Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!pt.cs.cmu.edu!sei!bwb
From: bwb@sei.cmu.edu (Bruce Benson)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: QUERY: Reviews of telecommunication packages for Win3.0
Message-ID: <8320@fy.sei.cmu.edu>
Date: 23 Aug 90 14:56:33 GMT
References: <26CC8B8F.1885@deimos.cis.ksu.edu> <3700@ursa-major.SPDCC.COM> <32975@cup.portal.com>
Reply-To: bwb@sei.cmu.edu (Bruce Benson)
Organization: Software Engineering Institute, Pittsburgh, PA
Lines: 27

In article <32975@cup.portal.com> MJB@cup.portal.com (Martin J Brown-Jr) writes:
>(I have laptops, amigas, 386's, hayes modems, acccounts on bix, genie,
>ci$, pcpursuit, and have used about 12-15 comm programs over the years).
>
>Unless you need to connect only to one site (mainframe?), and rarely
>explore telecommunication services of varying natures...
>
>DON'T BUY CROSSTALK FOR WINDOWS!

Crosstalk for windows works fine for me.  I've used MS Terminal, WinQvt, but
refused to try the crippleware Unicom.

Recommend you always try the shareware products first.  In this way you get to
know the products and don't have to rely on extreme opinions like the above.

I've had problems with crosstalks support for the kermit protocol and once had
to quickly terminate crosstalk and bring up MS Terminal to handle a call back
protocol (couldn't easily use modem direct AT command).

Crosstalk is not perfect, but it is not bad either - I've not seen a better 
windows comm program, but I'm still looking and suspect a shareware product
(WinQvt?) will eventually rule the roost.

* Bruce Benson                   + Internet  - bwb@sei.cmu.edu +       +
* Software Engineering Institute + Compuserv - 76226,3407      +    >--|>
* Carnegie Mellon University     + Voice     - 412 268 8469    +       +
* Pittsburgh PA 15213-3890       +                             +  US Air Force