You'd think Usenet is just perfect for vintage Mac fans - it's low-tech and runs
fine on a Mac Plus. You can post right from the very machines you're talking
about. If I check other vintage computers, their newsgroups appears to have at
least some more traffic. So why isn't this place more lively?

On a sidenote: anyone on here via Terminal on a vintage Mac (e.g. ZTerm?) Does
that even still work for accessing Usenet?

In article <info-5263FF.15382419042024@news.individual.de>, Sebastian
P. <info@cornica.org> wrote:

> You'd think Usenet is just perfect for vintage Mac fans - it's low-tech and
> runs
> fine on a Mac Plus. You can post right from the very machines you're talking
> about. If I check other vintage computers, their newsgroups appears to have
> at
> least some more traffic. So why isn't this place more lively?

Agreed. I actually, as we speak, have an article in draft for
vintageapplemac.com where I'm encouraging Mac users to hit Usenet up,
now that "Eternal February" is with us post-Google, Usenet could be a
real boon for vintage computer users, almost our own enclave! I will be
posting it at the weekend, if I manage to entice a single vintage Mac
user to take a look here, that'd be a win.

> On a sidenote: anyone on here via Terminal on a vintage Mac (e.g. ZTerm?)
> Does
> that even still work for accessing Usenet?

No clue, sorry, I'm using YA-NewsWatcher.

scole <vintageapplemac@gmail.com> writes:

> In article <info-5263FF.15382419042024@news.individual.de>, Sebastian
> P. <info@cornica.org> wrote:
>
>> You'd think Usenet is just perfect for vintage Mac fans - it's low-tech and
>> runs
>> fine on a Mac Plus. You can post right from the very machines you're talking
>> about. If I check other vintage computers, their newsgroups appears to have
>> at
>> least some more traffic. So why isn't this place more lively?
>
> Agreed. I actually, as we speak, have an article in draft for
> vintageapplemac.com where I'm encouraging Mac users to hit Usenet up,
> now that "Eternal February" is with us post-Google, Usenet could be a
> real boon for vintage computer users, almost our own enclave! I will be
> posting it at the weekend, if I manage to entice a single vintage Mac
> user to take a look here, that'd be a win.

Good luck!

>> On a sidenote: anyone on here via Terminal on a vintage Mac (e.g. ZTerm?)
>> Does
>> that even still work for accessing Usenet?

You could use ZTerm to connect to a Unix system via serial or modem,
then run a command-line newsreader. Not very Mac-ish, of course.

> No clue, sorry, I'm using YA-NewsWatcher.

If you've got a minute, I'd be interested to hear a comparison between
the various versions of NewsWatcher, e.g. YA-, MT-, VA-

john

In article <864jbp14pz.fsf@building-m.net>,
John <john@building-m.simplistic-anti-spam-measure.net> wrote:

> scole <vintageapplemac@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > In article <info-5263FF.15382419042024@news.individual.de>, Sebastian
> > P. <info@cornica.org> wrote:
> >
> >> You'd think Usenet is just perfect for vintage Mac fans - it's low-tech
> >> and
> >> runs
> >> fine on a Mac Plus. You can post right from the very machines you're
> >> talking
> >> about. If I check other vintage computers, their newsgroups appears to
> >> have
> >> at
> >> least some more traffic. So why isn't this place more lively?
> >
> > Agreed. I actually, as we speak, have an article in draft for
> > vintageapplemac.com where I'm encouraging Mac users to hit Usenet up,
> > now that "Eternal February" is with us post-Google, Usenet could be a
> > real boon for vintage computer users, almost our own enclave! I will be
> > posting it at the weekend, if I manage to entice a single vintage Mac
> > user to take a look here, that'd be a win.
>
> Good luck!
>
> >> On a sidenote: anyone on here via Terminal on a vintage Mac (e.g. ZTerm?)
> >> Does
> >> that even still work for accessing Usenet?
>
> You could use ZTerm to connect to a Unix system via serial or modem,
> then run a command-line newsreader. Not very Mac-ish, of course.
>
>
> > No clue, sorry, I'm using YA-NewsWatcher.
>
> If you've got a minute, I'd be interested to hear a comparison between
> the various versions of NewsWatcher, e.g. YA-, MT-, VA-
>
>
>
> john

Usenet is really vintage friendly, indeed. And there's plenty of
newsreaders around that work really well. I'm using MT-NewsWatcher to
write this on my PowerBook G4 Titanium.

Let's hope for a UseNet renaissance!

Knezzen <contact@unixfiles.org> writes:

> Usenet is really vintage friendly, indeed. And there's plenty of
> newsreaders around that work really well. I'm using MT-NewsWatcher to
> write this on my PowerBook G4 Titanium.
>
> Let's hope for a UseNet renaissance!

