Informer 213 terminal - 3274 / 3178 compatible ?
ethan.dicks at gmail.com
Mon Jun 13 15:05:47 CDT 2016
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Dave G4UGM <dave.g4ugm at 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
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.
More information about the cctalk