4 ms·

I considered Kermit bad then for pretty much anything, imagine now...

pdw 3y ago
Well, according to the article Kermit's performance problems have been fixed :) "Although ZModem came out a few years before Kermit had its performance optimizations, by about 1993 Kermit was on par or faster than ZModem."
- devilbunny 3y ago
  It was optimizable - if you had a proper Kermit client that did all the stuff ZModem did, like sliding ACK windows and larger packet sizes. After we had error-correcting modem protocols, line noise was much less of an issue. But most Kermit protocols in terminal software implemented only the most basic version of the protocol and didn't support all the options that you needed to set. Not sure about resuming, which was AFAICT only a ZModem thing (and the best part of it).
tyingq 3y ago
If you make comparisons only for "upload/download a file" versus, for example, zmodem...Kermit doesn't fare well. Kermit is, though, more than that. One example is that it includes a scripting functionality somewhat like the once popular "Expect" package[1]. For things like interacting with a Cisco router cli, ftp servers, etc. Or, as the article mentions, "server mode[2]"...something zmodem also doesn't do. So, for example, it was really useful "back in the day" for things like connecting to a network enabled modem bank and running batch jobs to do various things. [1] http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/ckscripts.html http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/ckscripts.html [2] http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/ckututor.html#iksd http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/ckututor.html#iksd
- shrubble 3y ago
  Expect is still very popular! There are implementations for C, Python, and Perl at the least. And my expect scripts written years ago, still work...
  - tyingq 3y ago
    Ah sure. I didn't mean they were now unpopular. Just that the need for them has drawn down as many things you would automate via expect now have better api-based choices. Or have otherwise dwindled...I don't see too many modem banks around these days.
    - shrubble 3y ago
      Very true, formerly command line only network devices now have APIs in some cases; the Cisco Meraki devices don't even have a CLI, only a cloud based web mgmt GUI, or a Restful API.
jtode 3y ago
Sure. Whereas in many many cases, zmodem was not an option, Kermit worked everywhere, if you believe OP. I also remember using Kermit for a BBS file transfer once. Once.
- pridkett 3y ago
  > I also remember using Kermit for a BBS file transfer once. Once. Similar memory here. Wasn’t sure about the different protocols offered in Telix and I used Kermit once because the BBS offered it. Right after the sysop burst in on chat and told me not to use Kermit and only use zmodem. That was basically what I did until HSLink came out and let me do bidirectional, chat, and play Tetris while waiting. Good times. Good memories.

pdw 3y ago

Well, according to the article Kermit's performance problems have been fixed :) "Although ZModem came out a few years before Kermit had its performance optimizations, by about 1993 Kermit was on par or faster than ZModem."

devilbunny 3y ago
It was optimizable - if you had a proper Kermit client that did all the stuff ZModem did, like sliding ACK windows and larger packet sizes. After we had error-correcting modem protocols, line noise was much less of an issue. But most Kermit protocols in terminal software implemented only the most basic version of the protocol and didn't support all the options that you needed to set. Not sure about resuming, which was AFAICT only a ZModem thing (and the best part of it).

tyingq 3y ago

If you make comparisons only for "upload/download a file" versus, for example, zmodem...Kermit doesn't fare well. Kermit is, though, more than that. One example is that it includes a scripting functionality somewhat like the once popular "Expect" package[1]. For things like interacting with a Cisco router cli, ftp servers, etc. Or, as the article mentions, "server mode[2]"...something zmodem also doesn't do. So, for example, it was really useful "back in the day" for things like connecting to a network enabled modem bank and running batch jobs to do various things. [1] http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/ckscripts.html http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/ckscripts.html [2] http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/ckututor.html#iksd http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/ckututor.html#iksd

shrubble 3y ago
Expect is still very popular! There are implementations for C, Python, and Perl at the least. And my expect scripts written years ago, still work...
- tyingq 3y ago
  Ah sure. I didn't mean they were now unpopular. Just that the need for them has drawn down as many things you would automate via expect now have better api-based choices. Or have otherwise dwindled...I don't see too many modem banks around these days.
  - shrubble 3y ago
    Very true, formerly command line only network devices now have APIs in some cases; the Cisco Meraki devices don't even have a CLI, only a cloud based web mgmt GUI, or a Restful API.

jtode 3y ago

Sure. Whereas in many many cases, zmodem was not an option, Kermit worked everywhere, if you believe OP. I also remember using Kermit for a BBS file transfer once. Once.

pridkett 3y ago
> I also remember using Kermit for a BBS file transfer once. Once. Similar memory here. Wasn’t sure about the different protocols offered in Telix and I used Kermit once because the BBS offered it. Right after the sysop burst in on chat and told me not to use Kermit and only use zmodem. That was basically what I did until HSLink came out and let me do bidirectional, chat, and play Tetris while waiting. Good times. Good memories.