MS-DOS Kermit: release 3.15 or 3.16? - Protocols

This is a discussion on MS-DOS Kermit: release 3.15 or 3.16? - Protocols ; Ed Ravin wrote: > > Got any copies of IBM Xenix lying around? Actually it was written by > Microsoft, just like the other operating system IBM offered for the PC-AT. > I'm sure Kermit will run just fine on ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 23 of 23

Thread: MS-DOS Kermit: release 3.15 or 3.16?

  1. Re: MS-DOS Kermit: on a 286 or 386?

    Ed Ravin wrote:
    >
    > Got any copies of IBM Xenix lying around? Actually it was written by
    > Microsoft, just like the other operating system IBM offered for the PC-AT.
    > I'm sure Kermit will run just fine on it...


    Indeed! Both IBM/Microsoft Xenix or SCO Xenix/286 would be great,
    but I have no licenses/media for them. I was looking for an old
    MINIX release too, but do not know how useful will it be for real
    work. (I wrote *old* MINIX.) I looked for COHERENT too, but the
    only release that seems available for free (4.2.10) is for 32-bit
    processors. I should look for COHERENT 3.x instead, but media is
    not available.

    Thanks for your advice,
    Igor.

  2. Re: MS-DOS Kermit: release 3.15 or 3.16?

    Igor,

    with all due respect, Kermit was what brought me to computing during
    Medical School 25 years ago, and eventually after playing with an
    enormous variety of Kermits via a few detours (Xenix, Minix, Linux,
    X25, UUCP, TCP/IP) lead to Namibia being connected to the Internet and
    me (now an Obstetrician & Gynaecologist) still running .NA, but why *ON
    EARTH* would one want to play with a 286 today?

    You can get reasonable PCs for 200-300 Euro these days, put up linux and
    if you really feel retro bring MS-DOS up on WINE. Then you do some
    serious searching for the SIMTEL archieves where you should find an
    assembler that should get Kermit 3.16. There was a very decent MAKE.EXE
    out there if I recall correctly.

    But if it's only a terminal you are looking for, ATerm on the iMini
    comes to mind, and C-Kermit runs there too.

    greetings, el

    on 8/17/06 2:26 PM Igor Sobrado said the following:

    > I want to run MS Kermit in a DOS computer (an old but excellent i80286,
    > it is not a joke); this computer will be a DEC VT compatible terminal
    > with file transfer functionality.


    --
    If you want to email me, replace nospam with el

  3. Re: MS-DOS Kermit: release 3.15 or 3.16?

    Eberhard Lisse wrote:
    >
    > You can get reasonable PCs for 200-300 Euro these days, put up linux and
    > if you really feel retro bring MS-DOS up on WINE. Then you do some
    > serious searching for the SIMTEL archieves where you should find an
    > assembler that should get Kermit 3.16. There was a very decent MAKE.EXE
    > out there if I recall correctly.
    >
    > But if it's only a terminal you are looking for, ATerm on the iMini
    > comes to mind, and C-Kermit runs there too.


    Hello, el.

    The main reason for using that computer is that, if it is not in use,
    it will be dropped in a wastebasket. It is a good and quiet Siemens
    computer with an excellent keyboard and a LCD display. The quality
    of that display is only comparable to the black-on-white display
    on my Siemens Nixdorf 97801 terminal.

    I know that it is not the state on the art on computing. I have other
    systems (mainly Sun SPARCs, SGI workstations and HP servers) more
    powerful. For i386-based computers, I certainly prefer OpenBSD or
    NetBSD: lightweight, secure and powerful high-quality operating systems.

    It is just that I do not want to see that computer in a wastebasket.

    I started using MS-DOS Kermit 15 years ago, to establish a 1200 bps
    connection from my house to a VAX system running OpenVMS at the
    Department of Chemistry of my University. I just do not want to see
    this 286 computer in a wastebasket, that is the reason I asked for it.

    For a simple terminal, a small 386+ computer with a BSD or Linux operating
    system and cu(1) is just perfect, agreed.

    Best regards,
    Igor.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2