CompuServe Thread

#CIM for Amiga

34 messages in this thread
#71907From: Vic WagnerSep 30, 1992 3:26 PM
Michael, HMI allows you to up/download AND be in CO at AT THE SAME TIME. I feel that CIS are being fools for ignoring a set of users who understand doing two things at once ever since they took their machine out of the box.
#71963From: Michael GerardSep 30, 1992 10:04 PM
Vic: I agree with you in principal. However, with 9600 baud modems becoming the norm rather than the exception, up/downloading is far more cost effective with a program like ap than using a program like CIM while in CO. It is rare that a file transfer keeps me tied up for more than a minute or three… and CO is MUCH less expensive at 300 baud, while file tranfers are more effecient and accurate at the higher speeds using error correction. Michael
#72030From: Vic WagnerOct 1, 1992 2:02 PM
Michael, I concur on the short times currently while downloading (for MY uses, tho there are times it's 20 minutes). I would STILL like to be able to drop into CO while it's going on tho (especially if there is someone else there).
#72086From: Michael GerardOct 1, 1992 10:22 PM
Vic: Wouldn't that 20 minute download become more on the order of 40 minutes due to the reduced bandwidth (if you were in CO whike Downloading)? If that's true, than the download would cost twice as much. Is suppose that there might be times when I would use that feature, but I doubt it would be very often (and I'm in CO everyday… I'm sure that MOST users, those that don't CO to begin with, wouldn't use it at all. Is CO _really_ better when other people are there? I'll have to try that some time. <g>
#72096From: KEITH YOUNGOct 1, 1992 11:46 PM
I don;t know how HMI was implemented, but the 20 minute download were [would] certainly not double to 40 mins…. sitting in CO, there's a LOT of un-used bandwidth. Anyway, if even if it did double, assuming you were going to be in CO for 40 mins anyway, you just got the download for 'free', not twice as much <grin>. – Keith
#72169From: Michael GerardOct 2, 1992 7:04 PM
Keith: The download wouldn't be 'free', unless you logged on at 300 baud… in which case that 20 min (at 9600 baud) download would take considerably longer… and I can't think of more than 8-10 forum members that spend that much time in CO on a regular basis. Maybe I'm wrong… maybe more people would come in to COnferences… I just doubt it.
#72207From: Don Curtis/SYSOPOct 3, 1992 12:48 AM
Michael, The download wouldn't be free…the CO would be free. Don
#72218From: Christopher LapriseOct 3, 1992 3:12 AM
You are closer to the mark saying the 'CO' is free, however the CO and the download are not that comparable. One is relatively automatic and the other highly interactive. It is more fitting to say that if you were downloading and you decided to upload something at the same time, the upload would be free, at least having cost less of your own personal time. -Chris
#72354From: Don Curtis/SYSOPOct 4, 1992 1:15 AM
Chris, The point being that downloading takes X amount of time, if you can do something else, that doesn't really slow the download…then that something else is essentially free. Since doing a download and upload at the same time (besides the fact that uploads [to the libraries] are free anyway) would essentially double the time anyway…since both attempt to use as much of the bandwidth available…then neither would be "free". However, something like reading the message base, or sitting in a CO would be much closer to free, since they use very little of the bandwidth…reading messages using more than being in a CO. Don
#72477From: Christopher LapriseOct 5, 1992 1:15 AM
"Since doing a download and upload at the same time (besides the fact that uploads [to the libraries] are free anyway) would essentially double the time anyway…" Uploading while downloading under something like CIM shouldn't double the online time, at least from my experience (which doesn't include CIM). Assuming the files are roughly the same size, the transfer time should be the same as if it were occurring in one direction only. The data link, being full duplex (I've never known CIS to use HST modems), allows a 2400 baud modem to xfer at a full 2400bps IN BOTH DIRECTIONS, SIMULTANEOUSLY. Most of the time, we are wasting half of our modem bandwidth. Packet-switching protocols, which HMI must be, break up a single serial line into packets belonging to different logical data streams as needed. Since you can now have more than one logical stream of data flowing at once, it follows that they can flow in parallel if your data line supports full-duplex operation. DNet, for instance, allows many, many different data streams over a single serial line. If you 'download' 2 things at once, each trabsfer will take twice as long as it normally would — the data are both going in the same direction. BUT if you decide to upload and download, both will flow at full speed — the data are both going in opposite directions and effective throughput on a 2400bps data line is a full 4800bps. Although it does not matter much, the upload during a download would be closer to 'free' (chronologically) because the upload is explicitly going in the opposite direction; A CO goes in both directions with most of the data flowing in the same direction as a download, thus adding more time to your download. Like I said, it doesn't matter much. What matters is that something like HMI is available, however one decides to use it. It is up to the HMI/packet-switcher to intelligently handle the traffic for you. -Chris
#72481From: Don Curtis/SYSOPOct 5, 1992 2:07 AM
Chris, yes…it's possible, presuming you're on a computer that can do two things at once…which we are, but those with HMI software…can't. So I suspect HMI isn't a full duplex protocol…where it could handle the load anyway. Don
#72103From: Don Curtis/SYSOPOct 2, 1992 12:38 AM
Michael, Unless you had one heck of a busy CO, I believe the impact on download time would be insignificant. Figure how long it would take to get 1K of data to scroll across your screen in a CO, whereas during a download…that'd take 1 second or real close to 1 second to get that much data. So 3 minutes of so to get 1 K of data from members during CO vs the 1 second delay in a download to send that 1 K of data. And that presumes no compression of the CO information. Don
#72170From: Michael GerardOct 2, 1992 7:04 PM
Don: Yeah, I guess that makes sense. If I get a chance, maybe I'll test a couple of downloads… once with CIM while in CO, and once just with CIM. Thanks.
