Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!uxa.cso.uiuc.edu!jbn35564 From: jbn35564@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (J.B. Nicholson) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: Atalk III & Kermit Message-ID: <1990Oct8.193808.21972@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> Date: 8 Oct 90 19:38:08 GMT References: <27412@usc.edu> Sender: news@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (News) Distribution: comp Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana Lines: 22 papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) writes: >Note that there is >NO loss in performance by using the external XPRkermit compared to the built-in >kermit, while this is NOT true concerning XPR-Zmodem vs. built-in ZMODEM, and >that's why we'll keep the built-in ZMODEM. Why not fix the XPR Zmodem? I really like the idea of XPR, and I think, with the right set of XPR protocols, you terminal developers could (theoretically) drop all transfer protocols and concentrate on the terminal emulator side of the product. >-- Marco >-- >-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >"Xerox sues somebody for copying?" -- David Letterman >-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= -- Jeff jeffo@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu