Re: vt100 compliance

[Brian Roland <bjr@ebicom.net>]

> Well that sounds pretty stupid from them. I'd guess they morer likely
> didn't know what they were talking about,.. but who knows.

I don't doubt this....
The problem is...
If you live in an area that gives you 2 choices on internet service for a
(local, non toll) phone call....and neither know what they're talking
about, yet 99% of the computing world can just load a VERY standard VT102
terminal and get support...why should they care?

The providers say, Get a PC...
The Atari support says learn to code and become a unix guru and fix it
yourself or shut up.

Is vt102 really that big of a deal?  Connect has it....STalker has it...
heck, even InterLink ST has it...and a dozen other free and share ware
modem based terminals.  Can we not persuade one of these authors to just
pop in a pipe line so a plain GEM WINDOW can run a TOS program inside,
and support the emulation modes there-in?

I did write Dan at Gribnif a while back asking if they'd consider putting
support for a TCP/IP stack (telent) into STalker.  He liked the
idea, and felt it'd be a pretty easy job, but no word in months.

That'd be a good term for telnet...but what about launching tos stuff
behind STalker's current emulation code?  Possible?



Really guys...I'd like to become a C++ wiz, and learn to compile and
administrate entire unix networks....but then again, I'd just like to
spend my time using the tools....composing my music, and exchanging my
information.  From what I"ve seen, it takes years to become even an
intermediate programmer.  Years I could spend if I were willing to cut way
back on the amount of time spent on gathering information to put into this
wonderful web of ours.  Oh well...enough speeches and poe mouth'in.

We've no choice at present but to make do with what we have (the non
coders).  So we will..and thanks for those offering help in getting a
working config of any type :)  But with all due respect...this is a polite
request to those with time, resources, and the heart to share their
efforts.  Can we PLEASE work towards a true high capability standard
terminal emulation for MINT and GEM?  I don't mind paying for it at all.

I believe TW100 is VERY close indeed.
Here's all that's needed (IF possible....I'm no guru remember).

Better handeling of the Pallet....
	Have TW keep up with an ANSI pallet, and swap back to that
	of the desk top, or the next application,  when a TW100 window is
	not topped.

Make TW100 work with the status quoe VT100 term cap...
	Why does it need it's own?  Or does it?
	I've used it with standard VT100 term caps before
	and haven't noticed major problems.

Trace the cause for TW causing GEM to loose the mouse and fix it.

Trace and fix (or add) all the scrolling and cursor positioning/clearing
	codes.  I suspect some of the more advanced positioning codes
	simply need to be added to TW100.  Things it hasn't been intended to
	support, as they weren't needed or demanded before.

Brian