#72115From: Mike SchillerOct 2, 1992 4:13 AM
Michael: The point is that if you're in CO while downloading, it doesn't really matter if it takes longer, as you're involved in the CO (otherwise you wouldn't be there), so you'd have to pay for the time anyway. So as an example, I decide I have 30 minutes worth of downloading to do, so I login and start the download, and then go into CO. Now because I'm in CO that half hour of downloading is translated into 1 hour of downloading. But I get involved in the CO and stay there for one and a half hours. When I sign off the downloads are done & waiting for me. If we went by the current method, and I get involved in a 1.5 hour CO, and have a half hour of downloading to do as well, that = 2 hours, 1.5 for CO .5 for dl. // -Mike Schiller \X/ AMIGA! On AutoPilot in sunny Fort Lauderdale
#72171From: Michael GerardOct 2, 1992 7:04 PM
Michael: Maybe your right… and maybe with such a feature available to us, CO activity would be higher.
#72343From: Jim SakladOct 3, 1992 11:08 PM
Mike – > The point is that if you're in CO while downloading, it doesn't really > matter if it takes longer, as you're involved in the CO (otherwise you > wouldn't be there), so you'd have to pay for the time anyway. Ah!, but if you were signing on ONLY to conference for an hour, you would do it at 300 bps (conferencing is a TIME-dependent operation), and if you were signing on ONLY to DL, you would do it at 9600 (DLing is a SPEED- dependent operation). The DL is "free" only if it can be completed while conferencing, AT CONFERENCING SPEED. . . . . JimDoc, on AutoPilot
#72360From: Mike SchillerOct 4, 1992 4:31 AM
Jim: Well, actually you'd pay for the DL, and the CO would be free. Does that make more sense? If AP could use the HMI libraries it could then do all the marked downloads, and in the meanwhile you could be enjoying yourself in CO. // -Mike Schiller \X/ AMIGA! On AutoPilot in sunny Fort Lauderdale
#72142From: Vic WagnerOct 2, 1992 3:36 PM
Michael, I figure the normal CO would add maybe 3% to a download and probably less. The whole point is that "that MOST users, those that don't CO to begin with" might TRY it. For getting specific questions answered in a hurry, nothing beats CO.
#72172From: Michael GerardOct 2, 1992 7:05 PM
Vic… No question that CO is a GREATplace to talk shop and get the most out of both the Amiga and CIS. And it's FUN! So how come CO activity is so low? Do we (those of us who CO nearly _every night of the week) get together too late in the evening? Do you think that more people would COnference if they were online downloading anyway? THAT would be great… I'd really like to get more people in CO… even if they only drop in for 15 minutes while downloading.
#72222From: Mike SchillerOct 3, 1992 3:42 AM
Michael: I would imagine that more folks would be involved in CO if they could do so while they're downloading files. // -Mike Schiller \X/ AMIGA! On AutoPilot in sunny Fort Lauderdale
#72333From: Michael GerardOct 3, 1992 10:28 PM
Mike: Could very well be. Sure wish we had the oppoetunity to find out. 😉
#72305From: Vic WagnerOct 3, 1992 6:36 PM
Michael, "Do you think that more people would COnference if they were online downloading anyway?" ABSOTIVELY!!!!! and THAT's why I've been all over CIS's case about getting HMI for the Amiga.
