esteban@apollo.HP.COM (09/10/90)
Would anybody care to compare PCPLUS to Qmodem? I just played around with Qmodem and was very impressed. Should I switch? Thanks Steve
koch@motcid.UUCP (Clifton Koch) (09/11/90)
From article <4cba5835.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM>, by esteban@apollo.HP.COM: > Would anybody care to compare PCPLUS to Qmodem? I just played around with > Qmodem and was very impressed. Should I switch? I switched from PCPLUS to Qmodem because PCPLUS was having trouble keeping up with my HST modem on high speed file transfers. PCPLUS would occasionally lock up, but Qmodem would work great (I see a > 1700 cps transfer rate with binary files and compression turned off). The terminal emulation on Qmodem seems a bit shakey, though. It doesn't get along with our Sun system at work real well.
wmf@chinet.chi.il.us (Bill Fischer) (09/12/90)
In article <4cba5835.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM> esteban@apollo.HP.COM () writes: =>Would anybody care to compare PCPLUS to Qmodem? I just played around with =>Qmodem and was very impressed. Should I switch? => Boy, this posting has the potential of starting "comm wars". I have used Qmodem SST and found it to be a very friendly program with lots of fun bells and whistles. However, the VT100 emulation was pretty poor. Since most of the systems I log into are *NIX, this is a pretty major draw- back. I'd stick with PROCOMM. wmf -- | Bill Fischer | INTERNET : wmf@chinet.chi.il.us | | US Agent for Omega Electronics | COMPUSERVE: 76257,1226 | | "Olympic Timekeepers Since 1936" | MCIMAIL : 3110885 | +=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-< The opinions expressed here are my own >-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+
roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu (Roy M. Silvernail) (09/14/90)
wmf@chinet.chi.il.us (Bill Fischer) writes: > Boy, this posting has the potential of starting "comm wars". (that clicking sound you hear..... :-) > I have used Qmodem SST and found it to be a very friendly program with lots > of fun bells and whistles. However, the VT100 emulation was pretty poor. My best results for VT100 came from Boyan. I stayed away from Qmodem because of the size of the program. (back when all I had was 10 megs, size was an important consideration) > Since most of the systems I log into are *NIX, this is a pretty major draw- > back. Precisely why I was using Boyan... the emulation is very solid. -- Roy M. Silvernail |+| roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu |+| #define opinions ALL_MINE; main(){float x=1;x=x/50;printf("It's only $%.2f, but it's my $%.2f!\n",x,x);} "This is cyberspace." -- Peter da Silva :--: "...and I like it here!" -- me
whenry@lindy.stanford.edu (homo obsolescensis) (09/15/90)
I haven't had time to try it but the latest version of QModem (4.2, I think it is) claims to have New Improved VT100 emulation. Walter Henry
mlord@bwdls58.bnr.ca (Mark Lord) (09/18/90)
>> I have used Qmodem SST and found it to be a very friendly program with lots >> of fun bells and whistles. However, the VT100 emulation was pretty poor. > >My best results for VT100 came from Boyan. I stayed away from Qmodem Or even better.. RBCOMM32 has the best ansi/vt102/whatever emulation I have yet to encounter (much better than PROCOMM, TELIX, etc..). And it has the added advantage of being 100% legal FREEWARE. -- ___Mark S. Lord__________________________________________ | ..uunet!bnrgate!mlord%bmerh724 | Climb Free Or Die (NH) | | MLORD@BNR.CA Ottawa, Ontario | Personal views only. | |________________________________|________________________|
wmf@chinet.chi.il.us (Bill Fischer) (09/18/90)
In article <4372@bwdls58.UUCP> mlord@bwdls58.bnr.ca (Mark Lord) writes: =>>> I have used Qmodem SST and found it to be a very friendly program with lots =>>> of fun bells and whistles. However, the VT100 emulation was pretty poor. =>> =>>My best results for VT100 came from Boyan. I stayed away from Qmodem => =>Or even better.. RBCOMM32 has the best ansi/vt102/whatever emulation =>I have yet to encounter (much better than PROCOMM, TELIX, etc..). The BEST VT100 (VT102) emulation I have found is in MSKERMIT. -- | Bill Fischer | USENET : wmf@chinet.chi.il.us | | US Agent for Omega Electronics | COMPUSERVE: 76257,1226 | | "Olympic Timekeepers Since 1936" | MCIMAIL : 3110885 | +=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-< The opinions expressed here are my own >-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+