campbell@maynard.BSW.COM (Larry Campbell) (05/31/87)
In article <16906@amdcad.AMD.COM> phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai) writes: > >Why would you want a PC instead of a terminal? Well, in addition to >the fact that it can be cheaper (particularly if you want graphics) >the IBM monitor makes really nice characters and the IBM keyboard >feels VERY nice. I don't know how well the clones do in this area. Bah. The IBM keyboards are detestable. They are much too noisy for office or home ... perhaps they'd be suitable for a factory floor. Their layout is atrocious. And until recently they obnoxiously overloaded the numeric keypad with function and cursor keys. Everyone agrees that NumLock is a total botch. And the IBM monitor? Gack. Either you're talking about a CGA and IBM color monitor, since you mention graphics, or you're talking about the monochrome adapter. The CGA is garbage -- you'd go blind looking at it for eight hours a day. The monochrome adapter does deliver nicely formed characters at a reasonable resolution, but the IBM monochrome green screen has such a long persistence that when the display scrolls, it smears like Tammy Bakker's mascara. Now, you could build a nice terminal out of an AT clone, with one of the new keyboards with separate cursor keys and without the raucous IBM clackety-clack, and either an EGA with a multisync monitor or a mono adapter and any non-IBM amber display. But you're sure not going to build a decent terminal with IBM hardware. My main terminal at work is an AT clone, with a new-style silent keyboard, a Hercules knock-off mono card and an amber monitor. I like it a lot. I would never trade any of the components for their IBM equivalents. -- Larry Campbell The Boston Software Works, Inc. Internet: campbell@maynard.BSW.COM 120 Fulton Street, Boston MA 02109 uucp: {husc6,mirror,think}!maynard!campbell +1 617 367 6846
allbery@ncoast.UUCP (06/02/87)
As quoted from <931@maynard.BSW.COM> by campbell@maynard.BSW.COM (Larry Campbell): +--------------- | In article <16906@amdcad.AMD.COM> phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai) writes: | > | >Why would you want a PC instead of a terminal? Well, in addition to | >the fact that it can be cheaper (particularly if you want graphics) | >the IBM monitor makes really nice characters and the IBM keyboard | >feels VERY nice. I don't know how well the clones do in this area. | | Bah. The IBM keyboards are detestable. They are much too noisy for | office or home ... perhaps they'd be suitable for a factory floor. | Their layout is atrocious. And until recently they obnoxiously overloaded | the numeric keypad with function and cursor keys. Everyone agrees that | NumLock is a total botch. +--------------- Agreed. The good news is that an ITT XTRA keyboard is PC and XT compatible, and solves most of these. (It still has the overloaded keypad, alas. But in compensation, it has an Enter key on the keypad.) +--------------- | And the IBM monitor? Gack. Either you're talking about a CGA and IBM | color monitor, since you mention graphics, or you're talking about | the monochrome adapter. The CGA is garbage -- you'd go blind looking | at it for eight hours a day. The monochrome adapter does deliver nicely | formed characters at a reasonable resolution, but the IBM monochrome | green screen has such a long persistence that when the display scrolls, | it smears like Tammy Bakker's mascara. +--------------- Don't talk to me about IBM graphics-type stuff; I can (barely) take a Herc mono, I can't stand composite or RGB, even EGA style. I have an AVT amber monitor and an MDA (ITT version, sans printer port which is on the mother- board instead), and it's very readable. Best terminal I've ever had. No graphics, but I rarely use them anyway. I have used various machines with variouscards and monitors; EGA + IBM hires display = almost maybe halfway legible, Sigma 400 is quite nice for a CGA/EGA (it fills in the characters, you can't see the dots, it's more readable than any other CGA/EGA display I've ever seen), CGA = NEVER!!!. Herc mono is sort-of; the clone versions I've seen use the CGA character set, which is a lossage (and worse because it looked like they were skipping scan lines to simulate the CGA character size in pixels). I would hope that a good model would use a readable character set and use full resolution in text mode. ++Brando -- Copyright (C) 1987 Brandon S. Allbery. Redistribution permitted only if the redistributor permits further redistribution. ---- Moderator for comp.sources.misc ---- Brandon S. Allbery {decvax,cbatt,cbosgd}!cwruecmp!ncoast!allbery Tridelta Industries {ames,mit-eddie,talcott}!necntc!ncoast!allbery 7350 Corporate Blvd. necntc!ncoast!allbery@harvard.HARVARD.EDU Mentor, OH 44060 +01 216 255 1080 (also eddie.MIT.EDU)
malc@tahoe.UUCP (Malcolm L. Carlock) (06/04/87)
