Point yer CLI to; 'telent 1984.ws' and be amazed! MAX HEADROOM - sixel graphics??! What the hell is going on here??
Point yer terminal to;
telnet 1984.ws ; open the screen to fullscreen - and sit back and reminisce. - What is this tom f00lery????
telnet 1984.ws ; open the screen to fullscreen - and sit back and remin - What is this tom f00lery????
Looks like high-color ANSI (not Sixel) to me.
Looks like high-color ANSI (not Sixel) to me.I agree - I believe he's doing tricks w/ 24bit color UTF-8... he's the
Seems he just uses half blocks and dithered blocks. I get the RGB true color ANSI codes, look much better than EGA colors I'm used to see everywhere else...
Point yer CLI to; 'telent 1984.ws' and be amazed! MAX HEADROOM - sixel graphics??! What the hell is going on here??
pAULIE42o
.........
I tried it in Netrunner and it doesn't work. Just gibberish. I'm guessing it isn't CP437?
Nope, UTF-8 and True Color terminal required. I found kitty and iTerm2
on MacOS to work properly with that telnet destination.
Point yer CLI to; 'telent 1984.ws' and be amazed! MAX HEADROOM - sixe graphics??! What the hell is going on here??
I tried it in Netrunner and it doesn't work. Just gibberish. I'm guessing it isn't CP437?
kitty will not work correctly with BBS systems.
kitty treats bold (what you think of as "bright" versions of the 8 bbs colors) instead as the bold version of the selected font.
kitty will not work correctly with BBS systems.
Nope, UTF-8 and True Color terminal required. I found kitty and iTerm2
on MacOS to work properly with that telnet destination.
-h1
but.. I saw a post on Synchterm's source forge suggesting that UTF-8 is
on that team's radar and they already support true color ansi codes.
kitty will not work correctly with BBS systems.
It depends on the BBS. Using CP437 is just a convention;
On 02 Jun 2023, tenser said the following...
It depends on the BBS. Using CP437 is just a convention;
lol my post said nothing about the codepage.
True; my mistake. But you did unilaterally
say, "kitty will not work correctly with BBS
systems." which, again, depends on the BBS
system.
On 02 Jun 2023, tenser said the following...
True; my mistake. But you did unilaterally
say, "kitty will not work correctly with BBS
systems." which, again, depends on the BBS
system.
http://kirin.dcclost.com/~alex/img_a.jpg http://kirin.dcclost.com/~alex/img_b.jpg
this is what 99% of the BBSes you will ever call with kitty will look
like vs what they're supposed to look like.
i think it's a reasonable assertion. if the sysop has no traditional
ansi on the whole board, then thumbs up i guess.
Right so...it depends on the BBS system? :-)
On 02 Jun 2023, tenser said the following...
Right so...it depends on the BBS system? :-)
sure, point me to the this unicorn bbs and i'll concede that.
On 01 Jun 2023 at 07:23p, fusion pondered and said...
On 02 Jun 2023, tenser said the following...
True; my mistake. But you did unilaterally
say, "kitty will not work correctly with BBS
systems." which, again, depends on the BBS
system.
http://kirin.dcclost.com/~alex/img_a.jpg http://kirin.dcclost.com/~alex/img_b.jpg
this is what 99% of the BBSes you will ever call with kitty will look like vs what they're supposed to look like.
One could also just do what the Kitty guy said
(admittedly in a jerky way...) and not try to
overload bold attributes for bright colors.
He was obnoxious about it, but he's not wrong
about the technical merits.
i think it's a reasonable assertion. if the sysop has no traditional ansi on the whole board, then thumbs up i guess.
Right so...it depends on the BBS system? :-)
As I recall, apam had an "ASCII-only" BBS, and
One could also just do what the Kitty guy said
(admittedly in a jerky way...) and not try to
overload bold attributes for bright colors.
He was obnoxious about it, but he's not wrong
about the technical merits.
History says he's wrong. But it's the hill he's chosen to die on. <shrug>
i think it's a reasonable assertion. if the sysop has no tradition ansi on the whole board, then thumbs up i guess.
Right so...it depends on the BBS system? :-)
"will not work" is probably too binary an assertion in this case. Different terminals display stuff (colors, fonts, glyphs) differently,
but the main features of a BBS should continue to work just fine.
As I recall, apam had an "ASCII-only" BBS, and
I did, but I added optional ANSI colour to it in the end through simlar ctrl-a codes to synchronet.
I kind of think you might be splitting hairs a bit though.. perhaps the correct statement would be "kitty is not ideal for calling the majority
of todays BBSes" - but then neither are most unix terminals (although perhaps less hostile to the idea)
Sysop: | digital man |
---|---|
Location: | Riverside County, California |
Users: | 1,041 |
Nodes: | 15 (0 / 15) |
Uptime: | 23:15:16 |
Calls: | 500,348 |
Calls today: | 21 |
Files: | 95,205 |
D/L today: |
12,961 files (2,099M bytes) |
Messages: | 465,961 |
Posted today: | 3 |