BAXTER_A@wehi.dn.mu.oz (06/07/90)
Further to an old thread in which some US folk claimed they couldn't imagine any use for a terminal emulator with more than 24 lines... I just worked out how to set the line number on VMS! Now I can read most news posts in a single screen. Now, why isn't this better than a smaller screen? ... Alan
d88-mbe@sm.luth.se (Michael Bergman) (06/07/90)
BAXTER_A@wehi.dn.mu.oz writes: >Further to an old thread in which some US folk claimed they couldn't >imagine any use for a terminal emulator with more than 24 lines... That's because of lack of imagination, I would say... :-) >I just worked out how to set the line number on VMS! Now I can read most >news posts in a single screen. Now, why isn't this better than a smaller >screen? This is *very* easy in UNIX also. vt100 standards doesn't say anything about the number of rows or columns. 'stty rows 35 columns 132' does the obvious in UNIX. Mike -- Michael Bergman Internet: d88-mbe@sm.luth.se // Undergrad. Comp. Eng. BITNET: d88-mbe%sm.luth.se@kth.se \X/ U of Lulea, SWEDEN ARPA: d88-mbe%sm.luth.se@ucbvax.berkeley.edu UUCP: {uunet,mcvax}!sunic.se!sm.luth.se!d88-mbe
ianr@mullian.ee.mu.oz.au (Ian ROWLANDS) (06/07/90)
In article <8750@wehi.dn.mu.oz> BAXTER_A@wehi.dn.mu.oz writes: >Further to an old thread in which some US folk claimed they couldn't >imagine any use for a terminal emulator with more than 24 lines... > >I just worked out how to set the line number on VMS! Now I can read most >news posts in a single screen. Now, why isn't this better than a smaller >screen? Whoever said the first statement originally is out of their mind. I use terminal programs that sometimes require vt100 emulation. I have tried most of them (PD ones), and I use VLT. Why? It supports more than 24 lines on a screen. I use it's basic default (i.e 40). I can't find any other terminal program which does this in a half decent way. Some others do 48, but that seemsd too much (I've tried it, but don't like it). When I require colour and other pretty things for calling BBS's, I use JRComm. When I ring the university and expect to need vt100, I use VLT and it's 40 line length. I read news on three different terminals - my Amiga running VLT, a vt100 terminal around uni, or a Sun 3/50 console. The sun is the best, as it's window is about 54 lines (just a guess). Who says you don't need more than 24 lines in a terminal emulator? Ian Ian Rowlands | ianr@mullian.ee.mu.oz.au (main) Dept. of Electrical Engineering, | ianr@gondwana.ecr.mu.oz.au (including Computer Science) | ianr@munmurra.cs.mu.oz.au (to 7/90) University of Melbourne | (How can you have a funny quote in only 4 li
jprad@faatcrl.UUCP (Jack Radigan) (06/08/90)
ianr@mullian.ee.mu.oz.au (Ian ROWLANDS) writes: > Whoever said the first statement originally is out of their mind. I >use terminal programs that sometimes require vt100 emulation. I have tried >most of them (PD ones), and I use VLT. Why? It supports more than 24 lines >on a screen. I use it's basic default (i.e 40). I can't find any other terminal >program which does this in a half decent way. Some others do 48, but that >seemsd too much (I've tried it, but don't like it). When I require colour and >other pretty things for calling BBS's, I use JRComm. When I ring the university >and expect to need vt100, I use VLT and it's 40 line length. The original thread was about IBM ANSI screens larger than 25 lines. Although it _is_ ANSI, it _is_ unique enough that there is no "right" way to deal with the remote system since they only "know" 25 lines. I'm talking BBS systems that have no concept of knowing otherwise. -jack-