Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!clyde!cbatt!cwruecmp!hal!ncoast!wb8foz
From: wb8foz@ncoast.UUCP (David Lesher)
Newsgroups: comp.terminals
Subject: Re: Good Fast VT-100 compatable
Message-ID: <1825@ncoast.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 17-Dec-86 00:24:50 EST
Article-I.D.: ncoast.1825
Posted: Wed Dec 17 00:24:50 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 18-Dec-86 04:14:23 EST
References: <83@rdlvax.UUCP>
Reply-To: wb8foz@ncoast.UUCP (David Lesher)
Distribution: world
Organization: Cleveland Public Access UNIX, Cleveland, OH
Lines: 24

> Article <83@rdlvax.UUCP> From: salzman@rdlvax.UUCP (Gumby)
# I'm looking for a real good VT-100 (or VT-220) compatable terminal with
# some of the following features:
# 
# 	- Fast enough to keep up with GNU Emacs at 9600 or 19.2K baud
# 	  without ^S/^Q.
I did extensive tests a couple years ago on a number of "fast"
terminals. Surprise! the ONLY one that came close to keeping
up @ 9600 was a TEK (ithink model#)  4051, a megadollar graphics
tube. Forget 19.2. All the rest were swamped when run without XON/
XOF. They just could not chew bits and spit electrons fast enough.
Granted my tests were worst case ( I was "loading" the CSMA/CD LAN 
to find ITS real thruput) but my advice is unless you are using a 
exotic bit-mapped mega resolution screen, ANY 9600 term is a lot
faster than you can read.
-- 

		      decvax!cwruecmp!ncoast!wb8foz
			ncoast!wb8foz@case.csnet 
		(ncoast!wb8foz%case.csnet@csnet-relay.ARPA)

    	         		"SERIOUS?
		Bones, it could upset the entire percentage!"