--- Line eater food --- In article <931@maynard.BSW.COM> campbell@maynard.UUCP (Larry Campbell) writes: >Bah. The IBM keyboards are detestable. They are much too noisy for >office or home ... perhaps they'd be suitable for a factory floor. >Their layout is atrocious. And until recently they obnoxiously overloaded >the numeric keypad with function and cursor keys. Everyone agrees that >NumLock is a total botch. Amen to that. The original PC keyboards were horribly laid out (dinky return key, teeny shift keys causing one to hit the ALT or '\' by mistake ... ACKPHT!) Most of the clone keyboards were from the beginning (deliberately?) laid out better than IBM's! >And the IBM monitor? Gack. Either you're talking about a CGA and IBM >color monitor, since you mention graphics, or you're talking about >the monochrome adapter. The CGA is garbage -- you'd go blind looking >at it for eight hours a day. The monochrome adapter does deliver nicely >formed characters at a reasonable resolution, but the IBM monochrome >green screen has such a long persistence that when the display scrolls, >it smears like Tammy Bakker's mascara. The IBM monitors are indeed trash. Not only do they smear and have generally poor resolution, but the the lower half of the screen flickers quite conspicuously and annoyingly during scrolling. This makes watching the thing scroll a very unpleasant experience. Admittedly, the serif'ed font that IBM uses on its monitors is a nice idea, but who needs it? Why should I go blind trying to read a monitor that can't properly resolve those "nice" characters? Even the better clone monitors aren't as easy to read as most simple "dumb" terminal screens. Unless monitors become widely available that use considerably finer text resolution, forget the fancy screen fonts. GIVE ME A CLEAN, EASY-TO-READ FONT ON THE SCREEN. I DON'T NEED MY TEXT TO BE FANCY-LOOKING UNTIL IT GETS TO THE PRINTER! > . . . you're sure not going to build a decent terminal with IBM hardware. Indeed, this is true. "I am the ghost of IBM monitors past and present!" "Bah, humbug! And furthermore, ACKPHT!!" Thanks for following me this far. Larry, thanks for bringing up the subject. profoundly, ll -------------------- ll ----------------------------------------------------- m mmm mmm aaaaa ll ccccc Plan: to follow the timesharer's motto: mm m m a a ll c c m m m a a ll c ********************************* m m m a a ll c * "Batches?! We don' need no * m m m a aa ll c c * stinking batches!!" * m m m aaaaaa ll ccccc ********************************* ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- malc@tahoe U of N/Reno Dis claimer, dat claimer, de other claimer... -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
lincoln@randvax.UUCP (06/07/87)
In article <2580@ncoast.UUCP> allbery@ncoast.UUCP (Brandon Allbery) writes: >As quoted from <931@maynard.BSW.COM> by campbell@maynard.BSW.COM (Larry Campbell): >+--------------- >| In article <16906@amdcad.AMD.COM> phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai) writes: >| > >| >Why would you want a PC instead of a terminal? > I would hope that a good model would use a readable character set >and use full resolution in text mode. > Lots of PCs and clones are being used as terminals to larger systems. I am interested in this workstation use and what it adds to the interaction with a program that one does not have at a dumb terminal. Granted that there are lots of possible configurations, and that some are orders of magnitude more convenient in the hardware sense than others... How does this configuration speed up your work? Do you use PC editors or word processors in place of a full screen editor on the mainframe? Do you bring other PC tools to bear on your work in this way? Does this make it easier to use other mainframe programs by suplimenting them with PC based activities? What are the most important considerations? o < ' . Thanks in advance... will summarize / > TOM LINCOLN ' `
smvorkoetter@watmum.UUCP (06/08/87)
In article <497@tahoe.UUCP> malc@tahoe.UUCP (Malcolm L. Carlock) writes: >In article <931@maynard.BSW.COM> campbell@maynard.UUCP (Larry Campbell) writes: >>at it for eight hours a day. The monochrome adapter does deliver nicely >>formed characters at a reasonable resolution, but the IBM monochrome >>green screen has such a long persistence that when the display scrolls, >>it smears like Tammy Bakker's mascara. > >The IBM monitors are indeed trash. Not only do they smear and have generally >poor resolution, but the the lower half of the screen flickers quite >conspicuously and annoyingly during scrolling. This makes watching the thing >scroll a very unpleasant experience. > >Admittedly, the serif'ed font that IBM uses on its monitors is a nice idea, >but who needs it? Why should I go blind trying to read a monitor that can't >properly resolve those "nice" characters? Even the better clone monitors >aren't as easy to read as most simple "dumb" terminal screens. Unless monitors >become widely available that use considerably finer text resolution, forget >the fancy screen fonts. You had better get your monochrome monitor fixed. Every IBM Monochrome monitor I've ever used at crystal clear needle sharp characters. I have seen a few that went out of adjustment and became fuzzy.
