[FlexNet] Re: Paxon (and feeling lost about Flex32 :-)

[flexnet@mailman.qth.net]

Howdy Maiko, and everybody on the list!

----- Original Message -----
From: "Maiko Langelaar (VE4KLM)" <maiko@pcs.mb.ca>
To: <flexnet@mailman.qth.net>

> snip <
>
> >
> I kinda felt the same too when Flex32 itself came out
> and months later, I saw a lack of applications dealing
> with stuff like BBS's and Mailbox's and APRS for that
> matter. The older PC/FlexNet (before the Flex32 days)
> was alot more flexible (I think anyways) when it came
> to building your system for multiple purposes.

Most flexible of all is the often-overlooked Win95 version of FlexNet, which
will run all of the DOS stuff, and all the 32-bit stuff too.

In a Flex95 installation here, I ran FBB BBS d700g, Clusse DX cluster, and
Paxon, all at the same time (with different SSID's). Sometimes I would run
SuperPacket instead of Paxon. All this on a system that was running a
soundcard modem with PTT off of the parallel port in an old 66 Mhz 486 PC!
This system operated flawlessly for over a year, until I shut it down so
another ham could use that computer.

>
> What has surprised me in some ways (and not at all in
> others) is the lack of applications based on Flex32. It
> is after all a very easy API to work with, and I myself
> have developed stuff for it.
>
> Perhaps the authors of Flex32 had their sights on IP,
> in other words perfecting the excellent Windows network
> drivers so that you can do full IP via Flex32 drivers.
>
> I really don't know, I'd like to hear other opinions
> on that. Come to think of it, this group has been quite
> lately, maybe we can get some interesting discussions
> going again.

I remember when the FlexNet group was kicking around the idea of making a
Linux version of FlexNet. This was all well and good until the amateur tcpip
community discovered that the FlexNet group do not believe in "open source"
programming. Then the FlexNet group started getting a lot of flak and
nastygrams from both amateur tcpip folks and Linux enthusiasts, trying to
tell them how to write thier software. Understandably, the FlexNet group
lost enthusiasm for the project and it was quietly dropped.

So basically that effort was torpedoed, as so many of our efforts are, by
"protocol warriors" who had an axe to grind and were too stupid, and perhaps
also lacking in the character necessary to care about the damage their
behavior does to the hobby.

"Protocol Warriors" are not content to promote and enjoy their favorite
software, protocol, or whatever, but feel they must run down and undercut
the effort and enjoyment of anyone who does anything different. Though they
often set themselves up as "experts" in order to push their agenda, the fact
is that they are closed-minded idiots who are too socially retarded to play
well with others.

What happened with the Linux version of FlexNet may be instructive if you
are wondering about an IP application or driver for Windows that never was
developed... Maybe the FlexNet group was harassed by "open-sourcers", or
Linux freaks who run down any attempt to run tcpip on the most popular
operating system in the world. (Windows)

Maybe the "protocol warriors" managed to screw that project up too, eh?

It's hard to say for sure about these things, but that would be my first
guess.

Charles Brabham,  N5PVL