is a little unnecessary -- once touch desktop monitors become popular it might make more sense.



... Mute and continue
--- MultiMail/Win32 v0.50
þ Synchronet þ realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Poindexter Fortran to Mro on Thu Nov 27 2014 14:00:00

8.1 on a non-touch screen is a little unnecessary -- once touch desktop monitors become popular it might make more sense.

Touch screens have been around for a long time. I doubt we'll suddenly see a rise in their popularity now. I suspect one reason they haven't been popular is that most people don't want to get finger smudges all over their screen and have to clean them all the time. Also, the way computer desks are, many times the monitor is just far enough away (maybe 2-3 feet) to make touch a bit awkward to use. Personally, I think it would be a bit uncomfortable to have my arms outstretched like that for a significant length of time. I think a touch interface is a lot more convenient on a portable device with a smaller screen such as a phone or tablet.

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion BBS - digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Nightfox to Poindexter Fortran on Fri Nov 28 2014 07:38 am

Touch screens have been around for a long time. I doubt we'll suddenly see a rise in their popularity now. I suspect one reason they haven't been popular is that most people don't want to get finger smudges all over their screen and have to clean them all the time. Also, the way computer desks

i hate using my touchscreen on my phone.
i eat at my computer a lot, so why do i want to have a fucked up display with greasy finger prints? i like my display nice and clear.
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Mro to Nightfox on Fri Nov 28 2014 10:07 pm

Yeah, I can't use a cell phone without a keyboard. I have an old sidekick that has a full qwerty keyboard and I love it. I tried Windows 8.1 and it's just clumsy and a pain when using a mouse and keyboard I saw Windows 10 and I still think it looks stupid having the Metro crap inside the start menu. Why can't we just have simple text for programs like Windows used to have? I loved Windows 7. Not everying needs a damn graphic! It's overkill.

---
þ Synchronet þ Decker's Heaven -//- bbs.deckersheaven.com

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: physalis17 to Mro on Mon Dec 01 2014 03:13 pm

Yeah, I can't use a cell phone without a keyboard. I have an old sidekick that has a full qwerty keyboard and I love it.

Do those still work? I remember when they first came out how they were at the forefront of moblogging. Later, I thought I'd heard the servers that ran them on the back end were being taken down.

---
þ Synchronet þ realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Poindexter Fortran to physalis17 on Mon Dec 01 2014 03:08 pm

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: physalis17 to Mro on Mon Dec 01 2014 03:13 pm

Yeah, I can't use a cell phone without a keyboard. I have an old sidekick that has a full qwerty keyboard and I love it.

Do those still work? I remember when they first came out how they were at the forefront of moblogging. Later, I thought I'd heard the servers that
ran them on the back end were being taken down.

they took them down in 2011 i think.

you can use them for talk and txt. no internet or picture msging
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: physalis17 to Mro on Mon Dec 01 2014 03:13 pm

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Mro to Nightfox on Fri Nov 28 2014 10:07 pm

Yeah, I can't use a cell phone without a keyboard. I have an old sidekick th has a full qwerty keyboard and I love it. I tried Windows 8.1 and it's just clumsy and a pain when using a mouse and keyboard I saw Windows 10 and I sti think it looks stupid having the Metro crap inside the start menu. Why can't just have simple text for programs like Windows used to have? I loved Window 7. Not everying needs a damn graphic! It's overkill.

Yeah I'm with you but the majority of computer users seem to not know how to read. I just basing that on everything moving away from text to graphics.
That said, I have adapted to windows 8.1 and i find it working well for me. The search feature in the charms makes it intuitive. Also I've added all my 3rd party apps (things as old as hyper terminal) to the start menu. Almost like modifying the system path.
I've tried to find a good console emulator (i really was into terminator in linux), but they all seem to have bugs. Oh well. All in all its working ok. I guess the touch screen is what sealed the deal for me. Just wish i didnt have to run Malwarebytes all the damn time.....

