Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.unix.sys5.r4:9040 comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:7996 comp.unix.misc:15460 comp.unix.bsd:15856 comp.sys.powerpc:31457 comp.sys.intel:28544 comp.os.misc:3680 comp.os.linux.misc:33011 comp.os.linux.development:22211 comp.os.386bsd.misc:4729 comp.os.386bsd.development:3000 Newsgroups: comp.unix.sys5.r4,comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd,comp.sys.powerpc,comp.sys.intel,comp.os.misc,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.386bsd.misc,comp.os.386bsd.development Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msunews!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!tsikes From: tsikes@netcom.com (Terry Sikes) Subject: Re: Interested in PowerPC for Linux / FreeBSD / NetBSD? Message-ID: <tsikesD1zyJ2.F38@netcom.com> Followup-To: comp.sys.powerpc,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) References: <3d8e0l$6ve@galaxy.ucr.edu> <NEWTNews.3157.788323227.muzaffer@omer1.smixedsignal.com> <3dtjnh$r7u@galaxy.ucr.edu> Date: Fri, 6 Jan 1995 18:40:14 GMT Lines: 55 In article <3dtjnh$r7u@galaxy.ucr.edu>, Joe Sloan <jjs@dostoevsky.ucr.edu> wrote: >In article <NEWTNews.3157.788323227.muzaffer@omer1.smixedsignal.com>, > <muzaffer@smixedsignal.com> wrote: >> >>In article <3d8e0l$6ve@galaxy.ucr.edu>, <jjs@dostoevsky.ucr.edu> writes: >>> As to your assertion that it is possible to have a full implementation >>> of X on NT, I will allow that it may someday be possible - but the radical >>> changes required to accomplish this would be extremely costly, and in the >>> end, we would probably have something very different from NT as we know it... >> >>Bullsh*. As I wrote in a previous post, you can get full X on NT today! >>I can telnet to another NT machine and run an X program on that which machine >>which displays its output on my machine. What else do you want ? > >I suspect that you are bluffing, sir. >Tektronix has just released, or is on the verge of releasing, a major >triumph of software engineering genius which makes Windoze NT multiuser, >and purports to allow NT to run X, as if it were a real UNIX.... >Pray tell, why would Tektronix invest so much time and effort into >addressing a couple of glaring weaknesses in NT if you say NT is already >multiuser and fully capable of running X??? DEC and Hummingbird both offer X client and server software for Win NT. Several other companies offer X servers. Win NT is fully multiuser out of the box, in terms of kernel support. You can get telnetd for Win NT by ftp. These functions are not considered 'mainstream' by Microsoft (for better or worse) and are only supported by third party software. The new Tek software allows distribution of Windows apps using the X protocol (as opposed to native X apps). I would personally like to see Microsoft add this capability to Win NT, preferably using a more efficient protocol than X. However, MS has not commited to this as far as I know. >The internet community awaits your answer... Well, I'm not the original poster, but I hope the 'community' found this of interest... :) Followups set to a more appropriate set of newsgroups... > jjs@wintermute.ucr.edu / You can't figure out how to > A linux machine! because a 486 / ACCELERATE your Windoze NT box? > is a terrible thing to waste! / -9.8 m/s^2 works quite well!!! Who needs to accelerate a 275 MHz. Alpha? ;) -- Terry Sikes | The sound of one hand clapping. Software Engineer++ | The sound of a tree falling in the forest with tsikes@netcom.com | no-one to hear. My opinions - mine only! | The sound of IBM OS/2 for PowerPC booting.