Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!mtune!codas!mikel
From: mikel@codas.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sources.d
Subject: Re: Using a PC for a terminal
Message-ID: <1061@codas.ATT.COM>
Date: Tue, 2-Jun-87 09:26:16 EDT
Article-I.D.: codas.1061
Posted: Tue Jun  2 09:26:16 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 4-Jun-87 03:38:10 EDT
References: <1731@ttrdc.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Mickey Mouse, Orlando, FL
Lines: 27

>> Why would you want a PC instead of a terminal? Well, in addition to
>> the fact that it can be cheaper (particularly if you want graphics)
>> the IBM monitor makes really nice characters and the IBM keyboard
>> feels VERY nice. I don't know how well the clones do in this area. 
> 
> Some (all?) PC/clones cannot keep up with speeds > 4800 baud in the VT100
> terminal emulator (they lose bursts of characters, even with Xon-Xoff flow
> control).  You want a PC, you buy a PC.  You want a terminal, well, I hope
> you get an AT&T terminal (plug plug :-) ).

There is a good reason why I use my Pc (Pc7300 upgraded to a 3B1) instead
of the AT&T 4425 sitting beside it. The 4425's max baud rate is 19200,
however our data switch can't handle more than 9600.

The 3B1 is on our StarLan. I can open up a window whatever size I want,
and using my "rlogin" program (forget "cu" [ugh] over StarLan!) talk
to all of our other computers at well over 19200 baud. You should see the
window refresh at this speed on the Unix Pc! Not to mention that I can have
windows up to over half a dozen machines at the same time.

Of course I can run windows on the 4425 too, but it's not as nice as the
Pc, and neither come close to a 5620 DMD (which is not *just* a terminal - btw).
-- 
					Mikel Manitius @ AT&T-IS
					mikel@codas.att.com.uucp

          Copyright 1987. Redistribution via Stargate PROHIBITED