---
þ Synchronet þ -=The Wastelands BBS=- -=wastelands-bbs.net=-

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Mro to Poindexter Fortran on Mon Dec 01 2014 08:14 pm

sidekick that has a full qwerty keyboard and I love it.

they took them down in 2011 i think.
you can use them for talk and txt. no internet or picture msging

Friend of mine used to swear by his Sidekick, but then iPhone came along. I actually have a bluetooth keyboard on my ipad as a cover/stand, though the lack of tactile feedback makes it hard to touchtype.

I bought a $125 mechanical keyboard a few months ago, damn those keyboards are SOOOO nice.

---
þ Synchronet þ Shodan's Core - shodan.synchro.net:23 & :2323

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Android8675 to Mro on Tue Dec 02 2014 09:05 am

I bought a $125 mechanical keyboard a few months ago, damn those keyboards are SOOOO nice.

And they last for a long time. I bought my model M to go on a 386 PS/2 and it's still going strong.

---
þ Synchronet þ realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org

I loved OS/2 - for running DOS and OS/2 apps nothing could compare. I
used a DOS window for most of my terminal app work, an OS/2 window to run BlueWave and OS/2 apps, a DOS VDM that included MS-DOS and Lantastic drivers to connect my OS/2 box to the BBS box running DOS, and could run OS/2 GUI apps on top of that.

This was on a 486DX50 with 12 megs of RAM.

I have always enjoyed any true multitasking OS. Previous to OS/2, I was running VM386 on a 386/25 system. It allowed me to run several DOS applications at the same time.

Back in those days I only had one PC, so multitasking was very important.

It wasn't until Windows95 came out that I ended up ditching OS/2. Getting TCP/IP running on OS/2 was a pain, and at that point hardware became powerful enough to overcome the difficulties with multitasking DOS apps
in Windows.

I'm a huge VMware fan. Allows me to run any and Operating Systems. Still running the BBS under OS/2 in VMware.

Stick with it. 8.1 feels faster than 7, and the re-added "start menu"
turns the tile page into a full-screen start menu. I hated Windows 8.0,
but 8.1 just feels different.

I see no point in going to Windows 8. In my opinion, it doesn't make anything better - instead makes things more difficult.

I have a test VM with it loaded just for the heck of it, but I don't use it for
anything other than tinkering at times.

- Mark

--- WWIVToss v.1.50
* Origin: http://www.weather-station.org * Bel Air, MD -USA (33:1/3.0)
þ Synchronet þ curmudge.hopto.org

Windows 8.1 can boot directly into desktop mode, so all is not lost. Also, with an add-on like the free Classic Shell, you can have a classic Start menu again:
http://classicshell.net/
So it's not all that bad. I still use Windows 7 on my home PC for now though.
I don't think Windows 8.1 is compelling enough to make me want to upgrade right now.

Yes, I am using 8.1 in my test VM. I also have the Classic Shell loaded on it.
At least it is usable at that point, but I still see no benefit to upgrading. - Mark

--- WWIVToss v.1.50
* Origin: http://www.weather-station.org * Bel Air, MD -USA (33:1/3.0)
þ Synchronet þ curmudge.hopto.org

I thought OS/2 was great back in the day. You're right about TCP/IP on
OS/2 though. A couple years ago, I installed OS/2 in a VM, and I forgot
that you had to restart the PC in OS/2 just to change the IP address.

OS/2 networking has always been one of it's biggest faults. At worked, but it was not easy to setup and is still not compatible with Active Directory or any new domain structure without adding 3rd party tools.

Even today, I run eCS with Samba. Without Samba, the networking capabilities are limited.

That is still the weak spot..

- Mark

--- WWIVToss v.1.50
* Origin: http://www.weather-station.org * Bel Air, MD -USA (33:1/3.0)
þ Synchronet þ curmudge.hopto.org

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Ronald Reid to physalis17 on Tue Dec 02 2014 07:33 am

linux), but they all seem to have bugs. Oh well. All in all its working ok. I guess the touch screen is what sealed the deal for me. Just wish i didnt have to run Malwarebytes all the damn time.....

what the hell are you doing that you need to run malware bytes all the time. ---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Mark Hofmann to Poindexter Fortran on Tue Dec 02 2014 11:21 am

I have always enjoyed any true multitasking OS. Previous to OS/2, I was running VM386 on a 386/25 system. It allowed me to run several DOS applications at the same time.

