Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!nstn.ns.ca!news.cs.indiana.edu!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!wuarchive!mit-eddie!bbn.com
From: pplacewa@bbn.com (Paul Placeway)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: T1000 and 2400 baud vs. 9600 for interactive use
Message-ID: <64136@bbn.BBN.COM>
Date: 12 May 91 01:37:42 GMT
References: <6196@mahendo.Jpl.Nasa.Gov> <DP0BCR6@xds13.ferranti.com>
Sender: news@bbn.com
Lines: 38
X-Zippy-sez: It's OKAY --- I'm an INTELLECTUAL, too.

peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:

< In article <6196@mahendo.Jpl.Nasa.Gov> earle@poseur.JPL.NASA.GOV (Greg Earle - Sun JPL on-site Software Support) writes:
< > Now that I'm back to a plain terminal again, there's still a win.  No, I can't
< > read faster than 2400 baud.  Butif I'm in "rn", I see a full page appear on
< > my screen much faster than at 2400 baud.  If I decide I don't want to read it,
< > I can hit "n" or "q" or whatever and get on with it much faster than waiting
< > for a page that I don't want to read come up at 2400 baud.

< That's a user interface problem again: rn should flush output and perform
< the command as soon as you hit that key, the way 'vnews' does it. Or Emacs.

Unless you are calling into an Annex, and then going into your host
with telnet or rlogin, as I am now.  In this case, it doesn't matter
that Emacs is smart enough to do the "right thing", because it has
allready sent the *entire* screen refresh to the Annex before my
typed character reaches it, so it can't flush because it thinks it
doesn't have to.  Scrolling down several pages in some code is really
painful as a result.

Yes, this sucks, and *maybe* telnet and rlogin can be told to "forget
it" sometimes, if done carefully, but for some dialins there will be a
non-flushable buffer in the path, and 2400 will always be painful.

< Don't blame the modem if the programs you use are designed for higher speeds.
< A faster modem is nice. It's not worth the difference in cost, yet.

On this one I have to agree with Peter.  CompuCon shouldn't be
encouraged because they are using a non-standard protocol (but then so
are MicroCom, Hayes, Telebit, and USR), but then again they should be,
becuase they are doing a 9600 bps (w/o compression) modem for $169,
albeit only for a type of computer that I avoid both at work and at
home.

Eventually v.32bis will drop in price, just as 300, 1200 and 2400 did.
Until then I'll be hacking away at 2400 I guess...

		--P