11 Apr
2011
11 Apr
'11
12:56 p.m.
Geoff Oltmans said the following on 4/11/2011 12:39 PM:
This doesn't strike me as a typical use case
though. :)
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 11, 2011, at 8:30 AM, Dave Mabry<dmabry at mich.com> wrote:
> Geoff Oltmans said the following on 4/11/2011 8:46 AM:
>> Does anyone in any real sense use Kermit these days? Even back during my bbs days
Kermit was a rarely supported and/or slow protocol that wasn't exactly a first choice.
Wasn't it designed for slower packet switched networks the likes of telenet and
tymnet?
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
> Well, yes, I still use it. I have occasionally needed to copy files from an 8"
floppy either in ISIS-II or CP/M format to a PC for archive on optical media or to email
to someone. The Intel MDS systems I have run Kermit nicely. And the standard Windows
software has hyperterminal with kermit protocol. So Kermit makes it easy to transfer
to/from dissimilar systems that can't be networked.
>
> Sure it's slow. But it's very stable and reliable.
>
I would argue that it is exactly "typical" for what Kermit was
designed. Dissimilar systems "talking" together. It is ideal for me.
Typical for me. I guess it comes down to your definition of "typical."