*BSD News Article 28859


Return to BSD News archive

Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.apps:1100 comp.os.linux.misc:11776
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!metro!news.cs.su.oz.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!usc!nic-nac.CSU.net!charnel.net.csuchico.edu!charnel!xmission!u.cc.utah.edu!cs.weber.edu!terry
From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert)
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.apps,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: DOOM for X
Date: 23 Mar 1994 01:37:30 GMT
Organization: Weber State University, Ogden, UT
Lines: 77
Distribution: inet
Message-ID: <2mo6gq$e0k@u.cc.utah.edu>
References: <2m814r$bnp@news.mcs.kent.edu> <2mb2bb$8m@u.cc.utah.edu> <2mh1ta$m21@usenet.mcs.kent.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.weber.edu

In article <2mh1ta$m21@usenet.mcs.kent.edu> borsburn@mcs.kent.edu (Bret Orsburn) writes:
]In article <2mb2bb$8m@u.cc.utah.edu> terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) writes:
]>As far as API environment
]>is concerned, a clock, a window manager, a print server, and an X telnet
]>or rlogin or CTERM (DECNet) window all consume only those interesting
]>resources that must be there for an X terminal to be an X terminal (ie:
]>networking, display, and mouse/keyboard input services).
]
]This drastic oversimplification simply ignores all of the client-side
]X libraries.

Excuse me, by why do you need client side X libraries to consume display
services if you are running inside an X terminal?

]>For print
]>services, I guess you'd need a local printer port (check the back of NCD,
]>NCR, or GraphOn X terminals lately? Even a Wyse-50 has a printer port...).
]
]There are no print services in X. We seem to be talking past each other here.

Well, I think I'd only run a window manager and a daemn to accept connections
and echo data back and forth from the serial port, and *maybe* a telnet window
and *maybe* a CTERM protocol window (if the server supported a DECNet
transport at all...

]>Finally, you are arguing from the specific to the general, which is logically
]>invalid in any case.
]
]Huh? Precisely where did I commit this fallacy?

By assuming I wanted to run a *lot* of clients on the X terminal, you
implied the need for more OS services, then you argued against running
*any* clients on the X terminal because of the OS service requirements
being too large.

]>This is the argument Sun tried to use (an failed at).  Sun is now selling
]>workstations running X server software under the name "X terminal".  Sun
]>wasn't very successful selling that world view, and they had a marketing
]>department being paid big $ trying to back their story up.  8-).
]
]Actually, you've made my case for me. The price point for X terminals has
]been kept so high (by creeping featurism) that workstations can compete
]against them head-to-head.

Sun has had a hard time selling this; so far it has only been a paper
competition, and until Sun's diskless workstations used only for their
display services outnumber NCD's X terminals, it will remain a paper
argument.  Honestly, you sound like Sun marketing?

]I think X terminals are useful and important, so I think we (as customers)
]should try *not* to apply pressure on the vendors to add features that drive
]the costs up and ultimately undermine the market.
]
]But, I'm afraid that train may already have left the station....

Well, there is another emerging windowing standard (being pushed by terminal
venders) that argues agains this.

I also have to argue that putting the Window manager and local clients
on the X terminal is *exactly* what you are doing when you run one of
the many *successful* X-under-Windows products.  Any Windows app is a
local client.  Windows itself is the embedded window manager.  In point
of fact, the only disctinction between this and what I have suggested so
far is the fact that X programs that do widget drawing the way I've
suggested would llok like Windows programs when run in such an environment
instead of looking like Athena, Motif, or OpenLook based widget sets.
This is arguably of GREAT benefit to users in exactly the same way all
windows apps looking the same is of benefit: the learning curve is
reduced.


					Regards,
					Terry Lambert
					terry@cs.weber.edu
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.