dalea@cerebus.UUCP (Dale M. Arends X5706) (04/21/88)
That's it!!! I've had it!!!!
Yesterday, I tried downloading a 250K+ file from our UNIX machine to my
Mac using Red Ryder at 2400 baud...well, it worked but I can write faster
that it downloaded! :-)/2
So...I would like to have anyone (everyone?) EMAIL to me the name of their
favorite communications program. My requirements are: XMODEM, YMODEM,
VT-100 Emulation, and FAST DATA TRANSFERS. (RR at 2400 baud had an
abysmal throughput of 137 cps.)
Please include any comments about yours that may help with my decision.
Send responses to me at: {...}!amdahl!cerebus!dalea
dalea@cerebus.UUCP
Thanks to all. I'll summarize the results if appropriate.
--
Dale M. Arends (Fujitsu America Inc., San Jose, Calif.)
{...}!amdahl!cerebus!dalea
The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of my employer.
They are entirely my own if they make sense and I disavow them if they don't.wrp@biochsn.acc.virginia.edu (William R. Pearson) (04/22/88)
> >Yesterday, I tried downloading a 250K+ file from our UNIX machine to my >Mac using Red Ryder at 2400 baud...well, it worked but I can write faster >that it downloaded! :-)/2 >VT-100 Emulation, and FAST DATA TRANSFERS. (RR at 2400 baud had an >abysmal throughput of 137 cps.) You do not say how you did the download. If you were using kermit, this would be the expected speed, because of kermit overhead. If you were using xmodem I would expect faster transfer. I use Versaterm and kermit with long packet sizes (1000 bytes). This works well at 2400 baud (or 19,200 to my IBM-PC over a direct line). But long packets can kill you if you have a noisy line. Unix kermit got long packets relatively recently, so you may have to upgrade. (I have to use kermit because my connection to the unix machine is over a LAN which interprets ^P, ^S and ^Q, and the LAN's modem interprets ^Q and ^S without letting it get to the LAN). Bill Pearson wrp@virginia
lih@cunixc.columbia.edu (Andrew Lih) (04/22/88)
In article <353@hudson.acc.virginia.edu> wrp@biochsn.acc.Virginia.EDU (William R. Pearson) writes: >> >>Yesterday, I tried downloading a 250K+ file from our UNIX machine to my >>Mac using Red Ryder at 2400 baud...well, it worked but I can write faster >>that it downloaded! :-)/2 > >>VT-100 Emulation, and FAST DATA TRANSFERS. (RR at 2400 baud had an >>abysmal throughput of 137 cps.) Hmm...well if you were using XMODEM, then 137 cps is not THAT bad considering the overhead for XMODEM. Since there are only 128 bytes per packet, if you go through the math, it really is not that bad. ( I am too lazy to go through the math, and I also don't want another flinging of combinatorics and icon posibilities :-) > You do not say how you did the download. If you were using >kermit, this would be the expected speed, because of kermit overhead. >If you were using xmodem I would expect faster transfer. Yeah, with a 94-byte packet constraint, then you are talking sub 1000 effective baud rate. > I use Versaterm and kermit with long packet sizes (1000 bytes). >This works well at 2400 baud (or 19,200 to my IBM-PC over a direct >line). But long packets can kill you if you have a noisy line. >Unix kermit got long packets relatively recently, so you may have to >upgrade. I use MacKermit 0.9(36) which has the capability to go up to 1000 bytes per packet. I normally use 512 byte packets, and get about a 1600-1700 effective baud rate, which I consider pretty good. The resend on 1000 bytes can be rather lengthy, which is the reason why I use 512. And the fact that when my refrigerator kicks in, you can see {{{eas{{ on the line... > (I have to use kermit because my connection to the unix >machine is over a LAN which interprets ^P, ^S and ^Q, and the >LAN's modem interprets ^Q and ^S without letting it get to the LAN). OK, so where is the Mac implementation of sliding-windows? Who shall come to the rescue and write this bugger? :-) >Bill Pearson >wrp@virginia
Eric_Shockwave-Rider_Larson@cup.portal.com (04/23/88)
Red Ryder users have my sympathy. As far as throughput, it resembles ad dead, beached whale (actually the comment of a different equally satisfied user). Microphone is about twice as fast as Red Ryder on a null modem connection running at 19,200 bps. Has excellent VT-100, and true, WORKING Ymodem. BUT, In my book there are no comm programs worth recommending on the Mac. I love the Mac, but when I want to use a modem I reach for a PC and ProYAM from Omen Technologies. ProYAM was written by the _inventor_ of Ymodem & Zmodem, and it shows. Red Ryder is like a Kodak brownie in comparison to ProYam's Hasselblad. I wish something like ProYAM's set of features could be run on my Mac. <<<< Eric Larson >>>> Just the facts ma'am.
dalea@cerebus.UUCP (Dale M. Arends X5706) (05/02/88)
A couple of weeks ago I requested recommendations as to a communications
program to replace Red Ryder.
The recommendations have been trickling in and there does seem to be a
pattern. The three programs that were mentioned more than once were
MacTerminal (of course!), Microphone and Versaterm.
The results are as follows:
Versaterm 50%
Microphone 30%
MacTerminal 16%
Others 4%
I still haven't made a move to either of the top 2 but I will be looking
into them.
Thanks to all who responded.
--
Dale M. Arends (Fujitsu America Inc., San Jose, Calif.)
{...}!amdahl!cerebus!dalea
The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of my employer.
They are entirely my own if they make sense and I disavow them if they don't.