Back in those days I only had one PC, so multitasking was very important.

I remember those days well. My first experience with multitasking was co-sysoping Just Say Yes, a local BBS in the area. Dr. Strangelove had a huge (at the time) 386/20 system with 4 megs of RAM. He had 3 Searchlight nodes running on that system under Desqview, and it mostly worked -- until he tried compiling in the foreground.

I got started running a BBS on cast-off hardware from work, so I had hardware to spare -- it just wasn't very glamorous. The first iteration of realitycheckBBS ran on an industrial point-of-sale version of an IBM PC AT called a Store Controller. My employer had phased them out and my boss asked me to toss them out. I did, obediently. My car happened to be outside the dock at the time. :)

---
þ Synchronet þ realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Mark Hofmann to Nightfox on Tue Dec 02 2014 11:26 am

OS/2 networking has always been one of it's biggest faults. At worked, but it was not easy to setup and is still not compatible with Active Directory or any new domain structure without adding 3rd party tools.

I tried to get Netware, Lan Manager and TCP/IP running under OS/2 Warp (I think version 3) in 1994. I could never get Windows and OS/2 apps to talk to the network card, so I cheated, put in a second network card, bound NDIS windows drivers to one and let OS/2 have the other card.

---
þ Synchronet þ realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Mark Hofmann to Nightfox on Tue Dec 02 2014 11:26:21

OS/2 networking has always been one of it's biggest faults. At worked, but it was not easy to setup and is still not compatible with Active Directory or any new domain structure without adding 3rd party tools.

Even today, I run eCS with Samba. Without Samba, the networking capabilities are limited.

That is still the weak spot..

I remember when OS/2 Warp Connect came out. I thought networking was supposed to be one of its strong points..

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion BBS - digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Poindexter Fortran to Mark Hofmann on Tue Dec 02 2014 08:11 pm

I have always enjoyed any true multitasking OS. Previous to OS/2, I
was running VM386 on a 386/25 system. It allowed me to run several
DOS applications at the same time.

I remember those days well. My first experience with multitasking was co-sysoping Just Say Yes, a local BBS in the area. Dr. Strangelove had a huge (at the time) 386/20 system with 4 megs of RAM. He had 3 Searchlight nodes running on that system under Desqview, and it mostly worked -- until he tried compiling in the foreground.

I used to love running my board on DesqView, such a useful way to work back in those days of DOS limitation, being able to start, stop, and process mail on your BBS at the same time was pretty freaking cool.

I mean when it wasn't crashing, etc. I had my system down though, I had 2 remote access nodes, and I could locally connect as Node 3 (I made it so anyone who came up to my system was greeted with a welcome ansi and "Press enter to login to BBS", was great. Crashes resulted in automatic restarts, whole system could recycle on it's own in about 15 seconds.

I've been trying to get DesqView/X to run virtually, pretty much impossible, crash city. Normal DesqView will run, but crashes are still there.

---
þ Synchronet þ Shodan's Core - shodan.synchro.net:23 & :2323

I used to love running my board on DesqView, such a useful way to work

back

in those days of DOS limitation, being able to start, stop, and process
mail on your BBS at the same time was pretty freaking cool.

Back in the 90s, I started running my BBS in DesqView after a while, and I agree, it was great to be able to log in and read mail, etc. while a user was on my BBS. I also used RemoteAccess, and it ran fairly well in DesqView.

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion BBS - digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Nightfox to Android8675 on Wed Dec 03 2014 12:53 pm

Back in the 90s, I started running my BBS in DesqView after a while, and I agree, it was great to be able to log in and read mail, etc. while a user was on my BBS. I also used RemoteAccess, and it ran fairly well in DesqView.

i used dr-dos for multitasking for a bit.
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Mro to Nightfox on Wed Dec 03 2014 18:19:06

i used dr-dos for multitasking for a bit.

