SCO ANSI terminal vs. regular ANSI terminal

SCO ANSI terminal vs. regular ANSI terminal

Post by Wayne Ng » Mon, 18 Jan 1993 04:56:05



        Hi! Does anyone out there know the differences between SCO's
ANSI terminal and a regular ANSI terminal?  If so, could some kind
soul please sent me a detail description of their differences?

Thank you!
Wayne

 
 
 

SCO ANSI terminal vs. regular ANSI terminal

Post by Dan Everha » Thu, 21 Jan 1993 15:54:14



Quote:> the nice thing about standards is there is so many to choose from.  If anyone
> actualy has a real ansi entry for SCO, let me know, im intrested.  The 6 or

I too would like to find robust ansi termcap and terminfo entries.
Perhaps there is enough general interest that they should be posted to
the newsgroup.

--

  / \_   Dan Everhart                        uunet!{camco,fluke}!dyndata!dan
  \_/ \____________________________          206-743-6982, 742-8604 (fax)
  / \_/                                      7107 179th St SW
  \_/    Dynamic Data & Electronics          Edmonds, WA 98026, USA

"Rhe rone rike, rhe rone rike... rhorane" -- Astro sings "*"

 
 
 

SCO ANSI terminal vs. regular ANSI terminal

Post by Robert W. Me » Sat, 13 Feb 1993 03:50:11





>>> the nice thing about standards is there is so many to choose from.  If anyone
>>> actualy has a real ansi entry for SCO, let me know, im intrested.  The 6 or

>>I too would like to find robust ansi termcap and terminfo entries.
>>Perhaps there is enough general interest that they should be posted to
>>the newsgroup.

>I hate to burst your bubble, but the sco ansi terminal is fully ansi.
>All the ansi standard says is that if you implement a capability then
>it's 'ESCape' sequence is a certain way.  They define hundreds of possible

The main "MEAT" of this article is based on that SCO users want to be
compatible with DOS terminal programs that use ANSI.  So far the DOS
ansi terminal programs all adhere to the same standard.  If SCO adhered
to the same standards programs such as setcolor would change the color
on DOS ansi terminals.  Also the SCO entries would handle cursor movement
controls correctly.  SCO may 'Technically' adhere to ansi, however they dont
adhere to an ansi standard that is compatible with anything but itself.

The point here is that SCO's ansi entries lack the compatibility that people
are looking for.

--

Paternalism is like mildew: If you ignore it, it won't just not go away,
it'll grow until you can no longer ignore it, or do anything about it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
 
 

SCO ANSI terminal vs. regular ANSI terminal

Post by Wu L » Fri, 19 Feb 1993 03:35:48



Quote:>The main "MEAT" of this article is based on that SCO users want to be
>compatible with DOS terminal programs that use ANSI.  So far the DOS
>ansi terminal programs all adhere to the same standard.  If SCO adhered
>to the same standards programs such as setcolor would change the color
>on DOS ansi terminals.  Also the SCO entries would handle cursor movement
>controls correctly.  SCO may 'Technically' adhere to ansi, however they dont
>adhere to an ansi standard that is compatible with anything but itself.

>The point here is that SCO's ansi entries lack the compatibility that people
>are looking for.

I don't think there is any difference between SCO's implementation of
the "ansi" termcap/terminfo description and the ANSI standard.  It's
the implementation of the color handling in the console driver (via
escape sequences) that you're complaining about, and I'm not sure
that the ANSI spec deals with that at all.  SCO's escape sequences
differ from those used by DOS's ANSI.SYS.

Besides, it's not that hard to write your own version of setcolor that
would output the correct set of escape sequences for whatever you've
got.
--
Wu Liu                          Software Engineer, User Interface Group

 
 
 

SCO ANSI terminal vs. regular ANSI terminal

Post by Philippe Gouja » Sat, 20 Feb 1993 00:50:30




>>The main "MEAT" of this article is based on that SCO users want to be
>>compatible with DOS terminal programs that use ANSI.  So far the DOS
>>ansi terminal programs all adhere to the same standard.  If SCO adhered
>>to the same standards programs such as setcolor would change the color
>>on DOS ansi terminals.  Also the SCO entries would handle cursor movement
>>controls correctly.  SCO may 'Technically' adhere to ansi, however they dont
>>adhere to an ansi standard that is compatible with anything but itself.

