sure!

I’m on the road in Newcastle at the moment so here is what I can find:

NetBSD 0.8 on archive.org

Hopefully this gets you started on the fun path of necromancy!

Based on the information in FAQs etc., there was quite bit on agate.berkeley.edu that appears to be lost.

Anyway, I assume you’ve seen 386BSD 1.0… it was in some areas very different from 0.0/1.0 and plainly stated that it’s “not intended to be used on production or commercial systems”. Bill Jolitz clearly had ideas about what 386BSD should be that were very different from the users’ wishes and expectations. Which is why FreeBSD is now at version 9 and 386BSD is not 🙂

I have to wonder if it ever happened. So much seemed to have been planed out for 386BSD that just didn’t happen. I guess the end goal was the book with 386BSD 1.0 although by the time that happened, net & free were well underway.

Yeah, but that’s just not the same 🙂 I’m still hoping someone has archived that stuff and it’ll surface one day.

Offhand I don’t know.. Although I guess you could diff net2 & 386BSD 0.0 .. I kind of did with CVSweb ….

http://unix.superglobalmegacorp.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/Net2/arch/i386/i386/conf.c

Incidentally, I’ve not been able to find the diffs relative to Net/2 (or whatever it was) which were supposed to come with 386BSD 0.0/0.1. Any idea where those might be hiding?

Outlook 98 is indeed great. Fixed what was wrong with 97, pretty well. If you notice through 2003, there’s very little improvement in the core apps, except Outlook can do IMAP, and I do have a soft spot for InfoPath.

Also, Exchange ActiveSync is interesting to me, because it’s the only well-supported cross-platform mobile sync protocol. Which is kinda sad, actually.

I fronted it with a linux email relay which also did a bunch of spam filtering. Even in 1997 I wouldn’t put an Exchange server directly onto the internet.. Even if the firewall simply forwarded every message in/out of the exchange server, it was just too popular (vulnerable) to attack.

But Exchange 5.5 & Outlook 98 work pretty good IMHO. Outlook 2003/Exchange 2003 were only slight improvements offering the ability for the client to connect over HTTPS, although with 2010 & 2012 they have taken something that worked, and really done their best to screw it up.

Also it is kind of funny that Exchange doesn’t use SQL for the backend, but rather Access MDB style databases. God help you if you have to repair corruption, it is a game over event.

I just hope you can secure it before exposing it to the internet.

Most RDP brute forcers can’t jump over the RDPv4 only hurdle when we had the NT4 TSE up, so maybe Exchange 5.5 wins security through oldness.