Columbia Kermit/kermit.zip/newsgroups/misc.19950528-19950726/[e-mail]_Mon Jun 5 03:19:01 1995.msg

Internet Message Format | 2020-01-01 | 8KB

Received: from apakabar.cc.columbia.edu by watsun.cc.columbia.edu with SMTP id AA23893
  (5.65c+CU/IDA-1.4.4/HLK for <[e-mail]>); Sun, 4 Jun 1995 23:44:25 -0400
Received: by apakabar.cc.columbia.edu id AA29765
  (5.65c+CU/IDA-1.4.4/HLK for kermit.misc@watsun); Sun, 4 Jun 1995 23:44:23 -0400
Path: news.columbia.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!newsspool.doit.wisc.edu!news.doit.wisc.edu!f180-090.net.wisc.edu!grhowes
From: Glenn R. Howes <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.kermit.misc
Subject: Re: Kermit MAC??
Date: 5 Jun 1995 03:19:01 GMT
Organization: UW-Chemistry
Lines: 147
Distribution: world
Message-Id: <3qtt35$[e-mail]>
References: <3qnon9$[e-mail]> <3qt3vq$[e-mail]> <3qtbvi$[e-mail]> <3qtfnp$[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: f180-090.net.wisc.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Newsreader: Nuntius 2.0.3_PPC
X-Xxmessage-Id: <[e-mail]>
X-Xxdate: Sun, 4 Jun 1995 04:19:46 GMT
Apparently-To: [e-mail]

I should preface this by with the disclaimer that I
wrote Kermit Tool GH and therefore am involved with a
competing commercial product, SITcomm. So take what I say
with a grain of salt.

Also, I don't want anything I say to be construed as an attack
on Frank da Cruz who has been extremely helpful to me and is
a credit to the net community. What I say is in the spirit of
a constructive debate.

In article <3qtfnp$[e-mail]> Frank da Cruz,
[e-mail] writes:
>Subject: Re: Kermit MAC??
>From: Frank da Cruz, [e-mail]
>Date: 4 Jun 1995 23:31:05 GMT

>>Right now, people would be better served by someone making a
>>high quality freeware VT220 tool...
>>
>Of course they would.  Be my guest.

Unfortunately, I'm under a non-competition contract until next year
or I might think about doing so, heck I am thinking about doing so.
I, however, do not have any VT220 engine code; you do.

>>... writing an AppleScriptable
>>character converter helper app,and writing a Kermit tool with
>>a more modern feature set.
>>
>So why isn't anybody doing this work?

I regret having to say this but it doesn't appear that
anybody is doing any work on MacKermit either so this is sort
of a mute point.

Writing such a converter should be easy enough (I assume),
trivial if the translation engine code is available in readable
form. With such an engine I could probably write a little
drag & drop/scriptable translator over a weekend with the
most time being spent figuring out the best scripting
interface.

As for a more fully featured Kermit tool, a) there are
at least 4 commercial tools of varying functionality, b) the
freely available one is good enough for most people, c) most
freeware communications programmers seem to be concentrating
on TCP/IP applications. If any young programmer is reading,
writing one will take about 3 months of weekends, buy
Frank's book "Kermit: A File Transfer Protocol", get the
current specs from their ftp site at Columbia, invest
in "Inside the Macintosh Communication Toolbox" and get the
specs on CTB 1.1 which should be on the apple ftp site. Also,
don't write it by cutting and pasting, write it from scratch
using the protocol specs, you'll be happy you did later.

>>As for scripting, the last thing the
>>Mac world needs is another application specific scripting
>>implementation: use AppleScript (or more precisely, make it
>>OSA compliant).
>>
>Oh boy, another three-letter-acronym to be compliant with.

OSA allows the user to choose what scripting implementation
he wants to use, examples: AppleScript, QuickKeys, Frontier.
I didn't want to be AppleScript centric.

>Everything you say is no doubt true, but recall that what we
>(in the Kermit project) try hard to do is write portable code
>with a portable interface that runs consistently on a wide
>variety of platforms over a variety of communication methods.
>All that while providing some of the best terminal emulators
>and file transfer software around.

Then base it around OpenDoc which is extremely cross platform
and will protect us from the code bloat of Microsoft and OLE.
I've been playing around with the 2nd OD beta and it is really
very cool. Right now I'm thinking about writing a spectra plotting
part, but communication parts are a very real possibility.

Otherwise, look at NetScape, which seems to be perfectly at
home whether it is in Windows, MacOS, or X.

>Somebody who lives in the Macintosh world could no doubt make a
>terrific Macintosh application, much more terrific and modular
>and TLA-compliant than we could, but that's exactly what it
>would be: a Macintosh app for the Macintosh world.  So far,
>however, it seems that nobody has done that.

Maybe that is your problem, no Mac programmer worth his bits
wants to write a program that looks like it would be at home
in DOS land. The Mac has a lot of services which should be
used: CTB connections, system wide scripting, helper apps
like Stuffit Expander, Open Transport, preemptive multi-threading
for 68K machines (and next year all Macs) and proven & tested
interface guidlines. It isn't perfect for serial communications:
the current lack of preemptive multitasking being the most glaring
problem, but it gives you a lot if you just go to the trouble of
calling it.

>A distinct advantage of Kermit software to some people -- those
>who live and work in a diverse computing and communications
>environment, as opposed to those who only see / feel / touch /
>know about one specific type of computer -- is that it is
>portable and familiar across many types of systems.  That's one
>reason why we do not go out of our way to make applications
>like the one you describe above.  Because then we would have to
>do the same thing for DOS, OS/2, Windows 3.x, Windows NT,
>Windows 9x, Motif, NeXTSTEP, DECwindows, HP Vue, and on and on
>and on, and then our software would be just like any other
>software that you bought in a store -- i.e. aimed at an
>individual mass-market user, with little or no commonality
>across platforms.

Unfortunately, a lot of the software I unwittingly buy is
built with just this mentality. I'm thinking of games that
MacPlay puts out like Star Trek the 25th Anniversary game
or Scrabble whose interfaces and bit resolutions seem to
have been coded to the lowest common denominator of an
8-bit Nintendo. Absolute garbage which I loathe using when
a month of programmer's time and somebody at MacPlay reading
"Tog on Interface" could have made them a joy.

>Not that anything is wrong with that, it's only that we don't
>have huge "campuses" full of energetic full-time programmers
>rolling products out for the market share.  In fact, when you
>think about it, it's pretty amazing what so few people have
>have produced for so many.
>
>There's no point complaining about Mac Kermit.  We've got
>countless thousands of people who want it to be on a par with
>MS-DOS Kermit or OS/2 C-Kermit in terms of functionality,
>performance, support, and robustness (believe me about the
>countless thousands -- I get the mail), but nobody in the past
>few years who has had the time, inclination, and ability to do
>the work, nor anyone who has the cash to hire such a person.
>
>What do you want for free?

I expect a program whose authors can say "This is my baby,
I'm proud of it." Why else would anyone release freeware?

Example Free Mac Programs whose authors can say this:
Stuffit Expander, Disenfectant, JPEGView, Eudora, BBEdit Lite,
Nuntius, Fetch, NewsWatcher, Audio Strip GH (this is cripple
ware, but I'm proud of the free parts too).

--glenn