Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!chaph.usc.edu!aludra.usc.edu!malczews
From: malczews@aludra.usc.edu (Frank Malczewski)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: White Knight and Zmodem
Message-ID: <7053@chaph.usc.edu>
Date: 16 Dec 89 03:08:55 GMT
References: <11143@csli.Stanford.EDU> <8400198@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: news@chaph.usc.edu
Reply-To: malczews@aludra.usc.edu (Frank Malczewski)
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Lines: 40

In article <8400198@m.cs.uiuc.edu> gillies@m.cs.uiuc.edu writes:
>
>Re: WK 11.02 zmodem auto-receive.
>
>So what is the verdict?  Who has white knight 11.02?  Does it really
>cure all the problems with zmodem auto-receive?  Is it as fast as
>zterm?  Zterm works so well, I am tempted to get WK and convert all my
>RR9.4 scripts to use zmodem, since 9.4 kermit & my unix kermit seem to
>misbehave around byte #65K on large uploads.
>
>I need to know if Scott Watson has fixed all the WK 11.02 problems.
>
>
>Don Gillies, Dept. of Computer Science, University of Illinois
>1304 W. Springfield, Urbana, Ill 61801      
>ARPA: gillies@cs.uiuc.edu   UUCP: {uunet,harvard}!uiucdcs!gillies



The verdict is:

Except for a bit of overuse of the Chicago font all over the place ;-)
that White Knight 11.02 is ALMOST as good as ZTerm 0.85.  Scott has done
quite a good job, overall.  However, I have had problems with zmodem
downloads that get interrupted by the sending computer (in two cases),
where after restarting the download, when completed, the file was not
useable.  I believe that in both cases the files were not MacBinary
format (I usually compress files on unix and decompress on Mac).

I have never had this occur with ZTerm, circumstances being the same.
Both, by the way, are comparable in speed.

x
x
x
x

--

  -- Frank Malczewski		(malczews@girtab.usc.edu)