covertr@gtephx.UUCP (Richard E. Covert) (07/22/89)
Is anyone from DC on USENET?? If so, does your cart have serial io drivers which allow full speed flow control?? I have a USR 9600 HST modem that can talk at up 38.4 KBPs ST to modem, and up to 14.4 USR to USR. But, the USR requires (hell, DEMANDS) hardware RTS/CTS low control. And the Atari TOS does not support hardware RTS/CTS flow control, not even the vaporware TOS 1.4. I might be interested in buying the DC SIO cart just to get a working flow control for my USR modem!!! Please post any data about this new cart, as I am sure that other ST USENETters would be interested. Richard (gtephx!covertr) Covert
jeff@quark.WV.TEK.COM (Jeff Beadles) (07/25/89)
In article <8021@ceres.physics.uiowa.edu> covertr@gtephx.UUCP (Richard E. Covert) writes: [Lotsa stuff deleted] >Is anyone from DC on USENET?? If so, does your cart have serial io drivers >which allow full speed flow control?? I have a USR 9600 HST modem that can >talk at up 38.4 KBPs ST to modem, and up to 14.4 USR to USR. But, the USR >requires (hell, DEMANDS) hardware RTS/CTS low control. And the Atari TOS does >not support hardware RTS/CTS flow control, not even the vaporware TOS 1.4. Well, I've downloaded a program from somewhere (GEnie I think) that allows for "proper" operation of the RTS/CTS lines. It's stuck in my AUTO folder on the HD. As for the DC multi-port, it only supports RTS/CTS on the standard ST port. (Per the doc's.) I asked for, and received a copy of the doc's from DC. (In Email no less!) I noticed a post from someone there and requested them. I'm a little leary of posting them here though. I'll send the folks email and ask them to post them here. -Jeff -- Jeff Beadles Utek Sustaining Engineering, Tektronix Inc. jeff@quark.WV.TEK.COM
uace0@uhnix2.uh.edu (Michael B. Vederman) (07/25/89)
He is the scoop on the DC-PORT. DC-PORT does allow for up to 38400 baud thru
DC-PORT, but alas, we do not support RTS/CTS at this time. I will discuss
the possibility of adding this with Gilbert (he is the hardware wiz). We
had decided at the time that rts/cts was not used much, and to keep size and
cost down, we did not implement them.
On another note, 5-port versions are now available.
Previous question, we supportt the following lines:
send
receive
DCD - carrier detect
DTR - data terminal ready
ground
(unused pin) on rj12
We will post more info. It may be possible to make a special version which
does support rts/cts, but I can't say for sure until speaking with gilbert.
- mike
--
for (;;) : Use ATARINET, send an interactive
do_it(c_programmers); : message such as:
: Tell UH-INFO at UHUPVM1 ATARINET HELP
University Atari Computer Enthusiasts : University of Houston UACEcovertr@gtephx.UUCP (Richard E. Covert) (07/25/89)
The June/July issue of ST EXPRESS magazine has an ad from Double Message-ID: <448e5c73.14a1f@gtephx.UUCP> Date: 21 Jul 89 17:37:26 GMT Organization: AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, Arizona Lines: 13 Is anyone from DC on USENET?? If so, does your cart have serial io drivers which allow full speed flow control?? I have a USR 9600 HST modem that can talk at up 38.4 KBPs ST to modem, and up to 14.4 USR to USR. But, the USR requires (hell, DEMANDS) hardware RTS/CTS low control. And the Atari TOS does not support hardware RTS/CTS flow control, not even the vaporware TOS 1.4. I might be interested in buying the DC SIO cart just to get a working flow control for my USR modem!!! Please post any data about this new cart, as I am sure that other ST USENETters would be interested. Richard (gtephx!covertr) Covert
michaela@iscuve.iscs.com (Michael Albo) (07/25/89)
In article <8023@ceres.physics.uiowa.edu> covertr@gtephx.UUCP (Richard E. Covert) writes: >... >not support hardware RTS/CTS flow control, not even the vaporware TOS 1.4. > > I might be interested in buying the DC SIO cart just to get a working >flow control for my USR modem!!! Somebody just posted on Genie a new routine to add RTS/CTS flow control to the ST. His complaint like yours was that TOS 1.4 did not even support it. I tried this software and it does work. I will post it soon. It is a very small routine and does not eat up alot of memory.
