terminal.exe sux?

Post #46,244 by boxley 7/20/02 8:52:42 PM Reply	terminal.exe sux? as opposed to hyperterm which was the worst fscking serial connection program ever written? Terminal, what port can you connect to. connect direct to modem for diagnostics early ms telnet offered a port as well as an ip good luck testing ports on a nix box using an old mslaptop running windermoi . Yes but the external login "REQUIRES" (fucked I now) logging in to a winders network and exchange server so mstools is all i got for remote right now. thanx, bill ."Once, in the wilds of Afghanistan, I had to subsist on food and water for several weeks." W.C. Fields
Post #46,320 by static 7/21/02 11:28:48 PM Reply	HyperTerm suffers from what I call the ProComm Error. That is, you can't tell it "talk down COM1". Oh no: you have to "make a connection" which involved picking a (Windows) modem, entering the phone number, entering the service name and even choosing a pretty icon! I first saw this inanity in ProComm for DOS, which instantly soured me on it. I was used to the venerable Telix and it's more laid-back approach. Wade. "Ah. One of the difficult questions."
Post #46,366 by admin 7/22/02 10:14:17 AM Reply	Er, boggle? ProComm was the one I always used to do exactly that... especially after HyperTerm came out. Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #46,473 by static 7/23/02 2:59:33 AM Reply	Well... I haven't used ProComm in a very long time. My first experiences with its DOS version were "this is ... not very good" and I went back to Telix. I can easily believe it is better than HyperTerm, but my first impressions was that it was Making Things Difficult For Me and I encountered it doing so in the way I described. YMMV. Wade. "Ah. One of the difficult questions."
Post #46,559 by orion 7/23/02 4:39:58 PM Reply	Qmodem I used it seemed to be more reliable than Procomm. The Apple // users claimed that Procomm for DOS had ripped off Pro Term for the Apple // systems. Did anyone ever validate that claim? Yet another "not invented here" syndrome? They claimed that it even had the same bugs as Pro Term, what a complete copy, eh? Anyway Qmodem seemed to work better, and I carried around a DOS boot disk with QMODEM on it and my dialing directory when I visited computer labs with PC and XT systems that had modems in them. Usually College Labs that didn't check for student IDs and let almost anyone get in that looked like a student. Nice to use their 1200 baud modems and phone lines to play Tradewars and download files. :) Last I heard Qmodem was ported to 32 bit Windows, and it didn't do as good. *I am free now, to choose my own destiny.*
Post #46,646 by static 7/23/02 11:57:34 PM Reply	Most BBSers had their favourite. I used Telix for a long time until I discovered Terminate. Other people swore by Qmodem, or ProComm, or RipTerm or that other thing that had a bizarre command line. Wade. "Ah. One of the difficult questions."
Post #46,648 by orion 7/24/02 12:17:12 AM Reply	Bitcomm? I remember that Bitcomm was a bit weird and not very user friendly. It also liked to lock up modems. *I am free now, to choose my own destiny.*
Post #46,654 by static 7/24/02 1:12:04 AM Reply	That doesn't sound right. It was part of the Zmodem suite of programs that were downloadable if your term program couldn't Zmodem. Ah, I remembered it: Zcomm (also called YAM). Very powerful, but very different! Wade. "Ah. One of the difficult questions."
Post #46,705 by inthane-chan 7/24/02 11:01:41 AM Reply	Trying to remember this one... It was a character-based "windowing" terminal app, with some simple multitasking built in - I seem to remember being able to bop out to a MS-DOS command prompt while downloading. Built in support for 43/50 line displays. Ring a bell for anybody? There are 10 types of people. Those who understand binary, and those who don't.
Post #46,721 by boxley 7/24/02 12:14:34 PM Reply	Kermit? ."Once, in the wilds of Afghanistan, I had to subsist on food and water for several weeks." W.C. Fields
Post #46,772 by inthane-chan 7/24/02 7:54:56 PM Reply	Nope. There are 10 types of people. Those who understand binary, and those who don't.
Post #46,738 by orion 7/24/02 1:31:27 PM Reply	Most of my friends used DoubleDOS for that. DoubleDOS was able to run two DOS programs side by side and hotkey switch between them. They would DoubleDOS Procomm, and then DoubleDOS a command prompt in the other one. I had a friend who ran the Hellfire Club BBS, and he decided to DoubleDOS the WWIV BBS in one session, and then DoubleDOS Test Drive in the other. When he switched to the WWIV BBS, he had garbage in that screen. Apparently it didn't handle direct to hardware memory writes too well or something. *I am free now, to choose my own destiny.*
Post #46,797 by static 7/25/02 12:20:15 AM Reply	Sounds familiar. But many term programs had support for 43/50 line mode, so that's no help. I think Terminate could do that, but I suspect that's not what you meant as Terminate was a little bit of a latecomer. Wade. "Ah. One of the difficult questions."
