smvorkoetter@watmum.UUCP (Stefan M. Vorkoetter) (10/03/86)
I have downloaded, uudecoded, and un-arced the PC-VT program posted to
the net recently, and have run the VT100 emulator test program posted to
net.sources on it. I am sorry to report that it fails most of these tests
miserably. The cursor movement tests, which fill the screen with a nice
symmetrical pattern, using all the cursor movement commands resulted in an
unreadable mess. The VT102 feature tests likewise. Ditto for VT52. Double
width characters came out completely illegible. I tried to post this message
using it, but unfortunately, vi did not work right with it.
I did not try kermit or xmodem, since I did not have time. Maybe this is
an old (very old) version of the program. I hope I didn't sound too
negative, but I am only reporting the results.
NB. I tried the VT100 test program on several VT100 compatibles, including
a VT240, and everything works fine.jallen@netxcom.UUCP (John Allen) (10/06/86)
In article <620@watmum.UUCP> smvorkoetter@watmum.UUCP (Stefan M. Vorkoetter) writes: > >I have downloaded, uudecoded, and un-arced the PC-VT program posted to >the net recently, and have run the VT100 emulator test program posted to >net.sources on it. I am sorry to report that it fails most of these tests >miserably. [etc.] >I did not try kermit or xmodem, since I did not have time. Maybe this is [etc.] I have also given PC-VT a try, and I've been pretty happy with it. My needs don't include 100% vt100 compatibility - the PC-VT documentation admits to the double height character omission [DECDHL - not ANSI anyway?], and some others. I have used the Xmodem support, and it's *great*. Of the six to ten terminal emulator / communications programs I have seen, I'd say PC-VT ranks at the top of the list. John Allen ========================================================================= NetExpress Communications, Inc. seismo!{sundc|hadron}!netxcom!jallen 1953 Gallows Road, Suite 300 (703) 749-2238 Vienna, Va., 22180 =========================================================================
p40001@mcomp.UUCP (10/07/86)
> I have downloaded, uudecoded, and un-arced the PC-VT program posted to > the net recently, and have run the VT100 emulator test program posted to > net.sources on it. I am sorry to report that it fails most of these tests > miserably. The cursor movement tests, which fill the screen with a nice > symmetrical pattern, using all the cursor movement commands resulted in an > unreadable mess. The VT102 feature tests likewise. Ditto for VT52. Double > width characters came out completely illegible. I tried to post this message > using it, but unfortunately, vi did not work right with it. > > I did not try kermit or xmodem, since I did not have time. Maybe this is > an old (very old) version of the program. I hope I didn't sound too > negative, but I am only reporting the results. > > NB. I tried the VT100 test program on several VT100 compatibles, including > a VT240, and everything works fine. I am not familiar with the test you refer to, but I'm using the program with vi every day, and it works right for me. Have you read the documenation, and set the program up to work with a UNIX host? (it defaults to a VMS host). All I can say, it works for me! ----------------------------------------------------- Wolf N. Paul, 290 Dogwood, Plano, Tx. 75075 UUCP: ihnp4!convex!mcomp!doulos!wnp or ihnp4!convex!mcomp!p40001 Phone: (214) 578-8023 W.U.ESL: 6283-2882
wmf@chinet.UUCP (William M. Fischer) (10/07/86)
In article <620@watmum.UUCP> smvorkoetter@watmum.UUCP (Stefan M. Vorkoetter) writes: > > >I have downloaded, uudecoded, and un-arced the PC-VT program posted to >the net recently, and have run the VT100 emulator test program posted to >net.sources on it. I am sorry to report that it fails most of these tests >miserably. The cursor movement tests, which fill the screen with a nice >symmetrical I have run the same routine and have to agree with Stefan's remarks. The version of PC-VT posted here was woefully lacking in many of the features required for a VT100 emulation. -- ==================================================== | Fortiter in re, || Bill Fischer | | suaviter in modo. || wmf@chinet.UUCP | ====================================================
rwb@luke.UUCP (Bob Beveridge) (10/09/86)
*** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE *** I don't understand all the complaints about PC-VT that have been posted recently. The basis of these postings is a "vt100 emulator test program" (which I admit I haven't tried), as opposed to actual use of PC-VT in the real world. My experience is that PC-VT is the only PD emulator that I have found that works correctly when I log into a UNIX system and use the vi editor. On the other hand, I have been unable to usefully use vi with any of the terminal emulations claimed by Procomm (at least version 2.3). Most of these emulations "sort of" work, but none is as complete as PC-VT.
jeff@cdp.UUCP (10/10/86)
Unix has a list of descriptions (usually called termcap or terminfo) for many different types of terminals. If you tell vi that you are running a vt100, it uses the description of a vt100 to control your terminal. These terminal descriptions, unfortunately, are by no means perfect. Any system administrator (and anyone else with appropriate permission) can go in and redefine what a "vt100" is. Thus, if PC-VT works fine, this only means that the vt100 terminal description matches what PC-VT expects. It does not say anything about the ability of PC-VT to really emulate the vt100. The vt100 test program referred to earlier was specifically designed to test terminals and terminal emulators with respect to vt100 comnpatibility. While it is surely not a complete test, it does provide a better way of assessing vt100 compatibility than using vi.