johnston@minnie.me.udel.edu (06/06/91)
Regarding PacerTerm announcement in c.s.m.announce: A CTB terminal emulator with TCP/IP and HyperTalk scripting, etc ... This is sorely tempting, even to a die-hard Red Ryder/White Knight addict. Any net folks have first-hand experience with PacerTerm? -- Bill (johnston@minnie.me.udel.edu)
6500wong@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (Ki Ching Wong) (06/06/91)
In article <55534@nigel.ee.udel.edu> johnston@minnie.me.udel.edu writes: >Regarding PacerTerm announcement in c.s.m.announce: >A CTB terminal emulator with TCP/IP and HyperTalk scripting, etc ... >This is sorely tempting, even to a die-hard Red Ryder/White Knight >addict. Any net folks have first-hand experience with PacerTerm? >-- Bill (johnston@minnie.me.udel.edu) I am curious too! How can they do multiwindow communication with a modem? Or can they do that at all? That's the most tempting feature of all, IMHO. -Ki Wong 6500wong@ucsbuxa
kenw@skyler.arc.ab.ca (Ken Wallewein) (06/06/91)
In article <11884@hub.ucsb.edu> 6500wong@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (Ki Ching Wong) writes: In article <55534@nigel.ee.udel.edu> johnston@minnie.me.udel.edu writes: >Regarding PacerTerm announcement in c.s.m.announce: >A CTB terminal emulator with TCP/IP and HyperTalk scripting, etc ... >This is sorely tempting, even to a die-hard Red Ryder/White Knight >addict. Any net folks have first-hand experience with PacerTerm? >-- Bill (johnston@minnie.me.udel.edu) I am curious too! How can they do multiwindow communication with a modem? Or can they do that at all? That's the most tempting feature of all, IMHO. -Ki Wong 6500wong@ucsbuxa Well... I haven't yet used PacerTerm, but I've been using what I presume is PacerTerm's predecessor, PacerLink, for at least a couple of years. I routinely have three or four PacerLink terminal sessions active at one time. However, only one of those can be a serial (modem) session. If one were running SLIP, AppleTalk, PPP, or some other high-level protocol across a serial line to a remote node, one could theoretically have multiple sessions across it, but you'd loose a _lot_ of speed to overhead -- and they couldn't really be called serial sessions. I like PacerLink. Oh, sure, there are thinks I'd like to have... a meta key for Emacs, for one, or some of VersaTerm's slick little non-Mac- standard ideas. But all in all, of the terminal emulators I've tried for use in an office environment (that doesn't include Red Ryder/White Knight), PacerLink is the best one I've found. It rather sounds like PacerTerm is aiming to be the best of both worlds. -- /kenw Ken Wallewein A L B E R T A kenw@noah.arc.ab.ca R E S E A R C H (403)297-2660 C O U N C I L
dant@ryptyde.UUCP (Daniel Tracy) (06/06/91)
Responding to the following: "I am curious too! How can they do multiwindow communication with a modem? Or can they do that at all? That's the most tempting feature of all, IMHO." This is an innate ability of the Communications Toolbox supplied with System 7. Since this program supports the CTB, it can leave this job to the OS. However, you will, of course, need multiple modems! There is a physical limit stating you cannot open two different channels on the same line (unless you're using ISDN!). However, you can do simultaneous uploads and downloads (as well as chat at the same time!) using a program called MultiXfer. The same program must also be on the other side (this is a Macintosh program). It uses a proprietary protocol that handles simultaneous upload/download/chat VERY efficiently (twice as efficient as Zmodem when handling multiple transfers).
