Reply by Meindert Sprang March 18, 20042004-03-18
"Torbj&#4294967295;rn Heltne" <torbjorn.heltne@amelektronikk.no> wrote in message
news:4059c9a8$1@news.broadpark.no...
> Meindert Sprang wrote: > > > The only drawback is that it only supports > > ports up to COM4 > > Allow me to help you out a bit here: > > * Open the teraterm.ini file using your favourite editor > * Find entry "MaxComPort" > * Set it to any value up to and including 16. > * Save and restart TeraTerm > > Personally I never install more than 16 comports in my PCs :-)
Me neither. But my Bluetooth inteface automatically allocates Com10 to 20. So after a few USB->serial converters, they start to be at COM21 and above... Meindert
Reply by March 18, 20042004-03-18
Meindert Sprang wrote:

> The only drawback is that it only supports > ports up to COM4
Allow me to help you out a bit here: * Open the teraterm.ini file using your favourite editor * Find entry "MaxComPort" * Set it to any value up to and including 16. * Save and restart TeraTerm Personally I never install more than 16 comports in my PCs :-) -- Torbj&#4294967295;rn Heltne AM Elektronikk AS
Reply by David Brown March 12, 20042004-03-12
"Max" <mtj2@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:ik52505iu1k95t7sgi95730d8raruq6ofs@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 20:22:24 GMT, Robert Scott wrote: > > >What about IVT by Ruud Beerstra? It is a freeware terminal emulator > >that also does Telnet via TCP/IP. > > So does HyperTerminal. > > I do wish some of the people who are so free with criticism of > HyperTerminal would at least take the trouble to actually run the > thing and check their facts first. >
No one cares whether HyperTerminal can do telnet over TCP/IP. TTP can also do telnet over TCP/IP (and there is a SSH add-on available), and can emulate a few dozen different types of terminal. Nor does it matter that IVT can do telnet (after all, windows already has a perfectly good telnet program). We are discussing the suitablity of terminal emulator programs connected to simple embedded systems communicating on a serial port.
Reply by David Brown March 12, 20042004-03-12
"Max" <mtj2@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:281150liegubcldqjppj6c74e4krul29rm@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 16:02:23 +0100, David Brown wrote: > > >> HyperTerminal doesn't need to use hardware handshaking. It can use > >> XON/OFF codes or no flow-control at all, if that's what you want. > > > >It can, sometimes - but I (and others) have had occasions when it just
won't
> >communicate at all, even with no flow control. > > Really? I haven't - ever. >
I've heard from others who have had no problems, and from others who have had problems. That makes it a potential source of problems, and if someone says they are having trouble getting something to communicate with HyperTerminal, then I suggest they cut out HT and try something else. That's common sense, and standard test/debug technique.
> >Whether it is because of > >handshake issues or other problems, I don't know - it is simply not worth > >bothering about. > > Probably poor hardware, but if you don't investigate, you'll never > know. >
That remark is barely worth answering. It is not the hardware - I have seen problems on different machines, and none have had problems using TTP.
> >Tera Term Pro is hardly exotic. It has features that HyperTerminal does
not
> >have (such as macros), and HyperTerminal has functionality that TTP does
not
> >(for easy access to bulliten boards and such like), but in practice TTP
is
> >faster and easier to use > > You're saying it's quicker to download, install, and learn to use TTP > than it would be to just use the program you're already familiar with? > Get real. >
Yes, it is quicker for most people to download TTP and use it than to use HT. That's because the only settings you need to worry (in most cases) about are the com port and the baud rate, and these are quickly set when you start it. You don't need to watch the advertising screen of HT, and fight though boxes asking for your country codes and modem types. TTP does not exactly have a steep learning curve - it is a terminal emulator, and does a simple job well. I'm sure that if you are very familiar with HT and have a slow download line, and find that it works great for you, then you are better sticking with that.