campbell@maynard.UUCP (06/12/87)
In article <1004@watmum.UUCP> smvorkoetter@watmum.UUCP (Stefan M. Vorkoetter) writes: > >You had better get your monochrome monitor fixed. Every IBM Monochrome monitor >I've ever used at crystal clear needle sharp characters. I have seen a few that >went out of adjustment and became fuzzy. There seems to be some confusion about which IBM monitors have which braindamaged characteristics. The Monochrome monitor has OK resolution, but smears incredibly badly when the text scrolls. Also the screen isn't black, but more of a washed-out pale grey, which makes for very poor contrast. Chuck this one. The Color monitor, on the other hand, has lousy resolution, but a much blacker screen. The screen is too shiny, though, and you can see yourself in it. Toss it. The flicker problem is seen only on CGA-equipped systems. It is the fault of a severely brain damaged implementation of the video memory on the CGA board. Into the dustbin with it. Thus, on the plain old PC, PCjr, XT, and AT systems, there is no way to get a decent display with IBM hardware. (The EGA and its display are almost good enough, though...) The good news is that the PS/2 systems have absolutely stunning graphics quality. The monitors are superb and the resolution of the VGA is good enough for anything short of serious CAD or image processing work. This alone is reason enough to chuck the old systems and switch to PS/2s. -- Larry Campbell The Boston Software Works, Inc. Internet: campbell@maynard.BSW.COM 120 Fulton Street, Boston MA 02109 uucp: {husc6,mirror,think}!maynard!campbell +1 617 367 6846
smvorkoetter@watmum.UUCP (06/12/87)
In article <936@maynard.BSW.COM> campbell@maynard.UUCP (Larry Campbell) writes: > >Thus, on the plain old PC, PCjr, XT, and AT systems, there is no way to ^^^^ >get a decent display with IBM hardware. (The EGA and its display are almost >good enough, though...) The PCjr Monitor, (which is not the IBM Colour Display, but rather the IBM PCjr Colour Display), has a matte surface, and has better contrast and less fuzzy edges than the IBM PC Colour Display. I have always considered it to be the best of the IBM Displays. (It is also the least expensive)
ephram@violet.berkeley.edu.UUCP (06/13/87)
In article <434@clsib21.UUCP> scott@clsib21.UUCP (Scott P. Herzig) writes: > >IBM actually does have a very nice monitor/display adapter combination. >It's just E X P E N S I V E!!! >The Professional Graphics Display and Adapter is quite nice, nicer than >the EGA. It just takes lots of $$$ and about 2 slots. The PGA does indeed have a better character set than the EGA however IBM in it's infinite wisdom put the flicker back into the display. Ephram Cohen ephram@violet.berkeley.edu
len@elxsi.UUCP (06/15/87)
In article <434@clsib21.UUCP> scott@clsib21.UUCP (Scott P. Herzig) writes: > >IBM actually does have a very nice monitor/display adapter combination. >It's just E X P E N S I V E!!! And getting cheaper all the time. Currently one can buy PGA's with monitors (1024x768) in the under $2000.00 range, but not from IBM (:-). >The Professional Graphics Display and Adapter is quite nice, nicer than >the EGA. It just takes lots of $$$ and about 2 slots. The newer products only use one slot. Direct mail to me if you want any recommendations. I have played with a few different PGA combinations. Len
lowey@sask.UUCP (Kevin Lowey) (06/16/87)
Tom Lincoln Writes: > Lots of PCs and clones are being used as terminals to larger systems. I am > interested in this workstation use and what it adds to the interaction with > a program that one does not have at a dumb terminal. Granted that there > are lots of possible configurations, and that some are orders of magnitude > more convenient in the hardware sense than others... > > How does this configuration speed up your work? Do you use PC editors or > word processors in place of a full screen editor on the mainframe? Do you > bring other PC tools to bear on your work in this way? Does this make it > easier to use other mainframe programs by suplimenting them with PC based > activities? What are the most important considerations? I work in the User Support and Training group at the University of Saskatchewan. We currently are using a variety