Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!portal!cup.portal.com!Isaac_K_Rabinovitch
From: Isaac_K_Rabinovitch@cup.portal.com
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: hooking PC's together
Message-ID: <3438@cup.portal.com>
Date: 23 Feb 88 20:29:55 GMT
References: <673@pasteur.Berkeley.Edu> <63200030@convexe> <1305@qetzal.UUCP>
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Lines: 62
XPortal-User-Id: 1.1001.1472


rcw@qetzal.UUCP (Robert C. White) writes:
->In article <63200030@convexe> loafman@convexe.UUCP writes:
->+
->+/* landay@cory.Berkeley.EDU.Sun.COM writes... */
->+/* ---------- "hooking PC's together" ---------- */
->+Is there a way to hook to PCs together via the parallel ports?
->+(Compaq '386 and IBM PC AT)  I would like to transfer files between
->+the two quickly. (and the serial ports are used.)
->+....
->+/* End of text from convexe:comp.sys.ibm.pc */
->+
->+Answer: go get a package called the Brooklyn Bridge.  It will allow
->+you to hook serial to serial at something over 100k baud, using one
Robert, you missed something.  Landay needs a *parallel* connection,
he doesn't have a spare RS232.  Also, 100K bps (careful with that
word "baud") is fast, but couldn't parallel be faster?

I've always preferred serial to parallel (when I worked with Unix
and CTOS I found serial a lot easier to live with), but now I find
myself with ample motivation to do parallel.  I've got an AT clone
with a parallel port on the motherboard (used by a printer) and
another on an expansion card (unused).  I have one serial port,
used by my modem.  If I get a mouse, the cheap approach is a bus
version, but I'd prefer to get a second serial port so I can move
the mouse to my laptop when I'm using that.  I'd like to wire the
two machines together (there are alternatives, but I like this
approach for various reasons I won't go into)  If the connection
is serial, I'll have to spend for a *third* serial port, a silly
waste when I *have* an unused communications port.  And turning
on the serial port on the laptop raises power consumption beyond
what's provided by the external power supply so I couldn't leave
it on all the time.

At that I'm better off than many, because I even though I don't want
to buy more cards, I have extra slots in which to put them.
->Another product that will do this is 'Duette' from Platte River
->Associates here in Denver. We have this product and it transfers
->files at the rate of about 119,000 baud. That is not a typo.
I've seen that rate on short RS232 connections before.  But some
RS232 hardware won't go that fast.  Does PRA do a parallel product?

Since it's not long, I'll repost the info someone else previously
provided about companies that sell parallel transfer products:

     Direc-link     (213)377-1640                                 
     Paranet        (613)236-1487                                 
     File Shuttle   (800)663-8066                                 
                                                                 
As I said before, I'm puzzled that the parallel approach isn't more
popular.  Perhaps it's harder to implement.

One issue we might talk about:  which approach to file transfer software
is better?  Brooklyn Bridge provides a device driver that makes the
remote disk look like its local, which appeals to me as the most powerful
and simple sollution.  But I can see the difficulties that might cause
if you have to connect your laptop to a lot of different machines.  So
how many people would rather have a user utility or TSR?

One idea I've had:  pull the floppy out of a cheap laptop and replace it
with a 3-1/2 inch winchester.  Use the commlink for backup.  Voila,
an inexpensive laptop with tons of working space.  Pity I can't think
of way around the power consumption problem.