Talk:Bulletin board system

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Access-80 BBS constantly being removed[edit]

Does anyone have a reason that Access-80 is being constantly removed from the article? It has had references to back it up lately. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Real Deuce (talkcontribs) 02:26, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Monochrome BBS pics[edit]

Any particular reason for having 2 screen shots of Monochrome BBS in the intro? I'm thinking the 2nd is the better of the two. Any thoughts? Jedikaiti (talk) 21:42, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

About OS usage[edit]

> By 1995, many of the DOS-based BBSes had begun switching to modern multitasking operating systems, such as OS/2, Windows 95, and Linux. These operating systems also provided built-in TCP/IP networking, which allowed most of the remaining BBSes to evolve and include Internet hosting capabilities. Recent BBS software, such as Synchronet, EleBBS, DOC or Wildcat! BBS provide access using the Telnet protocol rather than dialup, or by using legacy MS-DOS based BBS software with a FOSSIL-to-Telnet redirector such as NetFoss. I think this is BS, what is your reference? I did try to run my 4 node BBS with both Windows 95 (PCBoard) and Warp, it just did not work. Lines were disconnecting all the time and all sorts of other problems. Another thing is that Windows 95 did not have TCP/IP built in. I used DOS based multitasker (don't remember the name anymore) from -94 to -99 and I doubt that many other SysOps used Windows 95 or OS/2 Warp, at least any of the many I knew did not.


P —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:05, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

I took out the win95 claim for reasons you outlined - they are common knowledge, and documented in the wikipedia article on "microsoft windows".

For now, I didn't remove the claim about OS/2 warp. I don't know a lot about it, but it doesn't have the 2 strikes that the win95 claim did afaik - it did have TCP/IP.

We probably should really consider removing that entire unsourced paragraph... (talk) 08:32, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, I found at least one BBS sysop speaking as though OS/2 was a normal system to run a BBS on.

"Both Corby and the BBS were with me until 2001, although I could see their decline. When Corby died, so little activity was left in Net 106 that keeping the BBS up on an aging OS/2 machine seemed futile." (talk) 09:13, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

We need to find sources; there were at lesat two OS/2 hosted BBSes in my neck of the woods which was hardly a leading-edge hotbed of computerdom; this was back in the days when Linux users used to swap stories about how much uptime they'd had between crashes. It was a different era...--Wtshymanski (talk) 13:10, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Most used siftware in Bulgaria (1995- to the end) was Maximus+Fossil driver under DOS. Some systems use DESQview or openDOS' task switcher. Most old modem doesn't use MNP buildin driver and use software MNP/v42 error corrections.

I have removed the first mention of OS/2. It is mentioned only a few lines later, and clearly should not be part of that paragraph, which is about events circa 1980. Maury Markowitz (talk) 13:38, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Austin Arts BBS claims[edit]

I have removed a section on Austin Arts BBS. It makes several highly questionable claims, among them being that it was the first Mac BBS, that it started in 1983 (the Mac was released in 1984), that it ran on CBBS (which is S-100 based) and that it was the first to do internet radio (sort of). All of these claims are referenced to articles that simply do not support any of it; one is simply a listing of web systems with audio downloads, the other is a BBS list. The reference to 'net audio being used to claim priority not only makes no such claim, but actually lists an earlier example in the same paragraph. The entire Austin Arts BBS article was written by the person who ran it, and earlier versions do not make the same claims of priority. I have removed the text from this article pending further research, but I strongly suspect all of the claims are simply untrue, and will likely take the main article to AfD at some point. Maury Markowitz (talk) 13:37, 21 August 2015 (UTC)


I have noticed over the years that references to Access-80 come and go from the Wikipedia. I (Charles Oropallo) am the original creator of Access-80. I developed and placed Access-80 online in November 1977 on a very much hacked up TRS-80. It was officially called the "Access-80 BBS" (Bulletin Board System) and was dialed into using a 300 baud modem. It was a very simple compared to the BBS Ward Christiansen placed online a short time later. Access-80 was online for nearly 10 years until the system finally died in 1987. I have kept online as an informational site devoted to the original Access-80 BBS. CharlesWorks (talk) 19:34, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Note: Above comment moved from a relevant section near the top of this page from 2008, where it's unlikely anyone would see it.Rhododendrites talk \\ 21:11, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
I don't have any comment on the subject, but we might as well ping Real Deuce who opened the 2008 section about Access-80 (though it doesn't look like he/she has edited since 2011). — Rhododendrites talk \\ 21:14, 9 December 2015 (UTC)