Day Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [...] > The XT had only the 8-bit slots. The AT introduced the 16 bit, half > again longer. but didnt they both run off a 286?
The XT was an 8086. It introduced the hard drive as standard equipment. I *think* the XT introduced 8 (versus 5) slots as well. > It's been a long time aint it. Aye, that it has! > [...] > ASCII. All the hype these days is about the eye candy, and while I have appreciated the > art of video, the art of expressing ideas is still best what it has been since the Greeks began > writing them down... as text. Day, I know you love ASCII, but the Greeks would've had a hard time writing using it. ASCII is great for English, but causes problems (without some "enhancements") for all those pesky, non-English speaking people who think they have something to say! :) > [...] > If you want to hack into a BBS host, you havta break > into the guys house. There is a substially more robust security issue in > the BBS hosting. That's a bit like saying there's more security in NOT CONNECTING to anything. Yes, it's arguably more secure (though stand-alones still managed to get viruses), but it's NOT THE SAME THING. Saying a BBS is more secure than a mail and web server is definitely a case of apples-to-oranges (or Apples to Suns if you prefer). If you ONLY NEED to deliver text, then a mail server is overkill. The problem is software sales folks convincing (apparently successfully) everybody that you NEED all the additional functionality of database and RPC features on a box intended to do only a few specific functions. > [...] It didnt matter what kind of a software probe any hacker > saboteur came up with somewhere else in the world- there was no access > thru the com port to the DOS system kernel. Some of the same vulnerabilities existed (see http://www.skepticfiles.org/cowtext/bbs/security.htm) as today, but were less known simply because computer use was under the radar of the popular press. A quick quote from that page (from 1989!): --- cut here --- cut here --- There exists within the WILDCAT!(tm) external protocol pro- cedures the considerable possibility that somebody who is familiar with the system could execute a copy of COMMAND.COM and have full control of your computer, erasing or format- ting disks, and creating all kinds of havoc. Basically, any- thing that you could do from the keyboard can be done by the remote-user if he knows how to do it. --- cut here --- cut here --- > Besides which, the PC could be booted off a floppy that is write protected. > No sabotage software can get by this old fashioned read/write switch built into the > drive. But that alone doesn't clean the infected hard drive, nor protect it! I suppose you could configure a read-only, floppy-based BBS (in much the same way you could configure a read-only, CD-ROM based web server). > If you can get an XT running, you will have a pc no matter what kind > of sabotage crap spreads on the net. BTW: you dont even need AC > power! You can use a 12v and a 6volt vehicle batteries. Hook the > negatives of both batteries togather, then to the black wires of the P-8, P-9 > power jacks. [...] Kewl, but isn't an inverter and/or a lower-power PC/laptop equally viable? I don't think what you've described is married to the XT hardware in any way. > [...] > There are 12volt monitors, and 12volt portable TVs and NTSC video > outputs. Aren't you racking up quite a power load at this point? If the intent is to live without AC power for extended periods, I would think battery life would be critical. > If the AC power went out, the phone system usually has enough > battery power to run a few weeks. You mean the phone company's systems? > If you have the XT, and want to get back online, (I've done this with 486 too) you can > get the -5v -12 bias from flashlite batteries. The amount of power needed is less than > 50ma, so they'll last longer than the Lead Acids. Most of the mini size boards > run on 18-20 watts. total. [...] While you can certainly do all that with an XT, AT or P4 system, if you truly only need ASCII communications and are concerned about battery life etc., the old Tandy 200 and relatives (http://www.old-computers.com/museum/computer.asp?st=1&c=234) were some of the ORIGINAL ASCII workhorses, and many are still in use. DOS is WAY overkill for basic communications needs. The 200 would run for 16 continuous hours on AA batteries, so doing a conversion to run off longer-life batteries would be trivial. Even if you're dedicated to DOS, the Poquet PC was better suited to battery-based existence than the XT. Life certainly SEEMED simpler in the old days, but knowledge is hard to take back. Given what we know today, I think it's safe to say that many of the older systems survived simply because they weren't EXPOSED to the same levels of threat commonplace today. DOS (or XT) had nothing to do with it. - Bob To unsubscribe from SURVPC send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe SURVPC in the body of the message. Also, trim this footer from any quoted replies. More info can be found at; http://www.softcon.com/archives/SURVPC.html
