We've been using MS92 happily for about 12 years now, support is excellent,
cost is excellent, and upgrades are painless.

Like Peter, our users do not see the colon prompt, they are instead presented
with a menu system I developed using CI commands only.  This menu provides
some basic user authentication or password protection for our applications.
Also, because it was written in CI, users are allowed to run some basic MPE
commands (SHOWJOB, SHOWOUT).  It also allows the execution of the MS92 host
file transfer program, WS92LINK. I've set  up a MS92 script to prompt for
source filename, and the script automates the file transfer.  For large file
transfers, FTP is the method of choice.

Reflection, being the "cadillac" of termulators, also has that many features,
which I find unnecessary for basic terminal emulation.

Just my $.02 (CDN)

=====================================================
Steve Patterson                         [log in to unmask]
Halifax Port Authority                www.portofhalifax.ca
Halifax, Nova Scotia

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Chong" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2000 7:43 PM
Subject: Re: Reflections vs Minisoft


Hi, Chris

 ++ Little more addition for Minisoft file transfer.

Our set up in here, the user can not get an MPE prompt at all.

Therefore user can not use a file transfer function on terminal emulator,
but we implement the NFT/32 along with ODBC/32.

The Speed on file transfer is days and night. Like  80 - 90 min on Minisoft
terminal emulator file transfer V.S. 5 -10 minutes on NFT/32 and secure (No HP
prompt).

Cheers

Peter C.
FWIW I have done side by side benchmarks of download times (I do a LOT of
uploading and downloading) and Reflection is 4-6 times faster than Minisoft's
transfers in all cases. For our users doing heavy download/uploading, we've
installed Reflection on their machines just for that reason. R1's transfers
are also more reliable and have many more options; but you do pay a premium
for that.