Win'95 Winsock vs. Trumpet

Bill Potter (n5mbm@stevens.com)
Tue, 12 Mar 1996 22:31:49 -0600


Ok folks, I am a "newbie" to this list. But have gotten a LOT of msgs
talking about Trumpet vs. Win'95. I am a network professional, and work
with everything from PC networks to T3 connections for videoconferencing &
data. I can say with some certainty that the Win'95 "sock" works a HELL of
a lot better than Trumpet. But that is NOT to say that Trumpet is any
slouch either! At home I have a mix of WFW 3.11 and Win'95 boxes (9 of 'em
counting the server!). All are linked with Eithernet "Thin-Lan" (50 ohm
coax). I run Trumpet on the WFW boxes and use the built in on Win '95 and I
can tell you the REAL trick is to get all the addresses and options setup on
both rather than the differences between the two.

I still use the Trumpet once in a while on the '95 boxes, and they work
fine! The built-in is of course best suited for 32 bit versions of your net
browsers etc. but they work fine with the 16 bit versions as well. I have
used both 16 bit and 32 bit net browsers with no problems at all.

Here's the trick - there is a lot of behind the scenes nitty gritty to pore
thru to get the '95 version running. But once running it is worth it.
Enable your dialup networking with TCP/IP. Setup your IP adresses. Setup
your dialing sets and if you need to login on a NON PAP server just tell the
terminal window to open after dialing. Login manually, hit ppp and then hit
F7 to continue and away you go - into the internet via '95 winsock. I have
heard a lot of folks talk about "if you log into a non PAP server you're
screwed". It simply isn't true... You wouldn't get this message at all if
it were true. My Internet provider uses a non PAP server (Unix box!) and I
get in just fine.

Although I will admit I had a heck of a time trying to figure out all those
little config options that I normally didn't use. And it isn't my fault.
Once you set it up once, it works, and you dont have to mess with it
again.... Therefore I forget about it - perfectly understandable... After
playing with a Novell-Unix mix Win '95 seems easy!!!

I am also new to CU-seeme. I think it has fantastic potential to the PC
medium. Speaking from the viewpoint of one who does networking for a living
and a Ham Operator who is a dedicated ATV freak. There are some bugs, but
EXPECT them folks - this is semi-Beta code you're running!

I actually got it working on a 486/Pentium overdrive (83Mhz) with a simple
Trident vga card and a 14.4 modem. I can reliably see 2 to 4 windows. Any
more and it chokes down to nothing. Sure it is slow, IT IS GONNA BE OVER
THE NET! It requires a massive amount of bandwidth - and I am tickled to
DEATH to even get to see 2 windows from someone across the country. I
haven't tried sending yet. Waiting for and ISDN connection first.....

Normally I run Fast scan TV (like broadcast TV) on FM at 1.2Ghz into a
repeater in downtown Houston. Just like normal broadcast TV but it is all
done by Ham Radio Operators with amateur gear. Low power. Several guys in
our local ATV club have even played with mobile ATV in their cars... Makes
drive time REAL interesting, 2-way TV communications in the drive-time grid
lock.. You can actually SEE the traffic they are bitchin' about on the
radio! We talk back and forth on VHF 2-way radios as well as on
UHF/Microwave video.

Wanna know more about ATV? Check out the Houston Amateur Television Society
home page on Stevens.com. Connect to WWW.stevens.com, click on Amateur
Radio and pick from the HATS page or the BLT pages. The BLT is the South
Texas Balloon Launch Team. We send ATV to the edge of space at and past
120,000 ft.

HATS and I will try to connect to the mirror and send you live drive time
mobile ATV from the Houston repeater as well as from our meetings etc. Hams
from all over the Houston area do this on a daily basis.... This phone
intertie will be fun!

Comments? E-me at N5MBM@stevens.com

Be Seeing you! 73 es CUL de N5MBM Bill Potter