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!"