dorner@pequod.cso.uiuc.edu (Steve Dorner) (06/06/91)
In article <KENW.91Jun5211409@skyler.arc.ab.ca> kenw@skyler.arc.ab.ca (Ken Wallewein) writes: >time. However, only one of those can be a serial (modem) session. If one >were running SLIP, AppleTalk, PPP, or some other high-level protocol across >a serial line to a remote node, one could theoretically have multiple >sessions across it You mean like I've been doing with John Bruner's uw for four years or more? >but you'd loose a _lot_ of speed to overhead If you have a lot of simultaneous output, sure. That's really not a big consideration, IMHO; multiple windows are far more often used to maintain multiple contexts than to have several endlessly blathering processes going. -- Steve Dorner, U of Illinois Computing Services Office Internet: s-dorner@uiuc.edu UUCP: uunet!uiucuxc!uiuc.edu!s-dorner
dorner@pequod.cso.uiuc.edu (Steve Dorner) (06/07/91)
In article <27@ryptyde.UUCP> dant@ryptyde.UUCP (Daniel Tracy) writes: >Since this program supports the CTB, it can leave this job to the OS. However, >you will, of course, need multiple modems! There is a physical limit stating >you cannot open two different channels on the same line Balderdash. You put a (software) multiplexor on the remote end, and sit a de-mux module between the connection tool and multiple terminal tools. Of course, this does require you to run special software (the mux) on the host. This means that most commercial vendors won't touch it with a ten foot pole, no matter how useful it might be. Thank ingenuity for freeware and shareware authors, who've had products like this (albeit not CTB) for many years. -- Steve Dorner, U of Illinois Computing Services Office Internet: s-dorner@uiuc.edu UUCP: uunet!uiucuxc!uiuc.edu!s-dorner
kenw@skyler.arc.ab.ca (Ken Wallewein) (06/07/91)
In article <1991Jun6.140312.1719@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> dorner@pequod.cso.uiuc.edu (Steve Dorner) writes: In article <KENW.91Jun5211409@skyler.arc.ab.ca> kenw@skyler.arc.ab.ca (Ken Wallewein) writes: >time. However, only one of those can be a serial (modem) session. If one >were running SLIP, AppleTalk, PPP, or some other high-level protocol across >a serial line to a remote node, one could theoretically have multiple >sessions across it You mean like I've been doing with John Bruner's uw for four years or more? Good point. Not quite the same idea -- certainly not high-level protocol -- but, hey, it works. Only with Unix, though... >but you'd loose a _lot_ of speed to overhead If you have a lot of simultaneous output, sure. That's really not a big consideration, IMHO; multiple windows are far more often used to maintain multiple contexts than to have several endlessly blathering processes going. I was referring protocol overhead. I've run a PacerLink serial session over Asynchronous AppleTalk over a serial line. It made a teletype look fast. I imagine a telnet session over SLIP or PPP would be comparable. -- Steve Dorner, U of Illinois Computing Services Office Internet: s-dorner@uiuc.edu UUCP: uunet!uiucuxc!uiuc.edu!s-dorner -- /kenw Ken Wallewein A L B E R T A kenw@noah.arc.ab.ca R E S E A R C H (403)297-2660 C O U N C I L
johnston@oscar.ccm.udel.edu (06/07/91)
But enough of the multi-windows debate! Anybody have any experience with the HyperTalk scripting feature? This seems like a significant improvement over the relatively ad hoc scripting language built into White Knight (no experience with Microphone ...). Freeware is nice, but imagine for a minute that some folks would be willing to pay for good comm program: how do MicroPhone II, VersaTerm-Pro, and PacerTerm stack up? Anybody with Genie links know what's up with White Knight and Comm Tool Box? They're all good programs, and getting better, but with System 7.0, CTB, and IAC, I suppose some people will be interested in upgrading. We can keep this civil, can't we? ;-) -- Bill (johnston@minnie.me.udel.edu)
sjhg9320@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Spam-pyre) (06/07/91)
johnston@oscar.ccm.udel.edu writes: >Freeware is nice, but imagine for a minute that some folks would be >willing to pay for good comm program: how do MicroPhone II, >VersaTerm-Pro, and PacerTerm stack up? In my experience with Whight Knight, MP II, and Versa-Term Pro, there's no way any other Mac Comm Program, with the exception of the orignal Acknowledge, comes close to the ease and elegance of the scripting of Microphone II. (If you like Modula, you'll feel right at home.) An opinion, not a fact. -- ================================================================================ | June 4th, 1989. || |================================================================================
macman@wpi.WPI.EDU (Chris Silverberg) (06/07/91)
In an article johnston@oscar.ccm.udel.edu rambles: >Anybody with Genie links know what's up with White Knight and Comm >Tool Box? They're all good programs, and getting better, but with >System 7.0, CTB, and IAC, I suppose some people will be interested >in upgrading. We can keep this civil, can't we? ;-) Scott is diligently working on White Knight 12, adding support for the CTB, new emulations, and other Watson-goodies, but that's all I know. (Certainly nothing you couldn't have guessed anyways). If I find out more, i'll let you know... - Chris =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Chris Silverberg INTERNET: macman@wpi.wpi.edu Worcester Polytechnic Institute Main Street USA 508-832-7725 (sysop) America Online: TfChris WMUG BBS 508-832-5844 (sysop)
molloy@emerald.icd.teradyne.com (Phil Molloy) (06/07/91)