covertr@gtephx.UUCP (Richard E. Covert) (08/01/89)
In article <817@uhnix2.uh.edu>, uace0@uhnix2.uh.edu (Michael B. Vederman) writes: > > He is the scoop on the DC-PORT. DC-PORT does allow for up to 38400 baud thru > DC-PORT, but alas, we do not support RTS/CTS at this time. I will discuss > the possibility of adding this with Gilbert (he is the hardware wiz). We > had decided at the time that rts/cts was not used much, and to keep size and > cost down, we did not implement them. > > On another note, 5-port versions are now available. I think that it was a FATAL mistake not to include working hardware RTS/CTS in the DC PORT serial io product. Many Atari ST bbses would like to go multi-port, but the new high speed US Robotics modems require HARDWARE flow control for optimal performance. Is there any chance that DC PORT will be redesigned to add hardware RTS/CTS?? I am not interested in buying such a product until it does include hardware RTS/CTS. I would buy the DC PORT, today, if it had hardware RTS/CTS!!! Richard Covert
uace0@uhnix2.uh.edu (Michael B. Vederman) (08/01/89)
>hardware RTS/CTS in the DC PORT serial io product. Many Atari ST bbses >would like to go multi-port, but the new high speed US Robotics modems >require HARDWARE flow control for optimal performance. In fact, MichTron BBS 3.0 works just fine at 9600 baud using DC-PORT. At least that is what I am told by Tim Purves, and I trust him very much. > > Is there any chance that DC PORT will be redesigned to add hardware >RTS/CTS?? I am not interested in buying such a product until it does include >hardware RTS/CTS. > > I would buy the DC PORT, today, if it had hardware RTS/CTS!!! > >Richard Covert We are always willing to take special orders, and in fact, adding RTS/CTS support can be done with hacks to our PC board. As it stands, fresh out of the box, DC-PORT doesn't support RTS/CTS, but if you place an order with us, we will get you a version that supports RTS/CTS. Cost will be more, but we are very fair as to the added expense. Call our support BBS, and let's talk, the number is (713)944-0108. - michael b. vederman Double Click Software -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Double Click Me | Double Click Software | P.O. Box 741206 | Houston, Tx, 77274 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ See y'all at the Dallas World of Atari Show, Aug. 19-20. Stop by BOOTH 101
darren@blender.UUCP (Darren G. Holloway) (08/03/89)
This is the first I have heard about this idea...If you were running
Minix (for example), is there support for multiple users???
Can somebody tell me more about this card, as we had a news loss for about
a 2 week newsloss? And does this only work on a mega?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Darren G. Holloway | QUOTE: "Next time we have sex,
UUCP: darren@blender.UUCP | Just pretend that I'm Ed Meese"
..calgary!xenlink!blender!darren | -Jello Biafra
Citidel: ..the_land!poopsie!darren holloway | this space for rent
GEnie: D.HOLLOWAY5 |
DISCLAIMER: I read it in the 'Weekly World News', Therefore it must be true!BUGGS@cup.portal.com (William Edward JuneJr) (08/03/89)
ATZ >> I would buy the DC PORT, today, if it had hardware RTS/CTS!!! >>Richard Covert Me too, IF it's work with Binkley Term ST!! Ed June
pmb@swituc.UUCP (Pat Berry) (08/04/89)
In article <44c0b061.14a1f@gtephx.UUCP>, covertr@gtephx.UUCP (Richard E. Covert) writes: > Is there any chance that DC PORT will be redesigned to add hardware > RTS/CTS?? I am not interested in buying such a product until it does include > hardware RTS/CTS. I echo Richard's sentiment... the board would be of no use to us without properly functioning RTS/CTS lines. We also use US Robotics HST modems. -- Pat Berry KN7B pmb%swituc.uucp@arizona.edu KN7B @ WB7TLS.AZ packet radio
covertr@gtephx.UUCP (Richard E. Covert) (08/08/89)
In article <189@swituc.UUCP>, pmb@swituc.UUCP (Pat Berry) writes: > In article <44c0b061.14a1f@gtephx.UUCP>, covertr@gtephx.UUCP (Richard E. Covert) writes: > > Is there any chance that DC PORT will be redesigned to add hardware > > RTS/CTS?? I am not interested in buying such a product until it does include > > hardware RTS/CTS. > > I echo Richard's sentiment... the board would be of no use to us without > properly functioning RTS/CTS lines. We also use US Robotics HST modems. > > -- > Pat Berry KN7B > pmb%swituc.uucp@arizona.edu > KN7B @ WB7TLS.AZ packet radio At one point DC SOFTWARE stated that RTS/CTS could be 'added' to their DC PORT pc board. I guess that this means kludging up a p[c board by adding chips, jumpers, etc. I, for one, don't wat to buy a hacked up pc board. And the idea of paying extra for