Subject: Comparison of telecomm progs 21. ***** Q: Which is better, Procomm Plus or Telix? A: Procomm 1.1A vs Telix 3.12 -------------------------- Both are excellent telecommunications programs. I won't try to answer in any absolute terms, but tell some of my subjective observations, since I have used both quite a lot. I am first speaking of Procomm+ version 1.1A and Telix 3.12 (on Procomm Plus 2.0 later). Procomm+ is a fully commercial program while Telix is shareware. (There is an earlier shareware Procomm [version 2.4.3]. Both the shareware programs are available from garbo.uwasa.fi archives /pc/termprog directory. The shareware Procomm is not in the same league with Procomm+ and Telix. A later note: the shareware Procomm is not available from Garbo because of its excessive distribution limitations). Procomm+ comes with a manual, and there is literature on Procomm+ while Telix documents come as a file in the shareware distribution. I have tried the user support of both, with slightly discouraging results. In the case of Procomm+ I asked about the possibility of a two-way translation table, but the response was a polite no without any useful suggestions. In the case of Telix, I returned a faulty shareware disk, and had no reaction at all. Didn't even get the disk back. (This happened with version 3.12 with the previous owner Exis Inc. Telix has since been sold to deltaComm Development, and I have no experience on contacting the latter.) On the other hand, both are such good products that I haven't really needed the support. Procomm+ and Telix both have a useful command language. Procomm's is annoyingly sluggish since it is interpreter while Telix sports a C-like Salt compiler. Procomm's aspect command language is easier to use, while Telix's Salt command language is really powerful. Procomm+ command files can be invoked from a menu. In Telix this very convenient option is missing. Under difficult conditions with a slow machine plus a fast modem Telix behaves much better. I've even noted circumstances where Telix is the only working choice of the two, because Procomm+ cannot always cope with the load. Admittedly, Telix has fewer file transfer protocols than Procomm+, BUT this is more than amply compensated by the fact that Telix has an inbuilt Zmodem protocol. Neither has a sliding Kermit. The translation tables of both programs cause headaches to users needing some 8-bit characters as we Finns do. Procomm+ does not have an outgoing translation table at all. Telix does, but it gets tangled in ansi graphics when A with double dots is translated. Personally, I prefer Procomm's concise call logging to Telix's fuller but incoherent call logging. This is very subjective but of the two the "feel" of the user interface in Telix is more user friendly than that of Procomm+. In particular, Telix has an automatic starting of downloads. Procomm+ has a superior host mode compared to Telix. Yes, I know that there are external host modes for Telix, such as host44.zip, but I've never managed to make it work even in a selftest. (The host that comes with the new Telix 3.21 version seems ok, though). Incidentally, the host mode of shareware Procomm is better left alone. They frequently crash the machine. Another thing is that Procomm+ host mode shell to dos option also does this. If you use Procomm or Procomm+ you might be interested in more information given in ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/ts/tspfon29.zip. At the moment I have settled to Telix for calling to BBSes, to Procomm+ when I need the host mode (and MsKermit when I connect remotely to garbo.uwasa.fi, because MsKermit has clearly the best VT102 emulation of the three). Epilogue: At the time I last revised this item. Telix had been sold to deltaComm development, and version 3.20 just been released. It is a minor improvement, but worth taking a look at. Be warned, however, that it employs nagware tactics by having registration reminders at both ends. ---------------- Procomm Plus 2.0 ---------------- At the time I wrote this, Procomm Plus version 2.0 had just been released. (Telix 3.15 arrived when I wrote this, but it's just a minor bug fix). Commercial Procomm 2.0 is mostly at par with shareware Telix 3.12. Much of Procomm 2.0's improvements seem to have directly been adapted from Telix, but there is a touch of TeleMate as well. The aspect language compiler is the foremost example of emulating Telix strengths. But the old Procomm+ .asp files are not compilable without changes! Procomm 2.0 now has an inbuilt Z-modem with autodownload. This is a feature that was sorely missing earlier. Procomm 2.0 has long kermit packets which is an improvement over Telix. The installation phase of Procomm 2.0 is impressive. Full points for that. The really frustrating feature of Procomm 2.0 is the problems with non-US (at least the Finnish) keyboard, which renders much of it inoperable, if not useless. And there is still no outgoing translation table. Over all, my first impressions on the Procomm Plus 2.0 update are far from enthusiastic. On the other hand what might make Procomm Plus 2.0 worth its while is its host mode. It seem more flexibility than before, and can be considered a mini-BBS. This is a feature that Telix practically lacks. But I have had problems with 2.0 file transfers over a direct connection, which I didn't have with 1.1A. Interestingly, the outward appearance of Procomm Plus 2.0 has reverted back to the Procomm shareware days. -------- TeleMate -------- There are other very good telecommunication and terminal emulation programs besides Procomm+, Telix, and MsKermit. One of them is TeleMate (/pc/termprog/tm412-?.zip, where ? = 1,2,3,4). It's speciality is that the file transfers can take place in the background, which, for example, allows you to use TeleMate's useful screen editor while the transfer is taking place. Another nice feature is TeleMate's quote function. On the other hand TeleMate's dialog box based user interface takes some getting used to, and in this respect I feel that Procomm+ and Telix have a clear advantage over TeleMate. Also TeleMate's online help screen is not very coherent, and there is some inconvenience in figuring out how to load the translation tables on a regular basis. Shareware is a nice concept. I was able to try TeleMate out for a period with a clear conscience before making my decision of not adopting. We also have Boyan at garbo.uwasa.fi. I have just taken a very brief look at it, but I know that some users like it. --------------------------------------------------------------------