I have no doubt Usenet will outlive the last set of non-broken TiBook
hinges.

One reason I don't use mine much anymore is the terrible groaning creak
it makes when I open the lid. I just dread that inevitable CRACK.

john

Knezzen <contact@unixfiles.org> wrote:

[...]
> Usenet is really vintage friendly, indeed. And there's plenty of
> newsreaders around that work really well. I'm using MT-NewsWatcher to
> write this on my PowerBook G4 Titanium.

I'm using MacSOUP 2.4.6 on a beige G3 running OS 8.6

--
~ Liz Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk

In article <864jbp14pz.fsf@building-m.net>, John
<john@building-m.simplistic-anti-spam-measure.net> wrote:

> scole <vintageapplemac@gmail.com> writes:>
>
> > No clue, sorry, I'm using YA-NewsWatcher.
>
> If you've got a minute, I'd be interested to hear a comparison between
> the various versions of NewsWatcher, e.g. YA-, MT-, VA-

I have used YA and MT, and also Thoth which is pretty similar, but it
was about a decade ago that I last used MT so I can't recall the
nuances.

They're all much of a muchness, imo. I'm enjoying using YA now more
than I was enjoying Thoth, though. Can't put my finger on why, because
they are very similar, I guess that YA feels a little less clunky than
Thoth.

In article <info-5263FF.15382419042024@news.individual.de>, "Sebastian P."
<info@cornica.org> wrote:

> You'd think Usenet is just perfect for vintage Mac fans - it's low-tech
and runs
> fine on a Mac Plus. You can post right from the very machines you're talking
> about. If I check other vintage computers, their newsgroups appears to
have at
> least some more traffic. So why isn't this place more lively?

Agreed, however in usenet terms this froup is very new, and has only
existed since 2018 or 2019. It takes a while to get a good base of
posters, especially as it was formed during the darkest period of
horrendous Google postings (spam, trolling, etc)...

Maybe we'll see a usenet revival now Google has finally gone, and more
people will discover this little corner of the usenet ;-)

Here's hoping.

--
Dee

In article <864jbp14pz.fsf@building-m.net>,
John <john@building-m.simplistic-anti-spam-measure.net> wrote:
>scole <vintageapplemac@gmail.com> writes:
>>> On a sidenote: anyone on here via Terminal on a vintage Mac (e.g. ZTerm?)
>>> Does
>>> that even still work for accessing Usenet?
>
>You could use ZTerm to connect to a Unix system via serial or modem,
>then run a command-line newsreader. Not very Mac-ish, of course.

FWIW, that's basically what I sometimes did from the Macs in the basement of
my dorm back in the day, except it was a telnet client connecting over the
campus network. Other times, I'd dial in from the IIe in my room, but the
computers in the basement lab didn't keep the phone line tied up while they
were in use.

(Of course, back then, "UNIX system" meant anything from a NeXTcube on up to
some seriously big iron. Nowadays, a Raspberry Pi would stomp any of them
while providing a similar experience. :) )

--
_/_
/ v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
(IIGS( https://alfter.us/ Top-posting!
\_^_/ >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?

Mike Dee wrote:
> In article <info-5263FF.15382419042024@news.individual.de>, "Sebastian P."
> <info@cornica.org> wrote:
>
>> You'd think Usenet is just perfect for vintage Mac fans - it's low-tech
> and runs
>> fine on a Mac Plus. You can post right from the very machines you're
>> talking
>> about. If I check other vintage computers, their newsgroups appears to
> have at
>> least some more traffic. So why isn't this place more lively?
>
> Agreed, however in usenet terms this froup is very new, and has only
> existed since 2018 or 2019. It takes a while to get a good base of
> posters, especially as it was formed during the darkest period of
> horrendous Google postings (spam, trolling, etc)...

I have archives for comp.sys.mac.vintage that go back to 2013, ten years
ago.

https://macgui.com/usenet/?stats=117

--
]DF$
The New Apple II User's Guide:
https://macgui.com/newa2guide/

On Tue, 7 May 2024 20:27:52 -0000 (UTC), D Finnigan
<dog_cow@macgui.com> wrote:

>Mike Dee wrote:
>> In article <info-5263FF.15382419042024@news.individual.de>, "Sebastian P."
>> <info@cornica.org> wrote:
>>
>>> You'd think Usenet is just perfect for vintage Mac fans - it's low-tech
>> and runs
>>> fine on a Mac Plus. You can post right from the very machines you're
>>> talking
>>> about. If I check other vintage computers, their newsgroups appears to
>> have at
>>> least some more traffic. So why isn't this place more lively?
>>
>> Agreed, however in usenet terms this froup is very new, and has only
>> existed since 2018 or 2019. It takes a while to get a good base of
>> posters, especially as it was formed during the darkest period of
>> horrendous Google postings (spam, trolling, etc)...
>
>I have archives for comp.sys.mac.vintage that go back to 2013, ten years
>ago.
>
>https://macgui.com/usenet/?stats=117

Same here. I don't know how long the group was around before I
discovered it, but in 2013 there was an attempt (Stephen Cole) to
create a FAQ, but I didn't see any follow-ups.