of PCs as terminals on our VAX/VMS and VAX/ULTRIX mainframe systems. Personally, I think that using PCs is great! My setup is as follows: Hardware: - Zenith 158 IBM-XT compatible computer - 10 MB hard disk - Two serial ports - One IBM graphics printer compatible printer - IBM-CGA compatible screen with Zenith RGBI monitor. - Hayes compatible 1200 baud modem Software: - KERMIT version 2.29B (soon to be upgraded to the TEK version) - QKKERMIT tek4010 terminal emulator (written in Turbo Pascal) - Borland's Sidekick version 1.56A (with cut and paste functions) - Borland's Turbo Lightning (On the fly spelling checker) - PC-DOS version 3.2 (including the graphics.com program) - Micro-Emacs 3.8b - Turbo Pascal 3.01A This setup gives me the following capabilities: Terminal Emulation: - Tektronics 40xx graphics terminal emulation - VT102 Terminal emulation - The ability to log on to two computers at the same time through the two serial ports (although I must admit I haven't tried this yet) - Kermit supplies a multi-page rollback feature, similar to the old HP terminals, which means I can look at the last 100 lines of text which has scrolled off the top of the screen. File Transfer Capabilites: - Kermit allows full transfer of text and binary files - File transfers can be done both to and from the mainframe computer WITHOUT needing KERMIT on the other side, good for computer systems which don't have KERMIt - some programs, such as TeX, SAS, etc. can use the same device independent files on both the PC and the mainframe computer, so I can do local work on the PC, then upload it to the more powerful programs on the mainframe computer. Local Printing Capabilities: - The ability to take any screen image and dump it to my printer, both text AND graphics images. - The ability to have the printer "follow" everything I do. For example, to print a file locally, I can download the file with Kermit then print it, or I can press CONTROL-PRTSC and then "type" the file on the mainframe, having it come out on the printer as it is typed. I could also have it go to a file as well. - I can "grab" any portion from the screen using the Sidekick notepad, re-edit it any way I like, then print it from the notepad. - Version 2.29B of kermit supports the VT102 printer control codes. Advanced local PC commands: - Kermit allows us to re-define the keyboard any way we want to. - The Sidekick editor allows us to grab things from the screen, edit this message, then paste this new message back into the editor (or whatever) on the mainframe computer. - The Turbo Lightning program can check, and CORRECT my spelling both when I am using Microcomputer programs, and when I am using mainframe programs. It also supplies a thesaurus. Since a lot of my work is documentation, this is very handy. Software Compatiblity: - many programs, such as micro-emacs, gnuplot (graphics program), and others in the public domain come with source code. They can be compiled both on the micro and on the mainframe (as with the above mentioned packages). Combine this with other programs such as CED, which gives VMS style command line editing, and we can have an environment which is very similar on both PCs and the mainframe. An example of how I work: I'm working through the day, logged onto the mainframe computer. I have to make phone calls, so I look up phone numbers in the Sidekick phone book. My second port is connected to a modem, so I can get Sidekick to dial the phone in port two while I'm still logged into the direct line connected to port one. As I go through the day, I use the sidekick calendar to keep track of my time, so I can do my week-end report of projects I've been working on to my supervisor. This can be popped up even while I'm using the terminal emulator. Some user's arrive with questions about using graphics. I start the TEK terminal emulator, look at and solve the problem. I also use the graphics terminal for making overheads for courses I teach. I print the rough drafts on the local graphics printer, then do the final drafts on the mainframe laser printer. Everything I type is being checked for spelling. I can correct spelling on the fly in mail, editing help files, using the VMS PHONE command or the unix TALK or WRITE