dorner@pequod.cso.uiuc.edu (Steve Dorner) writes: > In article <KENW.91Jun5211409@skyler.arc.ab.ca> kenw@skyler.arc.ab.ca (Ken Wallewein) writes: > >time. However, only one of those can be a serial (modem) session. If one > >were running SLIP, AppleTalk, PPP, or some other high-level protocol across > >a serial line to a remote node, one could theoretically have multiple > >sessions across it > > You mean like I've been doing with John Bruner's uw for four years or more? > > >but you'd loose a _lot_ of speed to overhead > > If you have a lot of simultaneous output, sure. That's really not a big > consideration, IMHO; multiple windows are far more often used to maintain > multiple contexts than to have several endlessly blathering processes going. I've been using MacLayers for quite some time and agree that one does not tend to have a lot of output happening on each layer/window. The way I'm using it as I type is one layer running the tass newsreader, one running GNU Emacs with the vm mail handler, and one layer a shell to receive wall/write messages. If pacerterm operates as well as advertized I would have to consider changing. Especially beneficial would be zmodem and ftp capability. One important consideration will be the size of the program. I quite using RedRyder due to it's size (>1M). Although I have 4M in my Mac+, 1M for the com program is too much. MacLayers is sitting here quite happy with 225K. I realize that more features will cause it to grow, but if it reaches the >1M size, it will be too big for me. Phil -- Philip E. Molloy KA1CD molloy@icd.teradyne.com
resnick@cogsci.uiuc.edu (Pete Resnick) (06/08/91)
molloy@emerald.icd.teradyne.com (Phil Molloy) writes: >One important consideration will be the size of the program. I quite using >RedRyder due to it's size (>1M). Although I have 4M in my Mac+, 1M for the >com program is too much. MacLayers is sitting here quite happy with 225K. I >realize that more features will cause it to grow, but if it reaches the >1M >size, it will be too big for me. Matt Kingman wrote to me with the following: >The application will run on a 1MB Mac Plus or greater (it will run in a >550K but is much happier with more memory). On a 1MB machine you will >be limited as to the amount of connections you can make. On disk, the >application consumes 480K and the tools range from 24K (Text FT) to >207K (VT320, the pig of the group) with most being less than 60K. And >don't forget MacTCP. Not too bad. pr -- Pete Resnick (...so what is a mojo, and why would one be rising?) Graduate assistant - Philosophy Department, Gregory Hall, UIUC System manager - Cognitive Science Group, Beckman Institute, UIUC Internet/ARPAnet/EDUnet : resnick@cogsci.uiuc.edu BITNET (if no other way) : FREE0285@UIUCVMD
sharp@cpsc.ucalgary.ca (Maurice Sharp) (06/08/91)
In article <55676@nigel.ee.udel.edu> johnston@oscar.ccm.udel.edu writes: >But enough of the multi-windows debate! Anybody have any experience >with the HyperTalk scripting feature? This seems like a significant >improvement over the relatively ad hoc scripting language built into >White Knight (no experience with Microphone ...). The scripting language is a proper subset of Hypertalk with extensions for Communication facilities. As such, if you know how to work with Hypertalk, you know most of PacerScript. It also adds custom dialog boxes, including scrolling lists, popup menus, buttons, ... In short, it is an extreemly powerful scripting language that integrates nicely into the communications task. It is also very easy to use (nice editor and help feature). >Freeware is nice, but imagine for a minute that some folks would be >willing to pay for good comm program: how do MicroPhone II, >VersaTerm-Pro, and PacerTerm stack up? At the moment, if you need Tektronix emulation, you get Versaterm. Of course it is only a matter of time until a Tektronix tool appears for the Toolbox. Otherwise, PacerTerm is it. I have seen all of these programs, and PacerTerm is much better. Of course it is also the most recent product. >-- Bill (johnston@minnie.me.udel.edu) maurice Maurice Sharp BSc. (403) 289 5462 Director: Freedman, Sharp & Assoc. Inc. (403) 251 2729 FAX: (403) 281 0204 #206 - 2010 Ulster Road N.W. sharp@cpsc.UCalgary.CA Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4C2 GEnie: M.SHARP5 AOL: FSAMaurice -- Maurice Sharp MSc. Student (403) 220 7690 University of Calgary Computer Science Department 2500 University Drive N.W. sharp@cpsc.UCalgary.CA Calgary, Alberta, T2N 1N4 GEnie M.SHARP5
elliott@veronica.cs.wisc.edu (James Elliott) (06/09/91)
Has anyone tested its vt100 emulation against vttest? Does it do double-width and double-height characters properly? How is it at scrollback? And, hmm, I wonder how hard it would be to write a PC-ANSI-BBS emulation module in the CTB so that I can call my friend's BBS and see it in full living color? :^) -Jim -- Jim Elliott "Like a bridge he'll come between us, not a wall" elliott@veronica.cs.wisc.edu
kdb@intercon.com (Kurt Baumann) (06/10/91)
In article <29128@teda.Teradyne.COM>, molloy@emerald.icd.teradyne.com (Phil Molloy) writes: > One important consideration will be the size of the program. I quite using > RedRyder due to it's size (>1M). Although I have 4M in my Mac+, 1M for the > com program is too much. MacLayers is sitting here quite happy with 225K. I > realize that more features will cause it to grow, but if it reaches the >1M > size, it will be too big for me. I would assume that in part memory is going to defined by what terminal tool you use and how many connections you have open. TCP/Connect II our product will run in a variety of memory conditions, always with more being better, but if you want to have a NNTP, SMTP, 2-3 telnets (1 emulating TN3270, 1 VT231, and a VT102), and FTPing all at the sametime you are going to burn up some memory. I would imagine that PacerTerm would do quite well in low memory environments because basically you just have telnet and some file transfer connections that you can make, so the more simultaneous connections that you want the more memory it is going to need. All in all, although I haven't yet seen the product, it sounds like a good use of the CTB. Kurt Baumann 703.709.9890 InterCon Systems Corp. Creators of fine TCP/IP products for the Macintosh