>>The point here is that SCO's ansi entries lack the compatibility that people
>>are looking for.

Absolutely. Even if SCO is better ansi than ansi or whatever you call it DOS
users can still not use full screen programs properly : try do delete a
line with vi when connected with Telemate for example and start crying.
(and Telemate is suypposed to have a good ansi emulation, compared to
oldies like Procomm).

Quote:>I don't think there is any difference between SCO's implementation of
>the "ansi" termcap/terminfo description and the ANSI standard.

I don't know what the ansi standard is but even if SCO is 100% ansi
conformant and DOS emulator aren't the market is still with dos emulators.
Go tell your users/customers "No, the comm package you are using is not
ansi conformant so you must change it" they will laugh at you and say "I
don't care about conformance, it your problem to provide me with a correct
way to connect to your machine".

Quote:>Besides, it's not that hard to write your own version of setcolor that
>would output the correct set of escape sequences for whatever you've
>got.

This is not the point. Sure you can easily rewrite a setcolor. But what
about curses? What about all programs that use the terminfo database?

The point is how or where to get a terminfo entry to suists the
requirements of ansi-pc dos users ? (and unfortunately "dosansi" is not the
solution).

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Unix soit qui mal y pense.

 
 
 

SCO ANSI terminal vs. regular ANSI terminal

Post by Robert W. Me » Sun, 21 Feb 1993 18:16:21




>>The main "MEAT" of this article is based on that SCO users want to be
>>compatible with DOS terminal programs that use ANSI.  So far the DOS
>>ansi terminal programs all adhere to the same standard.  If SCO adhered
>>to the same standards programs such as setcolor would change the color
>>on DOS ansi terminals.  Also the SCO entries would handle cursor movement
>>controls correctly.  SCO may 'Technically' adhere to ansi, however they dont
>>adhere to an ansi standard that is compatible with anything but itself.

>>The point here is that SCO's ansi entries lack the compatibility that people
>>are looking for.

>I don't think there is any difference between SCO's implementation of
>the "ansi" termcap/terminfo description and the ANSI standard.  It's
>the implementation of the color handling in the console driver (via
>escape sequences) that you're complaining about, and I'm not sure
>that the ANSI spec deals with that at all.  SCO's escape sequences
>differ from those used by DOS's ANSI.SYS.

This is not simply related to color, cursor movements do not work correctly.

The thing is, it is claiming to be "ansi".  I would guess that DOS systems
are the major uses of ansi terminal emulations.  SCO's termcap has like
6 different entries for "ansi".  Why is this?  If ansi was a standard
then there should only be 1 correct?  I would also guess that 90% of the
people who want to use ansi on SCO boxes are using DOS terminal programs.
Using that theory, one would assume that when you use ansi as a terminal
emulation on a SCO box, you would get proper emulation.  This is not the
case.  In fact I have tried every entry SCO has for ansi and NONE of them
work correctly when using a DOS terminal program.  So something is amiss
here.  Either every DOS program that uses ansi is wrong, and the hundreds
of software and terminal packages that use ansi under DOS are wrong, or
SCO's entries for ansi are wrong.  The vt100 and vt102 emulations work
like a charm under DOS with any terminal program supporting it.  Why is
this?  Do DOS programmers just like vt100 better?  I think not.  This
all comes down to the original post and the original complaint.  SCO's
ansi entries are not worth the disk space they consume.

Quote:

>Besides, it's not that hard to write your own version of setcolor that
>would output the correct set of escape sequences for whatever you've
>got.