> >- it has all the functionality you need in most > >cases, without having to mess around trying to persuade HyperTerminal
that
> >you are not using a modem, and don't need an area code because you are
not
> >dialing, etc. > > Are you claiming that TTP doesn't need to be configured in some way to > use a modem or not? How does it know what settings to use for this > session, is it psychicware? >
It doesn't need configured for using a modem or not. You need to tell it your comms port and your baud rate, and can *if you want*, give it other settings outside the standard N,8,1 format, or delays between characters, and so on. But you don't need to tell it what country you are in to be able to talk to the PIC card on your desk.
> >I'm sure HyperTerminal is great for getting a modem > >connection to dinosaur servers, but when all you really want is a simple > >terminal connection on a direct serial link, then you are better with TTP > >(or many other programs - TTP is free and simple to use). > > You keep making this claim, but I've seen no evidence whatever to > support it. As a simple terminal emulator (which is all it's claimed > to be) HyperTerminal is entirely fit for it's purpose. >
The evidence is the my personal experiance, and the personal experiances of other posters here. I can't think what other evidence you might want, but feel free to search the comp.arch.embedded archives for other opinions. You'll find that very few people think highly of HT in the context of embedded systems, while TTP is very popular. There are plenty of other terminal emulator programs favoured by others, ranging from simple to advanced, from free to expensive - TTP just happens to be one that I find very useful.
> >When you want something with more features, at the cost of usability,
then
> >there are again many other choices that are far better than
HyperTerminal -
> >RealTerm is one option I've used. > > Non-programmers are easily impressed, I suppose. Once you're beyond > what HT can do for you, it's probably best to write some code to > handle the serial port directly. >
That is often the case - I have seldom had need for RealTerm. But on occasion it can be useful, and save the time taken to write dedicated programs.
> Incidentally, is the version of HT you're using as ancient as your > copy of Outlook Express? It seems somewhat illogical for an OE user to > criticise HyperTerminal's comparatively trivial imperfections at all, > come to that. >
You are decending far below the level of a technical discussion here - we are discussing the pros and cons of terminal programs, and critising them. Bringing up totally off-topic issues like newsreader programs sounds dangerously close to mud-slinging. As to the age of HT - I don't know how old the version was when I last tried it, and I don't care. The current version of Tera Term Pro is from 1999. That's not because it is not in use, or because the author has given up on it - it is simply because the program does the job it was designed to do, and doesn't need changed. The problems with HT are not so much bugs, but the way the program works - it is not designed for this sort of job, and I don't expect that to have changed with time.
> -- > Max
Reply by David Brown March 12, 20042004-03-12
"Max" <mtj2@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:am3150dmsvvgc3nrj9k0chf431e0db2162@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 16:31:08 +0100, Meindert Sprang wrote: > > >> > HyperTerminal doesn't need to use hardware handshaking. It can use > >> > XON/OFF codes or no flow-control at all, if that's what you want. > > > >Correct. But if you don't know that, it can take you all day before you
find
> >out that the default setting is 'hardware handshake on' and you wonder
why
> >Hyperterminal refuses to send characters to your device over three > >wires..... > > Just reading the help file would be too much to ask for, I suppose? > > What do you suggest should be the default handshake setting for a > terminal emulator, anyhow? Out of the box, the VT-100 used hardware > handshaking, while the VT-220 used XON/XOFF by default, IIRC, so I > don't see why no handshaking would be such an obvious choice here. >
That's pretty much exactly the point - HyperTerminal may be great as a terminal emulator, acting exactly like a VT-100 terminal or whatever. But the original poster, along with virtually everyone who follows comp.arch.embedded, wants a serial program to talk to an embedded system, not an ancient mainframe. So a program that quickly and easily, using default settings, connects reliably to such systems is far better than a program that can be co-erced into working if you read through the help files. Debugging potentially unreliable hardware and software on an embedded system is hard enough without having unreliable tools that might decide they don't want to work today, just because there are characters in the uart's buffer before you started. Of course, it *is* possible to use HyperTerminal for such testing. But why bother? Other programs are a few free clicks away and work so much better (and do so without nagging you to buy upgrades).
