Columbia Kermit/kermit.zip/newsgroups/misc.19960425-19960715/[e-mail] _Sun Apr 28 17:31:28 1996.msg

Internet Message Format | 2020-01-01 | 15KB

Return-Path: [e-mail]
Received: from apakabar.cc.columbia.edu (apakabar.cc.columbia.edu [128.59.35.159]) by watsun.cc.columbia.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id RAA08536 for <kermit.misc@watsun>; Sun, 28 Apr 1996 17:31:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from news@localhost) by apakabar.cc.columbia.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id RAA07060 for kermit.misc@watsun; Sun, 28 Apr 1996 17:31:26 -0400 (EDT)
Path: news.columbia.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.dacom.co.kr!usenet.seri.re.kr!news.cais.net!nntp.primenet.com!news.asu.edu!ennfs.eas.asu.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!cs.utk.edu!gaia.ns.utk.edu!utkux4!sad
From: [e-mail] (Deutscher)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.kermit.misc,comp.os.os2.comm
Subject: Re: which is the best soft. Kermit95, Relfection, KEA ??
Date: 28 Apr 1996 16:30:15 GMT
Organization: University of Tennessee, Knoxville
Lines: 255
Message-ID: <4m06en$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <1996Apr23.122245.1@eisner> <4llu3e$[e-mail]> <4lnjc0$[e-mail]> <4lp55o$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: utkux4.utcc.utk.edu
Followup: comp.protocols.kermit.misc,comp.os.os2.comm
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Xref: news.columbia.edu comp.protocols.kermit.misc:5171 comp.os.os2.comm:6835

Frank da Cruz ([e-mail]) wrote:
:In article <4lnjc0$[e-mail]>,
:Deutscher <[e-mail]> wrote:
::...
:: Nice. Will the OS/2 version be able to notify the host, too (or is it already
:: and its again one of those treasures I haven't found yet?).
::
:As Jeff pointed out, the OS/2 version -- like the MS-DOS version --
:already supports TELNET NAWS, but the Telnet server on the other end has
:to support it too.

Yup, I am just trying to find out what our UNIX boxes can do about it :-)

[snip]

:In a GUI program, we also can change screen dimensions by dragging the
:corner with the mouse.  On Telnet and Rlogin connections, GUI terminal
:emulators can send the appropriate Telnet or Rlogin protocol messages
:whenever this happens, as xterm users know.

Nice, still I was very pleased to read in Jeffrey's message that you
will continue to offer a console version, since this is one of the
many strong sides in my oppinion, that distinguishes Ckermit from the crowd:
You can use it fullscreen, text mode, _fast_. Say, w/o slip / ppp connection
and a 9.6 modem all I have to use multiple sessions over one dialup is
the UNIX screen command. CKermit swaps screens fast enough to make that
very pleasant, I'd expect  GUI  version to be slower. Just an example.
Over my ethernet connectoin OTHO I'd have no problem with a GUI version.
Anyway, the text mode interface was what caused me to ditch ZOC after I had
used it to d/l Ckermit, and hence I am happy.

::Will these things make it in the other releases, too, where appropriate?
::
:It depends on the platform.  If you are asking, will there be a product
:for OS/2 comparable to Kermit 95, the answer is "maybe".  Maybe you and
:other OS/2 users can help answer it.

Ahhhhhh, I see what's comming (and think it is justified).

:Obviously we want to please everybody, but there are not enough of us to
:do that, and in today's financial climate we have to focus our efforts
:where they will pay off best.  (Remember, the Kermit Project pays its own
:way.)

:To be candid, we could not give away a product for OS/2 that is the same
:as the one we are selling for Windows 95.  This is our bread and butter.
:Thus any new Kermit release for OS/2 would need to be a commercial-quality
:product.  But that requires a certain level of investment -- and I'm not
:just talking about programmer time, but also packaging and so on.

Well, if you were to include a CD-ROM with Ckermit in the Ckermit book you'd
keep packaging down. A friend of mine who runs a hw/sw company told me a
while ago that above a certain number of disk distributed CD-ROM is cheaper
than even one or two floppies, which is why AOL and people like this can
afford to keep sending me all this Windows stuff on CD-ROM, which in
my case make great coasters; it seems cheaper even than taking me out of
their data base.

