Date   : Sat, 06 Jun 1987 01:11:59 GMT
From   : poisson.usc.edu!mlinar@OBERON.USC.EDU (Mitch Mlinar)
Subject: Re: CONIX v/xs ZCPR

In article <176*kenw@noah.arc.cdn> kenw@noah.arc.CDN (Ken Wallewein) writes:
>
>   For about the last year I've been drooling over the ads for CONIX, the
>super-duper CP/M replacement. It got good reviews, and looks better than ZCPR3
>in many ways. I use ZCPR2 now, but a lot of that stuff is only really useful
>for hard drives and multiple users (I run dual 8" DSDD floppies and a RAM
>disk). 
>
>  However, there seems to be a lot of fuss and bother over ZCPR3, but not a 
>peep about CONIX. How come? Doesn't *anybody* use it? I would really like to 
>see some discussion.
>
>  For that matter, has anybody tried out that PD BDOS replacement I read 
>about recently (can't remember who by)?
>/kenw
>                                                             A L B E R T A
>Ken Wallewein                                                      R E S E A R C H
>                                                             C O U N C I L

Ken, I am not even sure CONIX is still trying to sell it.  They released a
big portion as freeware to the public domain almost a year ago due to lack of
response, hoping to generate a set of users who would pay for the full upgrade.
These files are located on Blaise Pascal System (NY) at (718) 604-1930.  I
do not know if they are still there.

I never fully implemented the CONIX stuff. After a brief experimental period,
I abandoned the project.  It seems very usable, but suffers the same memory
constraints and disk problems as ZCPR.  Considering ZCPR is well supported, a
choice between the two would favor ZCPR.  However, I am a developer (in my all
too short spare time) who can't afford a smaller TPA.  So, I remained with my
current OS: QP/M with Qplus extensions.

Check out the NY board for the files and good luck.

-Mitch

Signature:  none
Disclaimer: none
Ignorance:  plenty