hardware RTS/CTS seems kind of strange, almost like paying extra for the 1488/1489 RS-232 line drivers. I mean, RTS/CTS seems to be a basic,fundamental, part of the serial port design, and leaving it out makes me wonder where else DC SOFTWARE scimped to save money. All in all, if DC SOFTWARE had asked before committing to a final pc baord, they would have KNOWN that hardware RTS/CTS is a requirement, and not just an afterthought. Heck, all of the FoReM ST BBSes are just crying for a working TOS with hardware flow control. The USR 9600 HST modem will xfer data at 14400 baud if you have hardware flow control. And just ask US Robotics about sells of the USR 9600 HST mdoem!! IT IS HOT!!! So, I repeat, sell me a clean, nicely layed out, pc board DC PORT with hardware RTS/CTS, with software drivers that also support the hardware RTS/CTS and you will have one BIG market. If DC PORT worked at 38.4 KBPS with RTS/CTS you would have FoReM/USR owners begging for DC PORT. I guess to summarize, I think that RTS/CTS should have been part of the basic design of DC PORT. I do not want to buy a DC PORT that was hacked up to support RTS/CTS. And DC SOFTWARE needs to provide system software drivers, which run on all version of TOS, to support the RTS/CTS signals. If DC SOFTWARE could do this, then the DC PORT would be a smashing success. Until then, I will withold ordering one myself. Thanks for the forum to discuss this product. Richard (gtephx!covertr) Covert
kclenden@silver.bacs.indiana.edu (Kevin Clendenien) (08/08/89)
In article <44e3d740.14a1f@gtephx.UUCP> covertr@gtephx.UUCP (Richard E. Covert) writes: [stuff deleted] > I guess to summarize, I think that RTS/CTS should have been part of the >basic design of DC PORT. I do not want to buy a DC PORT that was hacked up to >support RTS/CTS. And DC SOFTWARE needs to provide system software drivers, which >run on all version of TOS, to support the RTS/CTS signals. If DC SOFTWARE could >do this, then the DC PORT would be a smashing success. Until then, I will withold >ordering one myself. > > Thanks for the forum to discuss this product. >Richard (gtephx!covertr) Covert Jeezy Peezy... Some people will never be happy. DC Software has attempted to make you, the customer, happy. They have offered to go out of their way to provide you with a board that will do what you want, but are you grateful? No, you would rather whine. It's no wonder there aren't more people supporting the ST out there. I would like to thank DC Software for their offer to modify a board for a special user request. I hope that DC Software remains in the ST market, and I hope that more developers for the ST will be as willing to satisfy a specialized customer request. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Kevin B. Clendenien kclenden@silver.bacs.indiana.edu ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
uace0@uhnix2.uh.edu (Michael B. Vederman) (08/08/89)
In article <44e3d740.14a1f@gtephx.UUCP> covertr@gtephx.UUCP (Richard E. Covert) writes: >In article <189@swituc.UUCP>, pmb@swituc.UUCP (Pat Berry) writes: >> In article <44c0b061.14a1f@gtephx.UUCP>, covertr@gtephx.UUCP (Richard E. Covert) writes: >> > Is there any chance that DC PORT will be redesigned to add hardware >> > RTS/CTS?? I am not interested in buying such a product until it does include >> > hardware RTS/CTS. >> >> I echo Richard's sentiment... the board would be of no use to us without >> properly functioning RTS/CTS lines. We also use US Robotics HST modems. >> >> -- >> Pat Berry KN7B >> pmb%swituc.uucp@arizona.edu >> KN7B @ WB7TLS.AZ packet radio > > > At one point DC SOFTWARE stated that RTS/CTS could be 'added' to their >DC PORT pc board. I guess that this means kludging up a p[c board by adding >chips, jumpers, etc. I, for one, don't wat to buy a hacked up pc board. And the >idea of paying extra for hardware RTS/CTS seems kind of strange, almost like >paying extra for the 1488/1489 RS-232 line drivers. I mean, RTS/CTS seems to be >a basic,fundamental, part of the serial port design, and leaving it out makes me >wonder where else DC SOFTWARE scimped to save money. > 1) *ALL* DC-PORTs are guaranteed to be from defects for a period of ONE YEAR after purchase. Let's see you get that from anywhere else! 2) A hacked up PC Board? Unless you call a couple of jumpers hacks, then you don't know... You can have two choices if you want rts/cts, you can go without dcd/dtr and get rts/cts, or we can add a daughter board to add rts/cts to the existing board. 