I always think it's funny when people call it "Doctor DOS". I believe the DR stood for Digital Research.

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion BBS - digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Nightfox to Mro on Wed Dec 03 2014 08:04 pm

Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Mro to Nightfox on Wed Dec 03 2014 18:19:06

i used dr-dos for multitasking for a bit.

I always think it's funny when people call it "Doctor DOS". I believe the DR stood for Digital Research.

yeah, i did that too though even though i knew what it stood for. maybe it was somewhat intentional since the guy who started it all was lighthearted.
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Mro to Nightfox on Wed Dec 03 2014 11:25 pm

yeah, i did that too though even though i knew what it stood for. maybe it was somewhat intentional since the guy who started it all was lighthearted.

DR-DOS was a nice value-add from plain ol' MS-DOS, liked the disk compression better than Microsoft's, and their memory manager was nice.

Too bad Microsoft made sure Windows wouldn't run on it.

---
þ Synchronet þ realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org

DR-DOS was a nice value-add from plain ol' MS-DOS, liked the disk compression better than Microsoft's, and their memory manager was nice.

I never used DR-DOS that much.. How do you think its memory manager compared to something like QEMM? And its disk compression as compared to something
like Stacker?

Too bad Microsoft made sure Windows wouldn't run on it.

I had heard about that.. Tactics like that were one thing that started to
make me think about moving away from Microsoft back in the day (although today I'm still running Windows, due largely to games & other software I
run that's only available for Windows).

It seems Microsoft is getting better about its tactics these days though.
I've heard each successive version of Internet Explorer after 6.0 has been better about working with standards, and recently I've heard that Microsoft
has open-sourced their .NET development platform too. I went to a
presentation about that a couple days ago, and although the presenter was someone who works for Microsoft (and thus is probably biased), it sounded like Microsoft wants to make .NET more open and transparent now. The presenter
also made the comment that Microsoft "has stopped fighting the web; the web
has won."

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion BBS - digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Nightfox to Poindexter Fortran on Thu Dec 04 2014 12:37 pm

I never used DR-DOS that much.. How do you think its memory manager compared to something like QEMM? And its disk compression as compared to something like Stacker?

QEMM used to use upper memory better, but it wouldn't always work. DR-DOS didn't stuff as much up in the HMA but it seemed to work.

My co-sysop worked at Addstor, If I recall they bundled a cut-down version of their Speedstor product with DR-DOS. It came with container utilities including a defragmenter that Stacker and MS-DOS's version didn't have.

I was running the alternative desktop back then -- DR-DOS, GEOWorks and Quattro Pro running on top. Amazing what I could get done on a 386DX40 with 3 megs of RAM. :)

---
þ Synchronet þ realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org

OS/2 networking has always been one of it's biggest faults. At

worked, but MH> it was not easy to setup and is still not compatible
with Active Directory MH> or any new domain structure without adding
3rd party tools.

I tried to get Netware, Lan Manager and TCP/IP running under OS/2
Warp (I think version 3) in 1994. I could never get Windows and OS/2
apps to talk to the network card, so I cheated, put in a second
network card, bound NDIS windows drivers to one and let OS/2 have
the other card.

Ok, looks like I am coming in late in the conversation here :) What
edition of OS/2 Warp did you have? Blue or red spine? Warp 3 Connect
was the blue spine box and it already installed the TCP/IP stack when
you installed the OS IIRC, whereas you had to install it after you
install OS/2 Warp 3 Red Spine edition.
---
þ wcGATE 4.2 ÷ Omicron Theta BBS/2 * Memphis, TN * os2.winserver.us
þ wcQWK 7.0 ÷ Omicron Theta BBS * Memphis, TN * winserver.us

Even today, I run eCS with Samba. Without Samba, the networking capabilities are limited.

That is still the weak spot..

I remember when OS/2 Warp Connect came out. I thought networking
was supposed to be one of its strong points..