:The
:question is: would there ever be enough sales of an OS/2 product to recoup
:the original investment, or would we take a bath?

I can't answer this, since I am not all OS/2 users, but I can do two things:
I have already taken the liberty to crosspost this to comp.os.os2.comm, where
you maight get more exposure to that audience, and I can tell you what I
think. Another note though: Someone who reads a 'kermit' newsgroup is
probably already in the camp, so the feedback you'd get here might be more
positive than the average of all users out there.

:I don't mean to sound
:crass, but the newsgroups are full of postings whose gist is "Kermit is
:GREAT as long as I don't have to pay for it."  Kermit 95 users, it seems,
:have mostly gotten past that.

Well, I really can't resist, but people who don't mind paying for an 18bit
(on average) operating system that is inferior to things which are out for a
while already (inlcuding UNIces, OS/2, and NT) will probabaly even more
happily pay for good software that actually works reliably: CKermit.

Now, that that is said, I have got the impression that CKermit users
are as loyal as are OS/2 users, so I'd expect the resulting set to be
similar: people stick with what works well. I also would assume that
posts regarding CKermit may actually be more of the "CKermit is great
_and_ it is even free" nature rather than of the " .. _as long_ as I
don't have to pay .." one.  I at least post the first version no matter
where one asks for good OS/2 communications software, and I also always
add that people may wish to buy the book to both get full control over
the package and to support the project.  I understand it is possible to
order CKermit from you guys for a charge, but naturally, you will see
less orders for something you can download and use legitimately for
free, than for software that has to be bought like CKermit/95. So I'd
expect your statistics to be influenzed by this fact.

:What about OS/2 users?  How do we know in advance if the investment is
:worth the risk?  With Windows 95 it was an easy decision.  With OS/2?  Not
:so easy.

I know. Windows is everywhere, so even if you capture only 10 % of its
market you will gain, OS/2 is a much smaller and, to be honest, also
way more critical market. People who use OS/2 do so because things like
Windows didn't fit their needs or expectations, be it just of uptimes
of 3+ weeks and heavy multitasking, that means they _have_ expectations
in the first place.

This is why simple ports of Windows software to OS/2 (like Wordperfect
once upon a time) will not be accepted too widely since they don't
utilize the power of OS/2's underlying SOM / WPS architecture: Often
they don't integrate with the OS but just look like a quick recompile.
(The frontend of Mathematica for OS/2 is another example.)

Luckily the OS/2 version you have put out is pretty impressive in my
mind, including native help files, all that is nice. Maybe a commercial
version should also accept some sort of dialing scripts which are
stored in a separate CKermit object file and can be double-clicked on
or droppend on the ckermit programme object to automate dialing and
such. I realize this can be done to some extent already by calling
ckermit with, I think -c or so, and having the WPS pass the script file
name to Ckermit, but this requires quite some knowledge or at least
familiarity with the OS and might be easier for new users if it was
installed as some sort of 'CKermit template' that has already the
association set to launch CKermit. Just an idea to support my point. To
sum it up: Windows software will sell, no matter what, just due to the
big market and its inherent inertia. The fact that Windows kept on
selling as it did is proof enough. If the Windows software is good, it
will sell even better.  OS/2 software will only sell when it is good,
because the OS has set some expectations.

::Btw, full information about Kermit 95 is available on the Web at:
::
:::   http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/k95.html
::
::Just a minor remark. I realize you have to and I hope you do make some
::money with Kermit '95, but does that mean that the URL has to look like
::there was only that?
::
:Just to clear up this misunderstanding: like it says, this is the URL for
:Kermit 95, not for all the other Kermit programs.  It was posted in a
:message that discusses Kermit 95.  The main Kermit URL is:
:  http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/
:The OS/2 C-Kermit URL is:
:  http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/os2.html

Hm. Haven't checked your web page in a while, hm? :-) I _did_ try
the 'generic' URL; here we go:

Linkname: Kermit Communications Software
        URL: http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/

  K-95 Kermit for Windows 95 and NT

    - v1.1.4, 7 Mar 96
     * What is Kermit?
     * Licensing
     * Documentation
     * Technical Support
     * What's New - 14 Apr 96
     * What's Available and How to Get It
     * Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
     * Further information
     * Links to Other Sites


:In any case, I hope some of you OS/2 users can help us reach a decision.
:Look at the Kermit 95 licensing and pricing plans at the aforementioned
:Kermit 95 URL and see how they would settle with you or your company or
:institution.  In short... would you pay?

