Talk:Terminal emulator

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Terminal emulator article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Computing: Software Start‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.

Telecommunications Start‑class Top‑importance

	Telecommunication portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

September 2005

Yes, this is what might be banged into a terminal. lysdexia 11:27, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

raw/cooked modes

It seems to me raw/cooked modes are handled by OS terminal driver, not by terminal emulator. So it would be better to remove that section or move it somewhere else. There's something like cooked mode that IS handled by terminal itself (and may be emulated by terminal emulators) - "half duplex mode", but it is so rarely used (currently) that maybe not worth mentioning at all.--Mpletnyov 17:59, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or it could be redeveloped to note how Unix terminal drivers hide most of the details in this area. But keep in mind that does not apply to non-Unix systems. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tedickey (talk • contribs) 18:14, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What about adding references to raw, cooked and rare mode to jargon file: http://www.olc.edu/~cdelong/jargon-4.4.7/jargon-4.4.7/html/R/raw-mode.html

JainAmber (talk) 09:27, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

that's getting offtrack (doesn't help this topic at all). Tedickey (talk) 09:51, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Navigation Box

wondering if there is a navigation box somewhere which has the terminal emulators listed, if this doesn't exist, should probably create —Preceding unsigned comment added by 231O (talk • contribs) 09:14, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting idea. Should it only contain "notable" products, i.e. ones with a wikipedia presence?

--ClickRick (talk) 10:42, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's already a category (navigation boxes don't seem to be a good fit, since they support few choices) Tedickey (talk) 10:54, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is, but there are plenty of entries missing from it. Attachmate, for example, is a page about the company, which produces a TE product. The page should not be in the category (the article is not about the product, the product is listed as only one part of it), but the product would appear in such a navbox.

I agree with the limitations of such a navbox, though, so as an alternative, how about a "List of..." page?

--ClickRick (talk) 11:16, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding (for example) Attachmate, my impression is that the company is listed because no one's found enough time/sources/etc to make a topic for the TE product. A "List of..." page would work; I hadn't done anything on that since (unlike categories) it requires work to maintain. Tedickey (talk) 11:42, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

javascript xterm

It should be noted in the implimentations section http://www.masswerk.at/termlib/index.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.246.120.18 (talk) 20:28, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TTY stands for teletype, not terminal (?)

The first sentence states that tty is short for terminal, but this is not true as far as I am aware. The terminals are emulators of the pure teletypes (tty) which are accessed via ctrl+alt+[n] on a linx based box. I don't know enough wiki syntax to edit this, so I'll leave it to this next person who reads this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.254.218.81 (talk) 20:16, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Should this article assume...

...that everybody knows what a "dumb" video terminal is? I dare say that the average computer-savvy teenager probably does not. I could write a few introductory sentences if needed; just ask. Nikevich (talk) 07:54, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It does need work (noting that a problem will be in fending off digressions by people whose only experience is for Linux console). Tedickey (talk) 11:33, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Excessive redlinks

The redlinks to terminal emulators appear more promotional than informative (several aren't notable). Tedickey (talk) 01:13, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I've had my eye on the (growing) list for a while. I wouldn't mind a major trim. Dawnseeker2000 02:11, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

well, there's the bulk-approach (just remove all, and cite WP:WTAF), or piece-meal (discuss here, and leave only the ones that it's likely a topic could be written which shows that it's notable) Tedickey (talk) 09:28, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My preference would be to trim the items without articles. Dawnseeker2000 04:44, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

bulk (go ahead) Tedickey (talk) 09:31, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I axed the Windows Mobile section too. Dawnseeker2000 14:55, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks better. (The only one that I thought could easily be given third-party sources was iTerm - there were a few others that were marginal) Tedickey (talk) 21:42, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I added iTerm back in, before checking the discussion page. I think as Terminal Emulators go, it's notable as being the only significant alternative to the built-in Terminal.app on Mac OS X, but I'm not sure what to write about it for its own page. Jonabbey (talk) 00:55, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It seems a wiki article for iTerm was deleted back in 2008 for being 'blatant advertising'. ;-/ Jonabbey (talk) 00:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

However, can you rework the mention to either remove the external link, or to make some comment that uses it as a reference? Tedickey (talk) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken a stab at it. Jonabbey (talk) 19:31, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with CLI?

I think this article might need to be merged with Command-line_interpreter or Command-line_interface. When I look up the article on Konsole, it tells me it's a terminal emulator. The article on cmd.exe calls it a command-line interpreter. Windows PowerShell's first sentence has a link to command-line interface and shell (computing). --Sonjaaa (talk) 05:18, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It might be, with a loss of accuracy. A command-line interpreter is a program that generally runs within a distinct terminal window. It's only for the special case of the Windows command-windows that they appear to be the same, and then only for specific shells. TEDickey (talk) 08:05, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I vote *against*. A terminal emulator is a program that gives one access to a CLI but it is not the CLI. A terminal emulator program is often a graphical app that provides an emulation of a text-mode display in a graphical environment and should *not* be confused with the commandline it gives one access to. In addition, terminal emulators are often used to access legacy menu-driven (ie. not commandline) apps. --Treekids (talk) 00:46, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Printing?

Article should cover the issue of printing in a terminal emulator and indicate which terminal emulators support it. --Treekids (talk) 00:46, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

«terminal emulators are the only way to access applications running on these older machines.»

I disagree with this sentence: «terminal emulators are the only way to access applications running on these older machines.» First, there is another way: use a physical terminal. So it is not the only way, but the more modern available for those applications and the cheaper. Secondly this is about application designed to only have terminal user interface, which might be runnt on old machines eventually. Thirdly, another way exist which consist in redeveloping the application with a new technology such as client/server or graphical user interface, this choice is related to cost considerations.

So, I propose: «terminal emulators are the easier way to access those older terminal user interface oriented applications, when they are not modernized (for a question of cost).» — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.199.89.101 (talk) 09:36, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

original research claims equating console window and terminal emulators

So far, none of the sources even use the term "terminal emulators". They only (at most - one did not even infer this) that they are analogous features. Since there are already distinct topics for reasons established by consensus, there's no reason yet provided for obscuring this distinction. TEDickey (talk) 09:22, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just as a reminder: "emulators" appears nowhere in the given sources, and as usual, there are no WP:RS from third-party reviewers supporting the creative "console emulators" term. TEDickey (talk) 10:45, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is no original research. This is common sense. It clearly appears in the given sources that terminal and console are synonymous. Check this quote "Another term for console is terminal." Moreover, a terminal emulator for Windows exists named ConEmu, which is itself an abbreviation for CONsole EMUlator. If terminal = console then terminal emulator = console emulator. No original research, just common sense. Check this link: http://lifehacker.com/5857540/the-best-terminal-emulator-for-windows Nickjames90 (talk) 11:07, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]