home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- id m0uEKsD-0007sLa; Tue, 30 Apr 96 13:14 MDT
- Sender: owner-executor
- Received: from ardi.com by ftp.ardi.com
- (Smail3.1.29.1 #3) id m0uEKrJ-0007sJn; Tue, 30 Apr 96 13:13 MDT
- Newsgroups: comp.emulators.mac.executor
- Path: sloth.swcp.com!tesuque.cs.sandia.gov!ferrari.mst6.lanl.gov!newshost.lanl.gov!ncar!csn!news-1.csn.net!imci3!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!watserv3.uwaterloo.ca!schepers
- From: schepers@dcs1.uwaterloo.ca (Peter Schepers)
- Subject: Re: Serial Ports.
- Message-ID: <DqoLn0.6x4@watserv3.uwaterloo.ca>
- Nntp-Posting-Host: dcs1.uwaterloo.ca
- Organization: University of Waterloo
- References: <1.5.4.32.19960418021002.0066ea08@lausd.k12.ca.us> <ufd94zbjse.fsf@ftp.ardi.com> <DqBpnD.LMK@watserv3.uwaterloo.ca> <31804D5A.42CB@tribeca.ios.com>
- Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 15:28:11 GMT
- Lines: 85
- To: executor@ardi.com
- X-MailNews-Gateway: From newsgroup comp.emulators.mac.executor
- Sender: owner-executor@ardi.com
- Precedence: bulk
-
- In article <31804D5A.42CB@tribeca.ios.com>,
- Albert Hartman <compexpr@tribeca.ios.com> wrote:
- >Peter Schepers wrote:
- >>
- >> In article <ufd94zbjse.fsf@ftp.ardi.com>,
- >> Clifford T. Matthews <ctm@ardi.com> wrote:
- >> >>>>>> "Matthew" == Matthew Ballard <mballard@lausd.k12.ca.us> writes:
- >> >In article <1.5.4.32.19960418021002.0066ea08@lausd.k12.ca.us> Matthew Ballard <mballard@lausd.k12.ca.us> writes:
- >> >
- >> >
- >> > Matthew> When Executor supports serial ports, will it also support
- >> > Matthew> AppleTalk via a port on my computer, because it would be
- >> > Matthew> useful access the AppleTalk networks at my school.
- >> > Matthew> Thanks, Matthew
- >> >
- >> >Probably not. Most likely we'll support AppleTalk over ethernet, instead.
- >>
- >> How can someone even start to support a protocol, which runs at ~230
- >> kilobaud through unbuffered 8250's (16540's) that run at max. 115
- >> kilobaud? Besides the baud difference, unbuffered UART's would likely be
- >> losing characters at an astronomical rate (as is evidenced by
- >> multi-tasking OS's like OS/2 which need at least a buffered UART just to
- >> do 9600 without bit loss.
- >>
- >> However, supporting appletalk over an ethernet card (ethertalk?) would
- >> also seem to be very limiting because of the cost for individual users.
- >> How could you hook up your PC to a standard appletalk laser printer using
- >> an ethernet card, while not incurring much more expense?
- >
- >Well, I have a bunch of Tops Local Talk adapters for the PC. Also, Shreve
- >Systems, Sun Remarketing and a few other companies still have a supply of
- >PC Appletalk cards for around $29.00. IF the cards are available in
- >enough numbers, perhaps ARDI might support them further down the line.
- >
- >But, truthfully... Ethertalk is where the Mac is going. I probably does
- >make more sense to buy an AppleTalk to EtherTalk router for an older
- >network rather than dumbing down the PC to be compatible.
-
- As the person who started part of this debate, I feel it necessary to add
- a few more things to the pot...
-
- Most of the original postings asked about support for "appletalk over
- serial ports". I don't recall any replies from ARDI which stated this was
- *not* going to be done.
-
- Back in the old days of Apple, the protocol and cabling were both called
- Appletalk. This was later changed to Localtalk cabling, but the protocol
- was still referred to as Appletalk. Running this over ethernet was still
- only a gleam in someone's eye.
-
- Nowadays we have appletalk over ethernet, but this is commonly referred
- to as "ethertalk", not appletalk. This is where much confusion seems to
- be creeping in.
-
- When I originally posed my question about "how to support appletalk over
- *serial ports*", I never actually got any replies stating "this can't be
- done, and of course it won't be supported", which is what I still
- contend, but instead got a bunch of people telling me about the various
- Appletalk cards which use to be available (I know of these), and that it
- wouldn't be worth supporting this anyways, so we might as well go to
- ethernet.
-
- Supporting only appletalk over ethernet (ethertalk) would seem to be a
- very market-limiting strategy, since my interest in Executor would be to
- be able to use it from my *home* pc, printing to my Laser Plus. No
- ethernet capabilities here, along with a huge chunk of the already present
- installed base of apple (and other manufacturers) printers. However, I
- don't think ADRI will have too many choices given the limitations of PC
- hardware.
-
- I guess the point I am saying is I would like ARDI to make it clear what
- they are going to support. Saying they will support Appletalk isn't
- enough... they must specify the transmission medium as well. So if it
- will be "appletalk over ethernet" only, they should say "we will support
- ethertalk, using appropriate ethernet cards". Just saying appletalk is
- much too fuzzy, as it embraces both a protocol and a cabling system.
-
- There, clear as mud now!
-
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Peter Schepers, |
- Dept. of Computing Services, | The opinions expressed in the above
- University of Waterloo, | rant are those of the poster, and not
- Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. | necessarily shared by anybody else on
- 1-519-885-1211 ext 2456 | this planet (or employer).
-
-