Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-crg!lll-lcc!well!ptsfa!pttesac!vanam
From: vanam@pttesac.UUCP (Marnix van Ammers)
Newsgroups: net.micro.amiga
Subject: Re: Picking a terminal emulator
Message-ID: <253@pttesac.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 29-Jul-86 18:09:03 EDT
Article-I.D.: pttesac.253
Posted: Tue Jul 29 18:09:03 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 1-Aug-86 08:51:32 EDT
References: <232@neoucom.UUCP> <18100001@ico>
Reply-To: vanam@pttesac.UUCP (Marnix van Ammers)
Organization: Pacific Bell ESAC, San Francisco
Lines: 40

In article <18100001@ico> farmer@ico.UUCP writes:
>
>>This brings up a question to CBM:  why is it so stinking hard to get
>>fast emulation going on a 68000 box with a separate IOP!  It seems
>>a bit ridiculous to me... maybe the OS is really getting in the way?
>>Is the slowup all in the console driver?
>Have you ever used a sun console?  It has a hard time doing 9600 baud -
>doing bitmapped screens is expensive.  When someone is using the console,
>the whole machine is slowed down dramaticly.  Of course the screen is
>higher resolution.  I wouldn't blame the OS too much, look at how many times

About a month ago I bought Maxiterm from a local Computer Land
dealer.  It was Maxiterm V2.?  and it didn't work at all.  When
I called the company they said they'd send me their latest V3
dot something disk and that it would work.  I asked them if their
terminal program could keep up with 2400 baud since I knew that
the Online! program has a maximum throughput of 1100 baud.  They
said that their latest version kept up with 7200 baud.  The person
I was talking to also said that they had to go through quite a few
tricks to be able to do that.  I presume that he meant that they
had to bypass standard calls to the OS.  I think that's very
unfortunate.  I have a strong feeling that there is something
wrong with the OS if it looses characters at anything less than
9600.

By the way the newer Maxiterm works just fine.  I'm still not
sure I understand their requestor boxes when I try to capture
a file but that's probably my fault since I've misplaced my
documentation.  I've got a 2400 baud modem and Maxiterm keeps
up with it and that's my major concern.

As soon as I hear that Online! can handle 2400 baud, I'll
switch to it though because I love it's ability to do scripts.

What about it CBM?  Why are so many of the emulators unable to
keep up with a measily 1200 baud?  What do the Maxiterm people
know that the rest of us don't?

Marnix
--