3) SKIMP? If you went to manufacture one of these babies, then you'd know that we designed it to keep cost down, and within the reach of most people. Since we are not a large company (actually college students) and we do not have endless cash flow, we went with the needed components to get our hardware working with the majority of software existing. We do not skimp! Our boards are 100% certified working, and carry a one year guarantee. Our drivers work as advertised, and all our customers thus far are satisified, in fact, several are upgrading to the five line version. > All in all, if DC SOFTWARE had asked before committing to a final pc >baord, they would have KNOWN that hardware RTS/CTS is a requirement, and not >just an afterthought. Heck, all of the FoReM ST BBSes are just crying for a >working TOS with hardware flow control. The USR 9600 HST modem will xfer data >at 14400 baud if you have hardware flow control. And just ask US Robotics about >sells of the USR 9600 HST mdoem!! IT IS HOT!!! You mean we should have asked you! As far as the USR modem is concerned, we admit that it will FLY with rts/cts, but it is not a requirement for it to work, and the *majority* of people out there do not own them, nor do the majority of BBS out there have them. As far as FoReM is concerned, we tried working with Matt Singer to get an update to FoReM to support DC-PORT and make FoReM multi-user. He never said nor expressed any concern about the rts/cts lines. He has our port now, ask him what he thinks on the matter! > > So, I repeat, sell me a clean, nicely layed out, pc board DC PORT with >hardware RTS/CTS, with software drivers that also support the hardware RTS/CTS >and you will have one BIG market. If DC PORT worked at 38.4 KBPS with RTS/CTS >you would have FoReM/USR owners begging for DC PORT. > > I guess to summarize, I think that RTS/CTS should have been part of the >basic design of DC PORT. I do not want to buy a DC PORT that was hacked up to >support RTS/CTS. And DC SOFTWARE needs to provide system software drivers, which >run on all version of TOS, to support the RTS/CTS signals. If DC SOFTWARE could >do this, then the DC PORT would be a smashing success. Until then, I will withold >ordering one myself. In other words, one sale to you is a 'smashing success'? Why don't you spend some time and money on a market survey, and determine whether or not the ST market can handle a higher priced expansion port! We are selling them as fast as we can make them, and have not had one returned, nor have we had any dissending comments. We have made special order versions, and have done our very best (considering our limited financial backing - read 'shareware contributions') to come out with a product that fills *most* peoples needs. Our driver does *work* with ALL TOS versions, and works as advertised. I assume you are speaking from experience with DC-PORT, and have actually seen one close up, and have actually voided someone's warranty by opening the case! You have no idea how much we would charge for the version which supports rts/cts, since you never called or wrote to ask, and as I stated twice before, *ALL* DC-PORTs come with a ONE YEAR warranty. Why don't you speak to us in person to find out how easy we are to work with, rather than getting 'modem-mania' and flaming our product (which I am sure you have never seen) on the net. And, by the way, we are working on a DC-PORT II, as well as another hardware product, DC-TALK. Give us a call, and see if it is as easy to flame us on the phone as it is on the net! > > Thanks for the forum to discuss this product. >Richard (gtephx!covertr) Covert Thank you! - mike vederman -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Double Click Me | Double Click Software | P.O. Box 741206 | Houston, Tx, 77274 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ See y'all at the Dallas World of Atari Show, Aug. 19-20. Stop by BOOTH 101
dbsuther@PacBell.COM (Daniel B. Suthers) (08/09/89)
In article <44e3d740.14a1f@gtephx.UUCP> covertr@gtephx.UUCP (Richard E. Covert) writes: #>In article <189@swituc.UUCP>, pmb@swituc.UUCP (Pat Berry) writes: #>> In article <44c0b061.14a1f@gtephx.UUCP>, covertr@gtephx.UUCP (Richard E. Covert) writes: #>> > Is there any chance that DC PORT will be redesigned to add hardware #>> > RTS/CTS?? I am not interested in buying such a product until it does #>> #>> I echo Richard's sentiment... the board would be of no use to us without #>> properly functioning RTS/CTS lines. We also use US Robotics HST modems. #>> #> #> #> [ TEXT DELETED ] I mean, RTS/CTS seems to be #>a basic,fundamental, part of the serial port design, and leaving it out #>makes me wonder where else DC SOFTWARE scimped to save money. #> #> All in all, if DC SOFTWARE had asked before committing to a final pc #>baord, they would