commands, etc. During the day, I think of things I have to do. I pop up the sidekick notepad, and jot the notes down. I have my startup file on the PC automatically display the "to do" list whenever I boot the micro. During the day, I see a mail message which I want a hardcopy of. Instead of printing on the printer a few buildings over, I press SHIFT-PRTSC and I immediately have a printout available. Another user comes to me with a problem. I type his error log file, which scrolls off the top of the screen. No problem, I press the PGUP key to see the part that scrolled past. A user wants his files stored on an MS-DOS diskette so he can take it home to his computer. I use kermit's file transfer capabilities to download the files for him from his mainframe account. While the mainframe computer is down for maintenance, I use micro- emacs to do some editing work, which I later transfer to the mainframe using KERMIT. I could also be using Turbo Pascal to do programing work, then later transfer it to VAX pascal. You can substitute your favorite languages. Finally, at the end of the day, I log onto the Ultrix system and read news. Since I'm not adept at the editors available on Ultrix, (I'm a VMS hacker), I use the notepad in sidekick to grab a person's article, edit in my own comments locally, then use the "paste" option within sidekick to paste the results back into the news system. This way, I get to use an editor I'm familiar with. In fact, I'm doing this now! Prices (very rough Canadian non-university discounted dollars): Cheap IBM compatible $3000.00 Hayes compatible 1200 baud modem $ 300.00 Printer $1000.00 Kermit free Tek4010 emulator free (soon a part of kermit I hear) Micro-Emacs free Turbo Lightning $ 150.00 Sidekick $ 150.00 ------------------------------------------------- Total $4600.00 This is similar to a DEC-VT241 terminal (I think, I don't buy them) without a printer, and even if a printer was attached, it probably wouldn't do graphics. Conclusions: Personally, I find the PC indispensable (I couldn't spell that, but Lightning caught it). The key is that it isn't just any particular terminal emulation program that makes the PC work. Instead, it is the complete system. The main strength is that the person using the system can tailor a PC to fit specific needs, which is one thing you CANNOT do with a normal terminal. I happen to have a collection of programs (mainly Kermit, Sidekick and Lightning) which works very well together. Another person in the office, using a Vaxmate with Microsoft Windows, has similar capabilities using the Microsoft Windows interface, a vt240 (and VT220) emulator, and the notepad and appointment minder in Windows. In fact, he can do something I wish I could, have more than one vt220 terminal running at the same time, (using windows, DEC's vt220 emulator, and an Ethernet card). Include the networking software for PCs that DEC is supplying, and even file transfer becomes transparent, but that's another story. How many people out there have a workstation which is VT100/tek40xx compatible, has locally definable keyboards, a cut and paste facility for text, long term (disk) memory for large files, screen roll-back, local graphics and text printer support, automatic telephone dialing, a colour screen, and a built in notepad, calendar, calculator, appointment minder, and spelling checker, all for less than $5000 Canadian? I'd gladly suffer with less pretty text if I can get all this in return. Besides, most of the new EGA compatible cards (or similar hi-res cards) are every bit as good in resolution as the IBM-MONO card. Have you seen the AT&T colour monitor, or an IBM EGA monitor, or the Hercules cards, or ... ______________________________________________________________________________ | Kevin Lowey |The above is the personal opinion of Kevin | | University of Saskatchewan |Lowey. It does not reflect the position of| | Computing Services |the University of Saskatchewan in any way. | | SaskTel: (306) 966-4826 | | | Bitnet:LOWEY@SASK. (preferred) |I am in no way affiliated with any of the | | UUCP: ihnp4!sask!lowey.uucp |above mentioned companies other than U of S| |________________________________|___________________________________________|