Reply by Meindert Sprang March 12, 20042004-03-12
"Max" <mtj2@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:3252505597eameq0ul5o2vg64tufdc0ebr@4ax.com...
> Nobody has yet pointed out any useful feature that HyperTerminal > doesn't have.
Oh yes, I did: start hyperterminal on a com port where data already comes in from for instance a GSP. 2 out of 10 times, HT complains about being unable to open the port, until you first stop the GPS. TTP does not exhibit this problem. So there's one useful feature that HT does not have: IT WORKS ALL THE TIME! Meindert
Reply by Max March 11, 20042004-03-11
On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 20:22:24 GMT, Robert Scott wrote:

>What about IVT by Ruud Beerstra? It is a freeware terminal emulator >that also does Telnet via TCP/IP.
So does HyperTerminal. I do wish some of the people who are so free with criticism of HyperTerminal would at least take the trouble to actually run the thing and check their facts first. -- Max
Reply by Max March 11, 20042004-03-11
On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 21:02:06 +0100, Meindert Sprang wrote:

>What i meant is: HT keeps nagging about opening a connection and asking for >phone numbers.
No it doesn't. As soon as you select a COM port rather than a modem, the Country/region drop-down and the edit boxes for area code and phone number are disabled, and a dialog is shown to allow you to set the speed, character format, and flow control. No nagging involved. (Version 5.1, btw)
>TTP does not. TTP *does* know about handshaking. Nobody said >otherwise. And yes it does all kinds of terminal emulations too. >Stop nagging, download it and see for yourself.
Nobody has yet pointed out any useful feature that HyperTerminal doesn't have.
>Well, in my case it's different. People use my devices for computer >navigation. The logical thing to do is when they don't get any GPS input is >in their programs is to check with a terminal program if the dataformat is >ok or if my device is configured the right way. And it is a but tricky >sometimes to send diagnostic tool to someone on a ship at sea....
Just as hard to download TTP, surely? -- Max
Reply by Robert Scott March 11, 20042004-03-11
What about IVT by Ruud Beerstra?  It is a freeware terminal emulator
that also does Telnet via TCP/IP.


-Robert Scott
 Ypsilanti, Michigan
(Reply through this forum, not by direct e-mail to me, as automatic reply address is fake.)
Reply by Meindert Sprang March 11, 20042004-03-11
"Max" <mtj2@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:7dc150hnh79vvada58f8nis4nt5e3vafdq@4ax.com...
> But HyperTerminal is on the PC already
Not necessarily.
> and most people who have a > need for a terminal emulator will likely be familiar with it, even if > it's not their first choice.
> Interesting that TTP doesn't use an installer. You need WinZip > installed as well, then?
Who hasn't? Or Wincommander, will also unzip.
> And to create shortcuts manually, of course. > That seems less than handy to me, YMMV.
C'mon man, one drag with your right mouse button down from the program directory back to the desktop does it.
> >Teraterm does not know about modems. It's a terminal program, opening a
port
> >when you tell it to. Simple as that. > > Oh. So it has *less* functionality than HT, yes? I don't see how it > can claim to be a "terminal emulator" at all if it can't handle any > form of handshaking. It sure as eggs isn't emulating a VT-100, that's > for sure.
What i meant is: HT keeps nagging about opening a connection and asking for phone numbers. TTP does not. TTP *does* know about handshaking. Nobody said otherwise. And yes it does all kinds of terminal emulations too. Stop nagging, download it and see for yourself.
> Criminy, no! I doubt I'd have lasted long in the business if I asked > customers to troubleshoot systems for me. If something like that was > necessary, I'd probably write some diagnostic software and send it to > them (assuming they couldn't just send me some suitable log files, > that is - and if they couldn't, I've already dropped the ball).
Well, in my case it's different. People use my devices for computer navigation. The logical thing to do is when they don't get any GPS input is in their programs is to check with a terminal program if the dataformat is ok or if my device is configured the right way. And it is a but tricky sometimes to send diagnostic tool to someone on a ship at sea.... Meindert