Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!rex!ames!ames.arc.nasa.gov!lamaster From: lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Hugh LaMaster) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: Single user vs. shared (was Re: Killer Micros and vectorized code) Message-ID: <45489@ames.arc.nasa.gov> Date: 20 Mar 90 22:12:45 GMT References: <51771@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> <100598@convex.convex.com> <52661@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> <1990Mar18.023523.4034@ultra.com> <52817@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> <1990Mar19.220617.26370@world.std.com> <782@cluster.cs.su.oz> Sender: usenet@ames.arc.nasa.gov Organization: NASA - Ames Research Center Lines: 43 In article m1phm02@fed.frb.gov (Patrick H. McAllister) writes: >to now is display I/O bandwidth. My workstation has its display controller This is quite correct. This is an important consideration in what is optimal. >only know that the systems people here are recommending X terminals for users >who don't do much graphics and single-user workstations for those of us who >do.) This is a the basic rule of thumb without exploration of your requirement. I would state, though, that "Mac-like" can mean several things. The X Window System can do most Mac-like things just fine, although particular X terminals may not be fast enough for your particular application. But some are fast enough for most such applications. When people say "graphics", they usually mean image processing, rendering of 3-D objects in full color, etc. If you need "graphics" in this sense, the X-Terminal approach doesn't add up. >Can anybody in netland speak to the other objective: can an X terminal talking >to a remote host provide acceptable performance in running a graphical user >interface like Motif or XView and running (moderately) graphics-intensive >applications under it? (I think we can all agree that CAD requires a In a word, yes. I run that way every day, and at this minute. The limiting factor when I run applications like Framemaker is the speed of the server I am using and the number of people I share it with. But, X is *not* the problem. ********************************** Comment: I think Eugene Brooks was trying to make a point which was lost that "Killer Micro" meant the CPU, not whether the CPU was packaged for a desktop. Perhaps we need a new term for 15-100 VUPS desktop systems, killer micro based. "Killer Desktops" anyone? Hugh LaMaster, M/S 233-9, UUCP ames!lamaster NASA Ames Research Center ARPA lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov Moffett Field, CA 94035 Phone: (415)604-6117