Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!cica!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!hplabs!hpfcdc!hpfclp!diamant
From: diamant@hpfclp.SDE.HP.COM (John Diamant)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: X terminal info (summary - long)
Message-ID: <9740092@hpfclp.SDE.HP.COM>
Date: 16 Jul 89 22:18:29 GMT
References: <11234@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu>
Organization: HP SESD, Fort Collins, CO
Lines: 32

> Four companies were mentioned: GraphOn, NCD, NCR, and Visual.
> The name of NCD appeared most often.  The consensus appears 
> to be that ethernet X terminals (NCD, NCR, Visual) can match the
> windowing/display capabilities of workstations.  The GraphOn which
> works over a serial line is a "neat idea" that isn't quite up to snuff
> yet.
> 
> Keith McNeill (eplrx7!mcneill@uunet.UU.NET)  writes:
> ====================

I think you missed the point on the GraphOn terminals.  As an office terminal,
I would agree that it isn't quite there (certainly doesn't perform as well
as an NCD), but it is really the only one that can work over modems and phone
lines with acceptable performance (not as good as at the office, but what
do you expect?).  I haven't seen anything using SLIP that comes even close
to acceptable performance (words like "unusable" come to mind).

Personally, I don't consider the Visual 640 (the 14" -- really 11"
interlaced version) to be quite there.  I haven't seen the NCR, so can't
comment, but between the NCD16 and the Visual 640, I'd say the NCD16 is
a clear winner.  I'd be curious to see the 19" Visual terminal, but the
performance and poor quality of the Visual 640 screen really didn't
impress us.


John Diamant
Software Engineering Systems Division
Hewlett-Packard Co.		Internet: diamant@hpfclp.sde.hp.com
Fort Collins, CO		    UUCP: {hplabs,hpfcla}!hpfclp!diamant

Disclaimer: These are my own opinions and do not reflect the opinion of
Hewlett-Packard Company.