home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
- Path: sparky!uunet!munnari.oz.au!comp.vuw.ac.nz!actrix!Steve.Withers
- From: Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz
- Subject: Re: Which is better: pmcomm or te2?
- Organization: Actrix Information Exchange
- Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 00:49:05 GMT
- Message-ID: <1992Aug29.004905.8158@actrix.gen.nz>
- Keywords: pmcomm te2 comms
- References: <1992Aug28.122747.22245@bas-a.bcc.ac.uk>
- Sender: Steve.Withers@actrix.gen.nz (Steve Withers)
- Lines: 39
-
- In article <1992Aug28.122747.22245@bas-a.bcc.ac.uk> ucgadkw@ucl.ac.uk (Dominik Wujastyk) writes:
- > This isn't intended to start a war, but I thought some people might
- > have tried the two already, and be able to sum up the pros and cons.
- >
- > Pmcomm is about 20 dollars more to register, I believe (89 versus 69,
- > roughly). That's about all I know, so far.
- >
- > Dominik
-
- I have used the unregistered versions of both and preferred TE/2 because it
- had Zmodem. I now have a registered copy of TE/2.
-
- I prefer text-based comms programs because they are "crisper". No GUI to
- refresh. I also bought TE/2 because PMComm's VT100 was not as good as TE/2.
- This was probably the main difference for me as reasonably VT100 is critical
- for my comms activities.
-
- The other main factor is the cost. The NZ$ is only worth about US$0.52, so the
- US$20 difference is double that to me. As it was, I paid about NZ$130-140 for
- TE/2.......PMComm would have been NZ$170-180.
-
- TE/2 also lets you use REXX for writing scripts. I don't recall PMComm
- offering this feature.
-
- I thought PMComm was better than *any* Windows 3.x comms program I had seen,
- however. Just to put things in perspective.....:-)
-
- steve
-
-
-
-
-
-
- --
- Steve Withers - Wellington, New Zealand | If you don't vote for MMP on
- Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz | September 19, 1992, then you
- withers_s@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz | must like things the way they
- **** Happy user of OS/2 v2!! **** | are.....can I live with YOU?
-