I run eCS 2.2 beta 2 here with Wildcat! 4.2MP. Granted it seems that
the keystroked lag a little on a telnet session, but that is probably
because I am running it in a Virtual PC 2007sp1 based VM.
---
þ wcGATE 4.2 ÷ Omicron Theta BBS/2 * Memphis, TN * os2.winserver.us
þ wcQWK 7.0 ÷ Omicron Theta BBS * Memphis, TN * winserver.us

Back in the 90s, I started running my BBS in DesqView after a while,
and I agree, it was great to be able to log in and read mail, etc.
while a user was on my BBS. I also used RemoteAccess, and it ran
fairly well in DesqView.

Yeah, I ran mine under DV/386 for a while before switching to WFWG 3.11
to handle the multitasking stuff.
---
þ wcGATE 4.2 ÷ Omicron Theta BBS/2 * Memphis, TN * os2.winserver.us
þ wcQWK 7.0 ÷ Omicron Theta BBS * Memphis, TN * winserver.us

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: ROBERT WOLFE to POINDEXTER FORTRAN on Sat Dec 06 2014 05:40 am

Ok, looks like I am coming in late in the conversation here :) What edition of OS/2 Warp did you have? Blue or red spine? Warp 3 Connect
was the blue spine box and it already installed the TCP/IP stack when
you installed the OS IIRC, whereas you had to install it after you
install OS/2 Warp 3 Red Spine edition.

I think it was the red spine edition -- memory fades, this was 1994. :)

---
þ Synchronet þ realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Poindexter Fortran to Mark Hofmann on Tue Dec 02 2014 08:12 pm

We used to run Netware 6.5 at the public school I worked at. It was my first exposure to Netware and I thought it was very fascinating. The commands were similar to Linux I noticed and so it was easy to administer. I really liked Zenworks for ghosting. I found it easier to use than Symantec's Ghost. Nothing like putting an entire OS on 30 different machines over a network.

/send

---
þ Synchronet þ Decker's Heaven -//- bbs.deckersheaven.com

I got started running a BBS on cast-off hardware from work, so I had hardware to spare -- it just wasn't very glamorous. The first iteration
of realitycheckBBS ran on an industrial point-of-sale version of an IBM
PC AT called a Store Controller. My employer had phased them out and my boss asked me to toss them out. I did, obediently. My car happened to be outside the dock at the time. :)

One of the perks of working in the technology field. :) I have used many old servers throughout the years that were "work throw-aways".

When I started my BBS, I was 13 years old so wasn't in the field yet and didn't
have extra thousands to buy an extra computer. Computers are no where near as expensive today as they were back then. I paid for more a single hard drive back then vs. what you can buy an entire PC system for these days. Heck, I paid more for 4 MEGS of RAM back then vs. entire PC systems cost now.

- Mark

--- WWIVToss v.1.50
* Origin: http://www.weather-station.org * Bel Air, MD -USA (33:1/3.0)
þ Synchronet þ curmudge.hopto.org

I tried to get Netware, Lan Manager and TCP/IP running under OS/2 Warp (I think version 3) in 1994. I could never get Windows and OS/2 apps to talk to the network card, so I cheated, put in a second network card, bound
NDIS windows drivers to one and let OS/2 have the other card.

I remember having to buy certain hardware that would work with OS/2. Fortunately, that is no longer an issue in the VMware world. It works fine as a VM no matter what hardware is being used thanks to the virtual environment.

The networking support is still lacking - even today. I wouldn't be able to do
what I'm doing with it today without Samba for OS/2. That was no picnic getting to work, either.

- Mark

--- WWIVToss v.1.50
* Origin: http://www.weather-station.org * Bel Air, MD -USA (33:1/3.0)
þ Synchronet þ curmudge.hopto.org

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Mark Hofmann to Poindexter Fortran on Thu Dec 18 2014 08:09 am

didn't have extra thousands to buy an extra computer. Computers are no where near as expensive today as they were back then. I paid for more a single hard drive back then vs. what you can buy an entire PC system for these days. Heck, I paid more for 4 MEGS of RAM back then vs. entire PC systems cost now.

