LSTOWN-L Archives

LISTSERV List Owners' Forum

LSTOWN-L

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Eric Thomas <[log in to unmask]>
Sun, 20 Sep 1992 01:51:37 +0200
text/plain (39 lines)
On Sat, 19 Sep 1992 19:37:25 EST Murph Sewall <SEWALL@UCONNVM> said:
 
>I typically run CMS in a window on a Macintosh. I've done so using a Mac
>Plus with a nine  inch screen. Given a terminal program  on the Mac that
>handles hardware handshaking one can crank  up a file transfer, hide the
>terminal  window in  the background,  and  do anything  except format  a
>floppy disk (I think Apple's next system update is supposed to make such
>tasks  cohabit  better with  background  tasks)  without disrupting  the
>transfer.
 
That  is  the Internet/unix  approach  -  you  create  a problem  out  of
laziness, religious  bigotry or plain  oversight, and then claim  it does
not exist because it  can be solved by cheap hardware  (in the US). Sure,
with a workstation  you can easily fire up several  windows and have that
many  FTP sessions  running  in parallel,  and  workstations are  getting
cheaper and cheaper. Ok, let's say a  SPARC was the same price as my dumb
terminal. I still have to see a legitimate justification for why I should
have to open a window, start a FTP session, wait for the prompt, type a n
o n y m o  u s (a word that was chosen for  its combined brevity and ease
of typing),  wait for  the prompt,  type any  obscene word  containing an
@-sign to  make the stupid server  happy, then a CD  command, then decide
that the file has to be transferred in binary, type BINARY, then GET, and
then get back to my business after some rodent relocation business.
 
What  does this  state-of-the-art procedure  give  me as  compared to  my
stone-age one-line command, which furthermore never needs to be restarted
because there  is no potential for  forgetting binary mode or  losing the
connection? Not even speed. With FTP, the file takes 2 minutes to arrive,
with BITNET  it takes 3, let's  say even 5 to  be nice. So what?  I don't
care, I  have started  a new mail  message meanwhile, as  long as  it has
arrived when I  am done I will be  happy. And why would I want  to send a
package to someone whose login password  I don't even know? Ah, this must
be for security reasons - by requiring  me to know the password of people
working on the same programming project as me, my correspondents can rest
assured  that they  will not  receive viruses  from people  who lack  the
privileges to run them on their own account ;-)
 
  Eric

ATOM RSS1 RSS2