Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!uhccux!virtue!comp.vuw.ac.nz!munnari.oz.au!metro!ipso!runxtsa!danup
From: danup@runxtsa.runx.oz.au (Daniel Upthegrove)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: Re: Crosstalk vs Procomm Plus
Summary: Another recommendation for Procomm Plus
Message-ID: <2083@runxtsa.runx.oz.au>
Date: 1 Aug 90 11:09:52 GMT
References: <6546.26aff6fc@uwovax.uwo.ca>
Organization: RUNX Unix Timeshare.  Sydney, Australia.
Lines: 31

G'day Ben!

I've had to prepare script files in both Crosstalk and Procomm Plus
for inexperienced PC users who want as little interaction with the
computer as possible, but want access to mail and data applications.

Crosstalk was better documented, and with the multiple examples provided,
I was able to prepare the necessary scripts quickly without too much
reading of the manuals.  Procomm Plus is simpler to use from the start,
and does not require as much setup as Crosstalk.  However, I find that
my Procomm Plus has some annoying terminal emulation bugs (which, honestly
could be the hosts that I am accessing) as well as it is necessary to
experiment with some of the script language commands to verify what they
actually do.

However, for the simple applications that you describe, Procomm Plus
should be more than sufficient.  The extra cost for Crosstalk would only
be for features that you don't seem to need (3270 emulation, key mappings,
etc.)

I also wrote some scripts for my wife to send and receive Internet mail
from the PC.  By using a batch file to call Procomm Plus, and using
script files to provide personalised menu windows from entry, my wife
doesn't have to contend with the program itself at all.



_________________________________________________
Daniel Upthegrove                danup@runxtsa.runx.oz.au
a.k.a. "Grover"                  Sydney Australia
Computer & Communications Consultant