Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!lll-winken!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!samsung!think.com!paperboy!meissner From: meissner@osf.org (Michael Meissner) Newsgroups: comp.windows.x Subject: Re: Dialup X Message-ID: Date: 1 Feb 91 00:58:46 GMT References: <19910130175219.2.BARMAR@OCCAM.THINK.COM> <9101310200.AA09703@eng1.sequent.com> Sender: news@OSF.ORG Organization: Open Software Foundation Lines: 26 In-reply-to: shap@sequent.COM's message of 31 Jan 91 02:00:39 GMT In article <9101310200.AA09703@eng1.sequent.com> shap@sequent.COM (Shap Shapiro) writes: | > Thanks for the clarification. When I first heard about Xremote that's | > what I thought it did, but somehow I'd later gotten the impression (not | > from anyone at NCD) that it was more like GraphOn. | > | > Are you willing to comment on the pros and cons of the two approaches? | > NCD's approach seems like it would make the host software simpler, | > whereas the GraphOn approach can optimize use of the serial line better. | | Personally, I like the NCD approach. When I take an NCD home or on the road, | then I can use a modem and/or serial line hookup and run Xremote. I can also | take the same NCD into work, plug it into the net, and use it like a normal X | terminal with no extra process (i.e. Xremote) running around on the host | system. Has anybody run NCD's with PEP modems (ie, T1000 in my case) rather than V.32 like they suggest? Any pointers, hints, war stories, advice not to... I am currently using a vt320 with a T1000, and our dataswitch also uses T1000's.... -- Michael Meissner email: meissner@osf.org phone: 617-621-8861 Open Software Foundation, 11 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA, 02142 Considering the flames and intolerance, shouldn't USENET be spelled ABUSENET?