RE: Every day emulation

[vhamberg@xxxxxxxxxxx]

Personal Communications (PCOMM) is the original product, not, as suggested, a 
part of CA. The PC5250 emulator in CA is based on PCOMM with some specific 
extensions - like license checking and other bloat. PCOMM actually is a much 
more general emulation product and still around under some other name - of 
course - this is IBM, remember? Or is it now called HAL?

;-)

-------------- Original message -------------- 
From: "Burns, Bryan" <Burnsbm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 

> Isn't the IBM product PC5250, and isn't it part of CA?? 
> 
> Don't worry at all about emulators. They're all stable. Even the ones on 
> thin clients and hand held RF computer/scanners such as CLIs Termpro, LXEs 
> RFterm, or the Wavelink emulator that PSC Falcons use. Doesn't matter 
> whether the OS is CE.net or Windows XP embedded. I do a lot of support and 
> emulator problems are almost non-existent. 
> 
> In fact the 5250 terminals we use on our final assembly lines will be 
> replaced with thin clients through attrition. I find it easier to support a 
> thin client than a remanufactured 5250 terminal that is prone to failure. 
> Like I want to pay $100 for a remanufactured 5250 keyboard when I have many 
> PC keyboards in storage! The thin clients are only $400 and can be 
> configured for emulation only. No shutdown required. Turn it on and off 
> just like a 5250 terminal and all they get is a sign on screen. 
> 
> I have deployed 10 thin clients in our manufacturing plant in the past year, 
> all configured for emulation only - no server required. I'm will to give a 
> demo if you're in the Chicago area. Or talk off list. 
> 
> Bryan Burns 
> ECHO, Inc. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: Pat Barber [mailto:mboceanside@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Friday, April 28, 2006 9:17 AM 
> To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion 
> Subject: Re: Every day emulation 
> 
> 
> It would appear that CA is still the top dog. 
> 
> I have used Personal Communications years ago 
> and had forgot about that. Is that still around 
> in a current version ??? 
> 
> I hadn't heard the term RUMBA in years. I recall 
> that being very popular at one time. Who owns 
> that product today ? 
> 
> Open source is certainly a possibility but I 
> would fret about support in a large install. 
> 
> I saw a copy of Synapse IP and that did look 
> prettty nice. 
> 
> Nobody mentioned the IBM telnet product at all. 
> 
> What about all these "thin client" folks we talked 
> about in an older thread ??? 
> 
> Is anybody using JUST a thin client for everybody ? 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pat Barber wrote: 
> > What is the general population using for every 
> > day emulation these days ? 
> > 
> > Is Access for Windows still the emulator of choice ? 
> > 
> > As I recall, most conversations regarding older 
> > versions of CA start with the phrase "I hate that software". 
> > 
> > If it is still hated, what are the other options ? 
> > 
> > 
> -- 
> This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list 
> To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx 
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options, 
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l 
> or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx 
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives 
> at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l. 
> -- 
> This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list 
> To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx 
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options, 
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l 
> or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx 
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives 
> at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l. 
>