> -----Original Message----- > From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Ethan Dicks > Sent: 13 June 2016 21:06 > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <cctalk@classiccmp.org> > Subject: Re: Informer 213 terminal - 3274 / 3178 compatible ? > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Dave G4UGM <dave.g4...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> does have a Rockwell modem board in it. > >> > >> I did find an old Computerworld ad from 1989 which matched. Informer > >> 213 - emulating a 3274 control unit with an attached 3178 mod 2 terminal. > >> Someone with IBM knowledge might share what that means and how the > >> terminal can be used. > >> > > > > Reading the add it looks like you need a dial-up SDLC (that’s synchronous > data) link into a mainframe with a telecoms controller running VTAM, l which I > guess is as rare as hens teeth these days. > > When you get to the set up menu's can you check if it can run bi-sync as > > that > might be hackable, providing a suitable synchronous modem can be found. > > Some time around 1992, give or take, there were piles of Informer 207s for > sale cheap at the Dayton Hamfest. We were doing Bisync and SNA products at > the time, so we bought a couple. We were able to fiddle our environment > enough to get one of them to connect - our flagship product was an SNA PU > type 2, much like a 3274 terminal controller, but with interactive sessions > via > VT100 + software 3270 emulation instead of a real IBM 3270. My memory is > that you could dial up your > 37x5 (via sync modem, as Dave mentioned) from one Informer 207, then attach > several "child" Informer 207s to the first, as if you had a real 3274 + > multiple > 3270s. I have to think the later Informer terminals had the same > functionality > (unless it was later determined that it was "better" (and/or cheaper) to do > one- > modem-one-user instead of supporting a remote office and multiple sessions > off of one connection. > > Essentially, what we had to do with out Informer 207 was to provision our > environment pretty much the same as adding a new 3274 and get the settings > to match on both sides of the phone line. I think it took a few hours of > fiddling > to get both sides happy. > > The 207 was SNA-only. It did not support HASP or 3780, the predominant bisync > protocols (we supported those on other products, and they are _far_ simpler > than anything SNA). > > Sorry I don't have any data on the 213. It sounds like a device we would have > liked to have had 20+ years ago. > > -ethan
Looking at the documents on the web it looks like the AE is a straight forward VT100 terminal, the PT was the 3270 version. If it is an AE it should work with any Unix/Linux/PDP/VAX etc. etc. out of the box. Dave G4UGM