Why would you want to do that?  The idea behind having it there and using
ansi is so it conforms to a standard.  Thats like saying I write in C
because its portable but I only use machine independant code so you
cant port it to anything.

--

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            No Canadian Coins.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
 
 

SCO ANSI terminal vs. regular ANSI terminal

Post by Ala » Mon, 22 Feb 1993 13:48:18




>>The main "MEAT" of this article is based on that SCO users want to be
>>compatible with DOS terminal programs that use ANSI.  So far the DOS
>>ansi terminal programs all adhere to the same standard.  If SCO adhered
>>to the same standards programs such as setcolor would change the color
>>on DOS ansi terminals.  Also the SCO entries would handle cursor movement
>>controls correctly.  SCO may 'Technically' adhere to ansi, however they dont
...
>the "ansi" termcap/terminfo description and the ANSI standard.  It's
>the implementation of the color handling in the console driver (via
>escape sequences) that you're complaining about, and I'm not sure

This seems to relate to a problem I've been having: finding
a Mac, DOS, Windows, or OS/2 terminal program which will work properly
over a serial modem line with the vi editor.  I've tried 7 different programs
including the Mac "zterm" and "RedRider" programs, the DOS "procomm",
"bitcom", and "qterm" programs, and the Windows and OS/2 bundled terminal
programs.  I've tried a variety of terminal emulation modes for each
program, including vt100 and ansi.  They are all intolerable,
failing to insert characters and lines, double spacing lines, etc.  Each
program screws up in its own fashion which has led me to conclude that
the problem lies with the individual programs and not with Xenix.
However, if that is the whole story, how can users of DOS based
BBS systems put up with it?  I need either a recommendation for a good
telecommunications program (preferably for DOS and shareware or freeware
since I'd like to share it with others, but commercial if need be)
OR termcap and terminfo entries which will support ansi as popular
DOS based terminal programs (let's say "Procomm" since it is the best
of the lot so far) understand it.  I'd appreciate email if possible.

--

-----

 
 
 

SCO ANSI terminal vs. regular ANSI terminal

Post by Bill Irw » Mon, 01 Mar 1993 17:48:18


:                              I need either a recommendation for a good
: telecommunications program (preferably for DOS and shareware or freeware
: since I'd like to share it with others, but commercial if need be)
: OR termcap and terminfo entries which will support ansi as popular
: DOS based terminal programs (let's say "Procomm" since it is the best
: of the lot so far) understand it.  I'd appreciate email if possible.

We've used Century Software's TERM for years, for both UNIX and
DOS communications.  Running TERM on a PC (either in DOS or
Windows) and connecting to a UNIX/XENIX host with TERM=ansi,
produces perfect results.  I have used and supported the product
for years and would recommend it without hesitation.

I think the DOS/Windows version is $3-400, with the UNIX version
$6-700 I think.  Century Software is:

Suite c-294
5284 South 320 West
Salt Lake City, UT
84092      Phone (801) 268-3088
FAX 801-268-2772
--
Bill Irwin    -       The Westrheim Group     -    Vancouver, BC, Canada
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
uunet!twg!bill            (604) 431-9600 (voice) |     Your Computer  

 
 
 

SCO ANSI terminal vs. regular ANSI terminal

Post by Marc Unang » Fri, 05 Mar 1993 19:32:11




>>I need either a recommendation for a good telecommunications program
>>(preferably for DOS [...]
>We've used Century Software's TERM for years [...]

Century Software's TERM isn't really a telecommunications program;
it's more of a terminal emulator package that runs over hardwired
serial connections.  I'm fairly sure that the original poster was
looking for something to use over modems.

At any rate, I've had fairly good luck using the stock SCO vt100
termcap with various PC-based telecom programs, including Telix and
Procomm Plus.  Remember to set the telecom program to VT100 emulation,
not ANSI emulation -- the two are different, and although the escape
codes overlap in places, you *will* have problems if you tell the Unix
system you're a VT100 when you're really emulating ANSI, or vice versa.

