8 Mar
2007
8 Mar
'07
2:03 p.m.
On 3/8/07, Zane H. Healy <healyzh at aracnet.com> wrote:
I implied, but didn't state, that if it weren't good enough, one could
fix the source so that it _was_ good enough (thus the "open source" vs
a ready-to-run-closed-binary).
For stuff of
the era, the VT-52 is a very handy terminal... I was *not*
able to use the VTEDIT macro under OS/8 with a VT220 in VT52 emulation
mode. The emulation just wasn't good enough. I suppose one could
find an open-source terminal program and ensure the VT-52 emulation
was up to snuff...
Shoot, finding a terminal program whose VT100 (or better) emulation is "up
to snuff" is hard enough! Especially if you're running anything other than
windows. I make do with X-Terms with their keys remapped since I don't have
room to have a pair of VT420's setup. :^(
For VT100-compatible work, it's not _too_ hard to set up an emulation
environment that handles 99% of what's thrown at it (vttest is a good
way to see how your emulator _really_ behaves). If you need
double-high/double-wide or flashing chars, etc., it's harder to find a
good emulator, but unless you are recreating some ancient UI (like the
old "watcher" program at South Pole that used to run on a VT420 or
older, stuck in a hole in the wall in the galley), there's little call
these days for the extended features of the VT100 series.
-ethan
Zane