Yeah, I remember spending $90 on a 286 motherboard for my XT clone and $230 on a 30 MB drive.

---
þ Synchronet þ realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Mark Hofmann to Poindexter Fortran on Thu Dec 18 2014 08:13 am

I remember having to buy certain hardware that would work with OS/2. Fortunately, that is no longer an issue in the VMware world.

I remember the reputation OS/2 had for being finicky with hardware. I worked in an all IBM shop as my first "real" job. AS/400 and S/38 midrange computers, IBM PS/2s and OS/2. Back then, you could run Word and Excel (Native OS/2 versions!), 3270 terminal emulation software and LAN Manager all at the same time.

Since we were such a big IBM shop, we were able to get advanced copies of OS/2 2.0. Only problem was, they wouldn't install on our IBM PS/2s!

We had the model 80s with 2 MB on the motherboard and 8 MB on a daughtercard. OS/2 only saw the motherboard memory, so we had to do some tricks to get OS/2 to recognize it. Took a while to figure that one out.

---
þ Synchronet þ realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org

I remember when OS/2 Warp Connect came out. I thought networking was supposed to be one of its strong points..

Yeah, me too. Back then, IBM was still pushing Token-Ring, 3270 and 5250 Emulation, and considered those "networking". Ethernet (TCP/IP) and Windows Domain / Active Directory support was poor.

- Mark

--- WWIVToss v.1.50
* Origin: http://www.weather-station.org * Bel Air, MD -USA (33:1/3.0)
þ Synchronet þ curmudge.hopto.org

I remember the reputation OS/2 had for being finicky with hardware. I worked in an all IBM shop as my first "real" job. AS/400 and S/38
midrange computers, IBM PS/2s and OS/2. Back then, you could run Word and Excel (Native OS/2 versions!), 3270 terminal emulation software and LAN Manager all at the same time.

Since we were such a big IBM shop, we were able to get advanced copies of OS/2 2.0. Only problem was, they wouldn't install on our IBM PS/2s!

The first two shops I worked in were also practically 100% IBM. Had everything
from 3090 mainframes down to IBM PS/2 systems with the old micro-channel token ring cards. I remember those cards costing over $500 each.

Hardware/driver issues for OS/2 has always been an issue, but is no longer relevant if you run it in a VM. That is what gave me the ability to finally throw away my very old BBS system and run the same environment on modern hardware. My system technically runs on 2x Xeon 6-core processors with 72GB of
RAM. Only have a vCPU allocated to it and 512MB of ram.

- Mark

--- WWIVToss v.1.50
* Origin: http://www.weather-station.org * Bel Air, MD -USA (33:1/3.0)
þ Synchronet þ curmudge.hopto.org

Ever work on the old ibm pc jr's? Man did those things suck...

-Denny

Denny's Computers - Not for profit computer repair - dpccom.blogspot.com

---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net

Ever work on the old ibm pc jr's? Man did those things suck...

Nope. I didn't enter the PC side of things until the 286 came out. All my other systems were Apple // systems or Commodore.

- Mark

--- WWIVToss v.1.50
* Origin: http://www.weather-station.org * Bel Air, MD -USA (33:1/3.0)
þ Synchronet þ curmudge.hopto.org

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Mark Hofmann to Hylian on Sun Dec 28 2014 09:07 pm

Ever work on the old ibm pc jr's? Man did those things suck...

Nope. I didn't enter the PC side of things until the 286 came out. All my other systems were Apple // systems or Commodore.

One of my long-time callers used a PC Jr. He stood by it steadfastly, and while the system was a failure in the long run, it got him hooked on IBM hardware. He ended up running an IBM Power system running AI/X for years afterward.

One thing IBM did well back then was hardware. I was working on IBM PS/2 model 80s (the deskside tower jobs) with Microchannel busses, ESDI drives, and the whole system came apart with a coin. Cables were all routed and held securely, and fans had ducting to direct the air. IBM Clicky model M keyboards. At home, I had a crappy clone, cables running every which way inside (usually working their way loose) with little screws and cases that were a bugger to get straight and screwed on.

