Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!uflorida!math.ufl.edu!shadrach.math.ufl.edu!bb From: bb@math.ufl.edu (Brian Bartholomew) Newsgroups: comp.sys.next Subject: Re: (Ne)X(T) Terminals---a hot product idea? Message-ID: Date: 30 Apr 91 01:28:35 GMT References: <1991Apr25.084827.1475@math.ucla.edu> <1991Apr26.193131.10122@wimsey.bc.ca> <15108@darkstar.ucsc.edu> Sender: news@math.ufl.edu Organization: University of Florida Department of Mathematics Lines: 22 In-Reply-To: isbell@ucscf.UCSC.EDU's message of 27 Apr 91 17:33:04 GMT In article <15108@darkstar.ucsc.edu> isbell@ucscf.UCSC.EDU (Art Isbell) writes: > Has anyone run the same application under X and DPS (there are a few > that have been ported to both, I think) and compared network > efficiency? At a local Sun presentation about 6 months ago, Sun was demoing the OpenWhatever windowing system. This window system understands PostScript a'la NeWS as well as X. The rep stated that they ran an X version of Framemaker over Ethernet at the same time as a PostScript version over a 9600 baud serial line. The rep stated that both applications had about the same interactive performance. (I didn't see it, and this is all I know about it.) -- "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Brian Bartholomew UUCP: ...gatech!uflorida!beach.cis.ufl.edu!bb University of Florida Internet: bb@math.ufl.edu