info-terms (03/10/83)
>From UCBVAX.@MIT-MC.PATTERMANN@SUMEX-AIM Thu Mar 10 12:10:41 1983
Received: by UCBVAX.ARPA (3.322/3.14)
id AA09547; 10 Mar 83 12:12:54 PST (Thu)
To: info-terms@MIT-MC.ARPA
Does anyone have any experience with either the Hazeltine Esprit III, Visual
50, or QUME 102 terminals?
I am looking for a good inexpensive terminal that will emulate the Televideo
950 series, or the ADDS Viewpoint/ADM3A/22/42 series.
Thanks, Ed
-------info-terms (03/15/83)
>From UCBVAX.@MIT-MC.decvax!genradbolton!linus!security!tfl@BERKELEY Mon Mar 14 23:42:50 1983
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by UCBVAX.ARPA (3.327/3.15)
id AA05591; 14 Mar 83 23:42:50 PST (Mon)
Received: by UCBVAX.ARPA (3.327/3.15)
id AA05612; 14 Mar 83 23:44:11 PST (Mon)
To: info-terms@BERKELEY
Having done a bit of research on this, here's some info. First, I
wouldn't buy Hazeltine, since they are having some coporate
problems. Also I've heard bad things about the reliability of
their stuff (also about Soroc stuff). Pournelle and other more
informed sources have bad stuff to say about the field failure rate of
televideo. ADM3a is too dumb for the money, and so is ADDS. My
personal choice (this week) would be either Liberty's Freedom 100
($595 list) or Nabu 4503 ($495 list). Now, disclaimers:
1) This opinion is not necessarily that of my employer's.
2) The information gathered was on my own time, at my own expense,
and is totally unrelated to any project on which I'm working.
3) This info does not constitute an endorsement.
4) This info is subject to change.
<by the way, the second line should read: *corporate*>
Now, to modulate my opinions above, the way to choose a terminal
should be based on cost/features estimates combined with an
assessment of the degree of difficulty in getting service. A used
ADM may be more cost/effective than a new Freedom 100 (there are
a lot of them around), while the most reliable terminal in the
world is worthless if, the one time that it does go down, there
is no one to service it. Remember folks, we all work for companies
and or universities that have maintenance contracts; it's a much
different problem when you buy a terminal for your own.
cheers.info-terms (03/15/83)
>From UCBVAX.@MIT-MC.Elmo@MIT-OZ Tue Mar 15 00:29:52 1983
Received: by UCBVAX.ARPA (3.327/3.15)
id AA06723; 15 Mar 83 00:31:22 PST (Tue)
To: decvax!genradbolton!linus!security!tfl@UCB-ARPA
Cc: Elmo@MIT-OZ, Info-Terms@MIT-OZ
Reply-To: Info-Terms@Mit-MC
Sender: GREN.ELMO@MIT-OZ
In-Reply-To: Msg of Mon Mar 14 12:39:40 1983 from decvax!genradbolton!linus!security!tfl at Berkeley
I must beg to differ. While the new Sorocs (Iq130,135) are ugly
and have a poor feel, the 120 (still available most everywhere)
is very much a winner. It suffers only from age... baud rate must
be switched via thumbwheel on the rear of the terminal, and its not
Vt52/Vt100/ANSI compatible. It also weighs 45 pounds, so it won't
budge if you set it down somewhere. Service for mine was never a
problem as none was ever necessary, but I've had very good response
from the factory in Anaheim when getting customers' units fixed or
upgraded.
If you're in the market for a terminal, be sure your system can support it
BEFORE you make the plunge.
Regards,
Elmo