Post #46,885 by wharris2 7/25/02 5:56:50 PM Reply	Me, too (trying to remember) Wasn't it the "biggie" of the commercial programs? Not shareware Procomm, don't think it was named anything like minicom or bitcom, but there was one that was THE communications program of choice for anyone who bought a comm program. (This is, of course, pre-Windows Procomm. Windows Procomm, while it had its flaws, grabbed the Windows 3.x market pretty quickly.)
Post #46,913 by inthane-chan 7/25/02 8:37:51 PM Reply	No idea... To be honest, at the time one might say I was "ethically challenged" - a friend of mine gave me the comm app. There are 10 types of people. Those who understand binary, and those who don't.
Post #46,971 by wharris2 7/26/02 3:08:52 AM Reply	I Remember (I think) Crosstalk! Biggie for DOS people converting over from CP/M and/or people buying comm programs. Did they ever come out with a Windows version? If they did, Procomm had already nabbed the market. Crosstalk pretty much vanished from the scene after a workable Windows (aka 3.1) was released. The lawyers would mostly rather be what they are than get out of the way even if the cost was Hammerfall. - Jerry Pournelle
Post #46,976 by CRConrad 7/26/02 3:52:20 AM Reply	OT re your JerryP quote: Would those be Intel lawyers? :-)
Post #46,981 by wharris2 7/26/02 4:17:10 AM Reply	Re: OT re your JerryP quote: Would those be Intel lawyers? I think that's lawyers in general: they'd rather suck blood than preserve the human race. See [link\|http://www.overlawyered.com\|www.overlawyered.com] for lots and lots of examples. Hammerfall is, of course, his novel (I think co-written with Larry Niven) about an asteroid doing a big smack-down on Earth. The lawyers would mostly rather be what they are than get out of the way even if the cost was Hammerfall. - Jerry Pournelle
Post #47,018 by CRConrad 7/26/02 9:29:31 AM Reply	Duh - think I didn't know that? (T'was a pun; AMD "Hammer")
Post #47,038 by inthane-chan 7/26/02 11:05:18 AM Reply	Novel name was "Lucifer's Hammer" The event itself was called Hammerfall, though... There are 10 types of people. Those who understand binary, and those who don't.
Post #47,097 by orion 7/26/02 7:15:45 PM Reply	I agree working for lawyers isn't so good either. Sort of like working for The Devil, eventually you know you are going to get screwed sometime. *I am free now, to choose my own destiny.*
Post #46,901 by altmann 7/25/02 7:23:26 PM Reply	Any of these ring a bell? (Lots of other nostalgiaware too) [link\|http://www.safelink.net/danrose/aw-dos-07.html\|A DOS comm. program list] from [link\|http://www.safelink.net/danrose/aw-dos.html\|Dan's 20th. Century Abandonware ] Ah, memories... -- Chris Altmann
Post #46,912 by inthane-chan 7/25/02 8:37:47 PM Reply	Nope. There are 10 types of people. Those who understand binary, and those who don't.
Post #46,916 by wharris2 7/25/02 8:45:06 PM Reply	Ah! Crosstalk was it, I'm sure The lawyers would mostly rather be what they are than get out of the way even if the cost was Hammerfall. - Jerry Pournelle
Post #46,960 by orion 7/26/02 1:35:57 AM Reply	Microsoft Access Not the database, but the Microsoft COM Terminal. Anyone remember that stinkeroo? Maybe it was the "mystery" terminal program? *I am free now, to choose my own destiny.*
Post #46,991 by static 7/26/02 7:10:48 AM Reply	Never used it, but I remember it. It musta stunk - MS reused the name. Wade. "Ah. One of the difficult questions."
Post #46,378 by pwhysall 7/22/02 12:04:44 PM Reply	Eh? You most certainly can tell HyperTerm to "just talk down COM1". It's crap in a lot of ways, but this isn't one of them - I have used HyperTerm to talk to things like DEC Brouters and Terminal Servers many times. No phone number required - just choose "Direct to COM1", set 8, one and none, hardware flow control, 9600, you're cooking on gas. Peter [link\|http://www.debian.org\|Shill For Hire] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Blog]
Post #46,472 by static 7/23/02 2:56:21 AM Reply	I posted in a hurry. What I should have also said was that although it was possible to shortcut it's Make a Connection interface to talk directly down a serial line, HyperTerm still expected very strongly you to do what I said. Navigating through the various cancel boxes to do it is far too intimidating. Experienced users will of course save a configuration with the right settings, but on a new install of Windows, you have to run the gauntlet of the "Make a Connection" dialog boxes. Wade. "Ah. One of the difficult questions."
Post #46,560 by orion 7/23/02 4:42:21 PM Reply	Hyperterm That is what I used to download a better terminal program. Just entered a number of a local BBS into its connection thingamabob and then just downloaded one of those many shareware DOS terminals like Procomm, QModem, Telix, Terminate, etc. But I mostly used Qmodem, had it on a disk. *I am free now, to choose my own destiny.*

Welcome to IWETHEY!