In short: yes, subject to certain restrictions, and I have already
once buying the book. But then again, I used to write commercial software
myself and think it is perfectly fine to pay for things you use if the price
is in a proper relation to the product, and I think it is not right to use
illegally copied software, I try to make a contribution to the FSF and
buy Nutshell books where most stuff is out on the web, too. I may not be
typical.

I would not buy a GUI-only version. (Unless there is a non-GUI version
also which is either included or --- free, which would be the same on a
CDROM).

Now lets talk about the prices: First it would have to be reasonable, say
together with the book, shouldn't exceed the price of the OS (as one
threshold), or if it does, there should be a lite version, and it should
probably not be more expensive than shareware registration fees for
products like ZOC.
Second, there should be well priced site licensing schemes available, so
environments like universities and such can afford it and can allow their
students and such to afford it, w/o the handbook, which they should buy
themselves if they wish. (That means there'd have to be the version with and
the version w/o CD around).
This would perhaps also buy you more customers in the long run, because
most everybody seems to feel the urge to upgrade all the time and once
students have left the university they may well _buy_ the next version.
Third, old versions should remain available at the original conditions.

This is what I can think of now. I also know that I am dying to get Tektronix
support and just started to shop around to find commercial offers for native
OS/2 tektronix emulators. I'd surely love to see this and my favourite comm
package (CKermit -- you guessed it) in one, maybe with a plugin module or
a moderately priced add-on to the base package. I realize that not many
people will be so eager to get Tektronix emulation, so I'd think it is fair
if I pay for it a bit extra. I'd even be happy with the rudimentary Tektronix
support NCSA telnet for MS-DOS has, of course the amazingly close-to perfect
emulation of EM4105, for instance, wouldn't be rejected either.

Also, it would be nice to allow ckermit to intergrate with external picture
viewers (like PM View) to allow viewing pictures, say, a weather map, as it
is being downloaded, w/o having to put all that stuff in the CKermit code
and blow it up to the size of ZOC. (I understand that, e.g. LifeWire can
do this integratin with PM View already). Granted, PM View is shareware, but
the point is it should be _possible_ and a documented interface rather than
building in all and every whistle.
Probably CKermit would need to be distributed with the littel add-in (p201
or so?) that allows to use xyz-modem transfers in addition to the kermit
protocol, and it would be interesting to see how the Finnish (I believe)
gentleman who wrote and made freely available this add-in would feel about
his code being part of a now commercial package. I think xyz modem are
essential. (I love kermit to death for uploads to my main frames, xyz never
get the job done, but for d/l I prefer sz, be it just for the transparent
handeling of file types and such.)

Did you consider going shareware rather than fully commercial? It seems at
leas in an office environment to be more annoying to be told that you use
unregistered software than that you use someone elses registered copy ...
Did you consider getting together with IBM about it? They distributed
lately a CD with demo versions of a boatload of commercial software
with contact info and such, and this might get you some exposure.
Did you consider posting a solicitaion in comp.os.os2.announce asking what
the OS/2 community would think about a commercial CKermit?


On a related note, maybe you could set up a web address for further
suggestions to CKermit (if you haven't done so, I didnt' check out your whole
site). Wolfram Research -- the Mathematica guys -- have an email address
[e-mail], as an example. I keep for most pieces of software I use
all the time a little file with notes where I collect ideas, bugs, and such,
and send them every now and then. I did this also when 191 was in beta.
This way I could beg more efficiently for file name completino also for
directories, and when using /, and for a transfer-option that is something
like 'basename-literal' to allow to transer file names from some other
than working directory w/o having suddenly the same directory structure on
the other machine).

Anyway, I think this gets  bit to much in details. Feel free to send me email
if you wish.

Kind regards!    Stefan


==========================================================================
Stefan A. Deutscher, [e-mail], (001)-423-[522-7845|974-7838|574-5897]
                                             home^    UTK^     ORNL^
==========================================================================
If there is software you'd like to have in a native version, visit the:
OS/2 E-mail Campaign Page http://www.andrews.edu/~boyko/email.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------