--
Marc Unangst, N8VRH         | "Of course, in order to understand this you

                            |  is squishy."
                            |    -W. Scheider, from a Physics lecture

 
 
 

SCO ANSI terminal vs. regular ANSI terminal

Post by Kevin W. Re » Tue, 09 Mar 1993 00:43:51





>>>I need either a recommendation for a good telecommunications program
>>>(preferably for DOS [...]
>>We've used Century Software's TERM for years [...]
>Century Software's TERM isn't really a telecommunications program;
>it's more of a terminal emulator package that runs over hardwired
>serial connections.  I'm fairly sure that the original poster was
>looking for something to use over modems.
>At any rate, I've had fairly good luck using the stock SCO vt100
>termcap with various PC-based telecom programs, including Telix and
>Procomm Plus.  Remember to set the telecom program to VT100 emulation,
>not ANSI emulation -- the two are different, and although the escape
>codes overlap in places, you *will* have problems if you tell the Unix
>system you're a VT100 when you're really emulating ANSI, or vice versa.

Digiboard sells a program called DoubleView that properly emulates
an SCO Console as well as several other emulations.  It also includes
a easy to use copy utility for getting files to and from Unix and DOS.

The program works as a TSR on DOS allowing you to pop in and out of
Unix on the fly.

--
================== TELESYS DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS ==================
Kevin W. Reed                Public *NIX Site and Newsfeed Source

SCO Xenix/Unix Support              Data/UUCP/BBS +1 602 649 9099

 
 
 

1. SCO ANSI terminal vs. regular ANSI terminal

: I hate to burst your bubble, but the sco ansi terminal is fully ansi.
: All the ansi standard says is that if you implement a capability then
: it's 'ESCape' sequence is a certain way.  They define hundreds of possible
: capabilities, but no mechanism for finding out which ones the device supports.
: Dec's vt180 printer also use ansi sequences including the ones for changing
: the font pitch.  Dec VT100 class terminal also use the "Verdor extensions"
: that ansi allows.  No where in the standard are any of the sequences manditory
: so two terminals both total ansi compatible may need to have totaly different
: sequences sent to them.  This is in fact the problem between SCO ansi,
: DOS's ansi.sys, Dec's vt100/vt220/vt320/vt420..., Dec's printers, and
: anything else that is claims to be ansi standard.

I don't know if anyone's interested, but I've written (am writing) a
terminal emulator for DOS that works correctly with SCO Unix/Zenix ansi
escape sequences.  By these I'm referring to the codes to change colors,
etc on the console.  It also "does" TTY, VT52, VT102, and VT200.
The emulation is pretty well complete, I'm just working on cleaning up the
menus, etc.  It currently runs over serial ports (COM1-COM8), and
LAT/CTERM Ethernet connections.  TELNET capability is on the way.  It's
$20 shareware for individuals/educational institutes/hospitals.  It's $35
for commercial/government.  Not crippled, and no nagging.  If you need
such a beast for accessing your SCO box, let me know and I'll see about
sending you a copy to beta test.

MARK

====================================================================

 Camosun College - Interurban Campus     TEL: (604) 370-4601
 4461 Interurban Road  Room 143-Tech     FAX: (604) 370-3660
 Victoria,   B.C.  Canada    V8X 3X1

2. Expect, Tcl, and Tk for Linux

3. Terminal ANSI ou SCO ANSI

4. modifying X for a new graphics card.. how?

5. SCOANSI vs AT386 vs ANSI terminal type

6. System Administrators' Guide 0.4 - new version of freeware book

7. SCO ANSI terminal emulation problem

8. ASUS A7V8X-X , ALSA and VIA-82xx : codec 0 is not valid [0x87e5370]

9. SCO Ansi terminal emulator programs for DOS/WIN (FREE).

10. "Local Print" to remote SCO ANSI terminal?

11. SCO-ANSI ANSI code?

12. WANTED: Windows SCO ANSI Terminal Emulator Free or Shareware

13. ANSI Virtual Terminal ?