Talk:Tera Term

Verifiable notability?

This article makes no verifiable claim as to the software's notability for inclusion. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 20:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Before PuTTY was widely used, this was the only reasonably good free VT100-emulator on Windows Tedickey (talk) 20:12, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok. That still doesn't provide any verifiable claims as to the software's notability for inclusion in an encyclopedia. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 20:21, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

The general guideline for notability seems to be for independent reviews - google shows about the expected number of comments, given that. But there are very few professional-quality reviews of any sort in this area (no money involved, no reason for anyone to promote it ;-). Most are mailing-list comments. (The same criticism can be applied to most of the programs described in Wikipedia, after discarding self-published sources ;-). Tedickey (talk) 20:31, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I found this article useful. Seems a reasonably important piece of computer history (terminal programs are used by millions everyday). Could do with more on the new versions of TeraTerm. 129.215.63.115 (talk) 08:27, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I found this article useful as well. Note that it is referenced by the Wikipedia article on covering terminal emulators in general. Bofar (talk) 15:16, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

This terminal emulator stands alone as the most fully featured freeware product available. It has been under development for a long time. It extends the features of Putty by adding scripting & keyboard mapping & is a significant product for that reason. From my experience working in the network industry it is also used very widely both by individuals and companies. Mike.Hinson (talk) 07:42, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Useful, I've been using Teraterm for 10 years coming this November. It is a remarkable piece of software which just does what it is meant to do. After 10 years of daily/weekly use I have still not noticed a bug... It is quite strange that Teraterm has actually survived without a user community - or even active development for many years. I believe it is because it was made to do a task, did that task, and there was no more to solve - people were not looking for newer software anywhere else. This is a very useful piece of software for a small, highly skilled, dispersed group of people. So, why isn't it verifiable that Teraterm is important? Is it because it was made in a different part of the world? Or is it because computer magazines are too mainstream, no need to cover software only used by the "elite"? Is it because it "just works"? Is it because it is not asking for attention? BTW, the wiki page guided me towards the new developments that has been happening. I've been using the 2002-version until today. Not that I needed to upgrade...

Very useful page. As pointed out above, many of these kinds of programs have no organised backing, despite being heavily used (often in specialised industries). Deleting this page would inflict harm on those who it helps, leaving it does not adversely affect other pages in Wikipedia, so there is no reason to even contemplate this. Timaru (talk) 15:45, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Useful page, facts are correct. Also 10+ year user of TeraTerm. Please leave this page intact. Hansschulze (talk) 01:17, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.70.2.252 (talk) 17:33, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

teraterm syntax highlighting lost

Since the switch from Geshi to Pygments for syntax highlighting (phab:T85794), support for 'teraterm' was unfortunately dropped, as can be seen with the plain text formatting on this page. If you want specialised 'teraterm' syntax highlight support again, it will need to be added to Pygments. Alternatively, if there is another language which has similar syntax, we can add that as a fallback. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 07:52, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Tera Term. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080821053950/http://www.zdnetasia.com/techguide/network/0,3800010800,62031238,00.htm to http://www.zdnetasia.com/techguide/network/0,3800010800,62031238,00.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:27, 17 February 2016 (UTC)