have KNOWN that hardware RTS/CTS is a requirement, and not #>just an afterthought. [ TEXT DELETED ] #>Richard (gtephx!covertr) Covert I've been working with various terminals and computer systems for ten years now, and I am sorry to inform you that many major companies do _NOT_ agree with you. Some support RTS/CTS, some XON/XOFF, some both and some use kludged up combinations of both!! ATT does not support rts/cts on their 3B2 series, and Burroughs seems to only support RTS/CTS. My point: the RS232 standard isn't. Please don't flame DC for implementing the portions that help the majority of their users. You might flame US Robotics for building a device that REQUIRES it to work right. Dan Suthers, Analyst, Pacific Bell
covertr@gtephx.UUCP (Richard E. Covert) (08/10/89)
In article <24393@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu>, kclenden@silver.bacs.indiana.edu (Kevin Clendenien) writes: > In article <44e3d740.14a1f@gtephx.UUCP> covertr@gtephx.UUCP (Richard E. Covert) writes: > [stuff deleted] > > I guess to summarize, I think that RTS/CTS should have been part of the > >basic design of DC PORT. I do not want to buy a DC PORT that was hacked up to > >support RTS/CTS. And DC SOFTWARE needs to provide system software drivers, which > way to provide you with a board that will do what you want, but are you > grateful? No, you would rather whine. It's no wonder there aren't more > people supporting the ST out there. I would like to thank DC Software > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Kevin B. Clendenien kclenden@silver.bacs.indiana.edu > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Kevin said in his reply that I was 'whining' about a small defiency in DC PORT. But, my main point was that DC SOFTWARE was being penny wise but pound foolish by leaving out the hardware RTS/CTS. I don't know which UART they used but I am sure that adding RTS/CTS is mainly just a case of adding another RS-232 line driver and line receiver set of ICs. So, to save a couple pennies in their design DC SOFTWARE has eliminated abig market. There are a lot of USR 9600 modem users out there just begging for a working hardware RTS/CTS with working software drivers. So, if this is whining, so be it. I am simply pointing out to DC SOFTWARE, and anyone else out contemplating such a product, to test your market before finishing your design. Ask your potential customers for their desired features, and be willing to change once they see your product. The 'whining' thing brings up another complaint of mine. Why is it that ST owners should be satisfied with a less then perfect product, or with a product with known defiencies, just because a company was willing to market it to us in the first place? I mean, don't we desire the right to be critical of ST products, or should we simply bless any software or hardware product that a company is willing to market, just because they were nice enough to market it?? Awwggg!! Richard (the 'whiner') Covert
kclenden@silver.bacs.indiana.edu (Kevin Clendenien) (08/11/89)
In article <44f290b1.14a1f@gtephx.UUCP> covertr@gtephx.UUCP (Richard E. Covert) writes: [stuff deleted] > The 'whining' thing brings up another complaint of mine. Why is it >that ST owners should be satisfied with a less then perfect product, or with >a product with known defiencies, just because a company was willing to market it >to us in the first place? I mean, don't we desire the right to be critical of >ST products, or should we simply bless any software or hardware product that >a company is willing to market, just because they were nice enough to market >it?? Awwggg!! > >Richard (the 'whiner') Covert Richard, I thought your request was reasonable. What I considered unreasonable was your response to DC Software's response to your request. You asked for something, and they said that they would provide it for you, but you said, "Not good enough! I want it to have been designed that way from the beginning." I do not think that DC Software has ignored a large portion of the RS-232 market, as you claim. I have no idea how much it would have cost them to have designed their board your way from the beginning, but they chose not to because (in part, at least) they felt that their current design would cover the majority of the market. As far as accepting imperfect products, I don't think that is applicable in this case. DC Software Multiport Board does exaclty what it was designed to do, and it does it perfectly. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Kevin B. Clendenien kclenden@silver.bacs.indiana.edu --------------------------------------------------------------------------