I wish I could have afforded a PS/2 back then.

---
þ Synchronet þ realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Poindexter Fortran to Mark Hofmann on Thu Dec 18 2014 09:30 am

didn't have extra thousands to buy an extra computer. Computers are no where near as expensive today as they were back then. I paid for more
a single hard drive back then vs. what you can buy an entire PC system for these days. Heck, I paid more for 4 MEGS of RAM back then vs. entire PC systems cost now.

Yeah, I remember spending $90 on a 286 motherboard for my XT clone and $230 on a 30 MB drive.

Exactly! I remember that too.

Knight

---
þ Synchronet þ The Phunc BBS -- Back from the dead! -- telnet to bbs.phunc.com

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Knight to Poindexter Fortran on Wed Mar 04 2015 06:27 pm

Yeah, I remember spending $90 on a 286 motherboard for my XT clone and $230 on a 30 MB drive.

Exactly! I remember that too.

if that was around that time period, that's dirt cheap
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Mro to Knight on Wed Mar 04 2015 09:09 pm

Yeah, I remember spending $90 on a 286 motherboard for my XT clone
and $230 on a 30 MB drive.

if that was around that time period, that's dirt cheap

That was 1988 for me -- I was in college studying computer science, bought the motherboard at a computer swap meet and the hard drive at a local computer shop. Those exact prices - I think I still have the receipts!

---
þ Synchronet þ realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org

if that was around that time period, that's dirt chea

I remember spending $300 on a 300 baud internal Apple 2 modem...



---
* TARDIS BBS - Home of QUARKware * telnet bbs.cortex-media.info

Re: Re: CLI vs GUI
By: the doctor to MRO on Thu Mar 05 2015 11:57 pm

if that was around that time period, that's dirt chea

I remember spending $300 on a 300 baud internal Apple 2 modem...

(lightly off topic, but)

Was just reminiscing how when 1200 baud modems became available as a port addon for my C-64 BBS, I drove a hundred miles to the nearest KMart, full of excitment, to buy one. I couldn't wait to get home. :-) 3 TIMES the S=P-E-E-D

Mickey
SynchroNET 3.15
Oxford Mills Remote @ telnet://manningfire.dyndns.org:23
Living the Past - Living the Dream - Keeping the Blues Alive




---
þ Synchronet þ Oxford Mills Remote - manningfire.dyndns.org

I remember spending $300 on a 300 baud internal Apple 2 modem...

Me too, but in my case it was an external 300 baud apple modem for my Apple //c.

- Mark

--- WWIVToss v.1.50
* Origin: http://www.weather-station.org * Bel Air, MD -USA (33:1/3.0)
þ Synchronet þ curmudge.hopto.org

--- MARK HOFMANN wrote --
Me too, but in my case it was an external 300 baud apple modem for my Appl //c

- Mar

Heh. Good times. It was my entire paycheck from Long John Silvers. (:



---
* TARDIS BBS - Home of QUARKware * telnet bbs.cortex-media.info 4223

Me too, but in my case it was an external 300 baud apple modem for my

Appl > //c

- Mar

Heh. Good times. It was my entire paycheck from Long John Silvers. (:

It took me almost a month to save up for modem upgrades for my BBS back in those days. Fun times, for sure!

- Mark

--- WWIVToss v.1.50
* Origin: http://www.weather-station.org * Bel Air, MD -USA (33:1/3.0)
þ Synchronet þ curmudge.hopto.org

Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Vectorgamer to physalis17 on Tue Nov 18 2014 15:36:23


aq

a


---
þ Synchronet þ Crazy World Bbs - crazyworldbbs.no-ip.org

Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Opie to Vectorgamer on Thu Apr 02 2015 07:36 pm

Re: CLI vs GUI
By: Vectorgamer to physalis17 on Tue Nov 18 2014 15:36:23

aq

a

what about cli vs gui? aq? a? please illucidate. :)
-Denny

Denny's Computers - Not for profit computer repair - dpccom.blogspot.com

---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net