I woudl like to know if anyone has any success to Telnet a BBS using SecureCRT (I have v.7.1.1) and have ANSI art diplayed correctly?
I used Xterm with Courier font (similar to Putty's defaults), changed to ANSI, VT100, and other font combinations, to no avail.
Has anyone found the 'sweet settings' to get SecureCRT to display BBS ANSI menus correctly?
If SecureCRT supports setting also the codepage to CP437, the graphics should look a bit better, though likely not perfect.
Re: SecureCRT settings for BBSing
By: Papadopoulos to All on Wed Oct 19 2016 07:33 pm
I woudl like to know if anyone has any success to Telnet a BBS using SecureCRT (I have v.7.1.1) and have ANSI art diplayed correctly?
I used Xterm with Courier font (similar to Putty's defaults), changed to ANSI, VT100, and other font combinations, to no avail.
Has anyone found the 'sweet settings' to get SecureCRT to display BBS ANSI menus correctly?
If SecureCRT supports setting also the codepage to CP437, the graphics should look a bit better, though likely not perfect.
I use PuTTY sometimes and the CP437 codepage seems to do best with either VT100 or ANSI terminal type.
Nothing really beats SyncTERM that I've found. (though I haven't looked
once I started using SyncTerm)
Nothing really beats SyncTERM that I've found. (though I haven't
looked once I started using SyncTerm)
mtelnet or netrunner beat it on windows.
mtelnet or netrunner beat it on windows.
Re: SecureCRT settings for BBSing
By: Mro to All on Thu Oct 20 2016 03:44 pm
mtelnet or netrunner beat it on windows.
Gross. Spray some Windex on that shit.
Nothing really beats SyncTERM that I've found. (though I haven't
looked once I started using SyncTerm)
mtelnet or netrunner beat it on windows.
I think mTelnet and NetRunner look nice, but as far as drawing ANSI, they seem slower than SyncTerm.
Nothing really beats SyncTERM that I've found. (though I haven't
looked once I started using SyncTerm)
mtelnet or netrunner beat it on windows.
I think mTelnet and NetRunner look nice, but as far as drawing ANSI,
they seem slower than SyncTerm.
I think mTelnet and NetRunner look nice, but as far as drawing ANSI,
they seem slower than SyncTerm.
i dont know why, because works the same on my computers. maybe for you it is a hardware issue with your video card.
i dont know why, because works the same on my computers. maybe for you it is a hardware issue with your video card.
My video card has an Nvidia GeForce chip. I know a lot of people use
Nvidia GeForce, and if it had such simple rendering problems, I'd think
they would have
fixed it by now. Besides, ANSI rendering should not be that taxing on modern hardware. If one piece of software is able to render ANSI faster than another, I
doubt it's a hardware issue.
furthermore, why are you so concerned about the speed of your ansi menus loading. you arent doing FPS gaming with your bbs.
i thought you were a programmer. certainly a conflict of hardware and software can cause issues.
i dont know how you could think i implied that
ansi graphic rendering is taxing the processor of the video card.
i dont know why, because works the same on my computers. maybe for
you it is a hardware issue with your video card.
furthermore, why are you so concerned about the speed of your ansi menus loading. you arent doing FPS gaming with your bbs.
rendering speed. Perhaps mTelnet and NetRunner are simulating a certain connection speed whereas SyncTerm isn't (SyncTerm has the ability to simulate different connection speeds, but its default is not to do that,
and it will render ANSI as fast as it downloads).
I was just commenting that SyncTerm seems to render ANSI faster. I guess I'm just used to SyncTerm so the speed of displaying ANSI was just
something I noticed in mTelnet and NetRunner. Anyway it's not really a big deal to me. Sometimes I do use mTelnet or NetRunner, as I think they look
I think mTelnet and NetRunner look nice, but as far as drawing ANSI,
they seem slower than SyncTerm.
i dont know why, because works the same on my computers. maybe for you it
is a hardware issue with your video card.
My video card has an Nvidia GeForce chip. I know a lot of people use Nvidia GeForce, and if it had such simple rendering problems, I'd think they would have
fixed it by now. Besides, ANSI rendering should not be that taxing on modern hardware. If one piece of software is able to render ANSI faster than another, I
doubt it's a hardware issue.
i dont know why, because works the same on my computers. maybe for you
it is a hardware issue with your video card.
It's probably a matter of the GUI rendering that SyncTERM does being faster on a system with accellerated graphics than the textmode processing that mTelnet and NetRunner need.
My video card has an Nvidia GeForce chip. I know a lot of people use
Nvidia GeForce, and if it had such simple rendering problems, I'd
think they would have
fixed it by now. Besides, ANSI rendering should not be that taxing
on modern hardware. If one piece of software is able to render ANSI
faster than another, I
doubt it's a hardware issue.
It probably isn't a hardware issue, it probably comes down to text-mode rendered apps vs native rendered... SyncTERM should use a gui rendering library by default which is probably faster than the textmode subsystem the other apps in quesion are using... it's a mater of native vs simulated.
Sysop: | Eric Oulashin |
---|---|
Location: | Beaverton, Oregon, USA |
Users: | 89 |
Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
Uptime: | 02:02:57 |
Calls: | 5,076 |
Calls today: | 1 |
Files: | 8,491 |
Messages: | 351,643 |