Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!uupsi!sunic!news.funet.fi!uwasa.fi!ts
From: ts@uwasa.fi (Timo Salmi)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Subject: Re: Looking for latest ProComm software!
Keywords: Procomm
Message-ID: <1990Dec30.184615.8594@uwasa.fi>
Date: 30 Dec 90 18:46:15 GMT
References: <1990Dec26.130022.8077@i88.isc.com> <2744@sixhub.UUCP> <1990Dec27.052414.3798@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <1990Dec27.180542.1222@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Organization: University of Vaasa
Lines: 67

In article <1990Dec27.180542.1222@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> berger@iboga (Mike Berger) writes:
>lemson@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (David Lemson) writes:
>>Might I suggest you check out Telix version 3.12A, I think it's
>>better than Procomm Plus, and is completely shareware.
>
>In what way is it better?  I tried it, and found the terminal emulation to be
>as inadequate as ProComm's.  It had fewer file transfer protocols supported.

21. *****
 Q: Which is better, Procomm Plus or Telix?

 A: Both are excellent telecommunications programs. I won't try to
answer in any absolute terms, but tell some of my subjective
observations, since I have used both quite a lot. I am speaking of
Procomm+ version 1.1A and Telix 3.12 (neither quite the latest).
   Procomm+ is a fully commercial program while Telix is shareware.
(There is an earlier shareware Procomm [version 2.4.3]. Both the
shareware programs are available from uwasa.fi archives /pc/pd2
directory. The shareware Procomm is not in the same league with
Procomm+ and Telix).
   Procomm+ comes with a manual, and there is literature on Procomm+
while Telix documents come as a file in the shareware distribution.
   I have tried the user support of both, with slightly discouraging
results. In the case of Procomm+ I asked about the possibility of a
two-way translation table, but the response was a polite no without
any useful suggestions. In the case of Telix, I returned a faulty
shareware disk, and had no reaction at all. On the other hand, both
are such good products, that I haven't really needed the support.
   Procomm+ and Telix both have a useful command language. Procomm's
is annoyingly sluggish since it is interpreter while Telix sports a
C-like Salt compiler. Procomm's aspect command language is easier to
use, while Telix's Salt command language is really powerful.
   Procomm+ command files can be invoked from a menu. In Telix this
very convenient option is missing.
   Under difficult conditions with a slow machine plus a fast modem
Telix behaves much better. I've even noted circumstances where Telix
is the only working choice of the two, because Procomm+ cannot
always cope with the load.
   Admittedly, Telix has fewer file transfer protocols than
Procomm+, BUT this is more than amply compensated by the fact that
Telix has an unbuilt Zmodem protocol. Neither has a sliding Kermit.
   The translation tables of both programs cause headaches to users
needing some 8-bit characters as we Finns do. Procomm+ does not have
an outgoing translation table at all. Telix does, but it gets
tangled in ansi graphics when A with double dots is translated.
   Personally, I prefer Procomm's concise call logging to Telix's
fuller but incoherent call logging.
   This is very subjective but of the two the "feel" of the user
interface in Telix is more user friendly than that of Procomm+. In
particular, Telix has an automatic starting of downloads.
   Procomm+ has a superior host mode compared to Telix. Yes, I know
that there are external host modes for Telix, such as host44.zip,
but I've never managed to make it work even in a selftest.
Incidentally, the host mode of shareware Procomm is better left
alone. They frequently crash the machine. Another thing is that
Procomm+ host mode shell to dos option also does this.
   If you use Procomm or Procomm+ you might be interested in more
information given in /pc/ts/tspfon29.arc.
   At the moment I have settled to Telix for calling to BBSes,
to Procomm+ when I need the host mode (and MsKermit when I connect
remotely to uwasa.fi, because MsKermit has clearly the best VT102
emulation of the three).

...................................................................
Prof. Timo Salmi        (Moderating at anon. ftp site 128.214.12.3)
School of Business Studies, University of Vaasa, SF-65101, Finland
Internet: ts@chyde.uwasa.fi Funet: gado::salmi Bitnet: salmi@finfun