#72334From: Michael GerardOct 3, 1992 10:28 PM
Vic: Ok… let's get cis to give us CIM so we can test the theory. 🙂
#72509From: Vic WagnerOct 5, 1992 3:13 PM
I don't WANT CIM, I just want the capability. I think we have better programmers to do Amiga programs than CIS does.
#72607From: Michael GerardOct 6, 1992 8:14 AM
Vic… That's the ticket… an Amiga-CIS program that can make use of the HMI libraries!
#72217From: Christopher LapriseOct 3, 1992 3:11 AM
"Wouldn't that 20 minute download become more on the order of 40 minutes.." No way.. more like from 20 to 22 minutes. It's like multitasking; if two programs are running, but one of them is almost constantly waiting for input then the other program effectively runs at full speed. A few lines of text every minute has essentially no impact on the data throughput. Either that, or I am wrong and this HMI protocol is technically rotten. But I wouldn't think so. Think about it.. a 30 minute conference may prolong a (single or batch) file download taking equally as long by perhaps 2 or 3 minutes. The impact of your CO on your "online time" has effectively been sqaushed by 90%. If you happened to be uploading something, also, the impact of THAT would have been virtually NIL! You would have been utilitizing the other 'duplex' of your modem's bandwidth. From a human point-of-view, you're getting 2.9 things done AT THE SAME TIME. All you have to do is schedule all your up/downloding to coincide with COs you're interested in, and voila! -Chris
#72306From: Vic WagnerOct 3, 1992 6:36 PM
Chris, Right!!!! Though I don't think they actually alllow up AND downloading at the same time (silly people).
#72335From: Michael GerardOct 3, 1992 10:28 PM
Cheistopher: It's sounding better to me all the time! Thanks.
#72216From: Christopher LapriseOct 3, 1992 3:11 AM
Michael, You're mixing your oranges and apples.. Used _interactively_, a protocol like HMI allows you to use your time mor productively at any speed. The same comparison holds true when automation is introduced; Imagine the advantages if AutoPilot could upload, download _and_ allowed you to jump into a CO on impulse (or perhaps even collect/post your forum messages) simultaneously? The ultimate benefit is gained when your modem's full-duplex capability is exploited, potentially delivering TWICE the throughput. The immediate benefits can be substantial, just imagine the cumulative, long-term benefits! -Chris
#72336From: Michael GerardOct 3, 1992 10:28 PM
Chris: Again, thanks for the info & explanation!
#72215From: Christopher LapriseOct 3, 1992 3:11 AM
My sentiments exactly, which is why I created ParaBIT for that kind of "multiplexed" interaction between an Amiga terminal and an Amiga BBS. Even more striking, is that technically the Amiga is a natural for an implementation of HMI.. porting it should be a breeze, relatively speaking. -Chris
#72220From: KEITH YOUNGOct 3, 1992 3:39 AM
Out of curiousity, what's ParaBIT ? (I get the general idea, but what's the product?) – Keith
#72478From: Christopher LapriseOct 5, 1992 1:16 AM
Glad you asked..(although it's not for sale, yet.. The current version of the terminal is available for free, and it's here on CIS). ParaBIT is terminal software (which incidentally uses DNet) which at this point allows you to start downloads and uploads on a BBS at the same time, taking advantage of full-duplex, bi-directional transmission. However, whenever you start a transfer, you immediately come back to a BBS menu prompt… The up/downloads run in their own little windows while you continue to use whatever area of the BBS you like (DOWNLOAD, UPLOAD & READING/POSTING at the same time or online games or whatever). Although the throughput is roughly twice what you're accustomed to, it is more like 2.9x normal. That is because like CO, most of your time browsing through messages is idle as far as the modem is concerned; Alot data can be transferring with ParaBIT while you're reading a message. If you go to the Telecom lib, you can find the ParaBIT terminal by typing: "browse key:parabit" I have not released the BBS end of it yet, so my BBS is the only one running it; although one should be able to adapt the host/BBS end of ParaBIT to any flexible ARexx-capable BBS software (I'm using Proteus BBS by Rick Huebner — also available from the Telecom lib). Fortunately all the complexity is on the BBS's end. Once the caller connects to the BBS and starts up ParaBIT, everything is automatic. Download the terminal, give the BBS a call, and experience it for yourself 🙂 -Chris
#72488From: KEITH YOUNGOct 5, 1992 10:12 AM
Thanks for the info.