=IML=

Ira Lieberman wrote:

> On Tue, 7 May 2024 20:27:52 -0000 (UTC), D Finnigan
> <dog_cow@macgui.com> wrote:
>
>>Mike Dee wrote:
>>> In article <info-5263FF.15382419042024@news.individual.de>,
[...]
>>> Agreed, however in usenet terms this froup is very new, and has
>>> only existed since 2018 or 2019. It takes a while to get a good
>>> base of posters, especially as it was formed during the darkest
>>> period of horrendous Google postings (spam, trolling, etc)...
>>
>>I have archives for comp.sys.mac.vintage that go back to 2013, ten
>>years ago.
>>
>>https://macgui.com/usenet/?stats=117
>
> Same here. I don't know how long the group was around before I
> discovered it, but in 2013 there was an attempt (Stephen Cole) to
> create a FAQ, but I didn't see any follow-ups.

ISC. Sorry.

Even so, a decade isn't ancient in usenet terms.

Google Groups can no longer be posted to. So get posting those good
actual newsposts, folks :-)

--
dee

scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us (Scott Alfter) writes:

> In article <864jbp14pz.fsf@building-m.net>,
> John <john@building-m.simplistic-anti-spam-measure.net> wrote:
>>scole <vintageapplemac@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> On a sidenote: anyone on here via Terminal on a vintage Mac (e.g. ZTerm?)
>>>> Does
>>>> that even still work for accessing Usenet?
>>
>>You could use ZTerm to connect to a Unix system via serial or modem,
>>then run a command-line newsreader. Not very Mac-ish, of course.
>
> FWIW, that's basically what I sometimes did from the Macs in the basement of
> my dorm back in the day, except it was a telnet client connecting over the
> campus network. Other times, I'd dial in from the IIe in my room, but the
> computers in the basement lab didn't keep the phone line tied up while they
> were in use.
>
> (Of course, back then, "UNIX system" meant anything from a NeXTcube on up to
> some seriously big iron. Nowadays, a Raspberry Pi would stomp any of them
> while providing a similar experience. :) )

Hell, I haven't checked but the microcontroller in my floppy emulator
might be a step up from the Mac Plus :D

I've got my NAS running an NFS share and anonymous FTP (on a small
volume) for easy access from vintage systems. The eternal struggle of
losing the resource fork on non-Mac filesystems is painful, though.

john

In article <info-5263FF.15382419042024@news.individual.de>,
"Sebastian P." <info@cornica.org> wrote:

> You'd think Usenet is just perfect for vintage Mac fans - it's low-tech and
> runs
> fine on a Mac Plus. You can post right from the very machines you're talking
> about. If I check other vintage computers, their newsgroups appears to have
> at
> least some more traffic. So why isn't this place more lively?
>
>
> On a sidenote: anyone on here via Terminal on a vintage Mac (e.g. ZTerm?)
> Does
> that even still work for accessing Usenet?

I though Usenet was dead except for binaries. I was on macos9lives.com
reading about Subtext, which lead to their article on BBSing (out of
curiosity, I'm already a BBS nerd) which lead me to MT-NewsWatcher and
the free provider Eternal September. I'm using both now. Baton Mail to
do SMTP auth to my RPi running stunnel for SSL and viola!

In article <dog_cow-1715113670@macgui.com>, D Finnigan
<dog_cow@macgui.com> wrote:

> Mike Dee wrote:
> > In article <info-5263FF.15382419042024@news.individual.de>, "Sebastian P."
> > <info@cornica.org> wrote:
> >
> >> You'd think Usenet is just perfect for vintage Mac fans - it's low-tech
> > and runs
> >> fine on a Mac Plus. You can post right from the very machines you're
> >> talking
> >> about. If I check other vintage computers, their newsgroups appears to
> > have at
> >> least some more traffic. So why isn't this place more lively?
> >
> > Agreed, however in usenet terms this froup is very new, and has only
> > existed since 2018 or 2019. It takes a while to get a good base of
> > posters, especially as it was formed during the darkest period of
> > horrendous Google postings (spam, trolling, etc)...
>
> I have archives for comp.sys.mac.vintage that go back to 2013, ten years
> ago.
>
> https://macgui.com/usenet/?stats=117

Christ, more than a decade ago. Where has that 10 years gone?