Newsgroups: comp.unix.ultrix
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!stanford.edu!leland.Stanford.EDU!adelbert5.Stanford.EDU!foo
From: foo@adelbert5.Stanford.EDU (castor fu)
Subject: DECwindows & Display PostScript compatible?
Message-ID: <foo.677983212@adelbert5.Stanford.EDU>
Sender: news@leland.Stanford.EDU (Mr News)
Organization: AIR, Stanford University
Date: 27 Jun 91 00:40:12 GMT
Lines: 26

Here's a question which has been irking me for a while, for which I would like
an answer:

Does anyone actually use Display PostScript under DECwindows?  If so,
do they just accept the fact that they will have to put a 3100 or better
on the desk of every person who might use DPS applications?

I am sort of annoyed to find that with our VT1200, we have no obvious
way of using DPS applications.  It seems that one should be able to 
somehow have at worst a DPS interpreter residing on some friendly host
to feed the little VT1200. In fact, if I go and take the Ultrix 3.0
dxpsview, I can use that as a previewer, so this is clearly possible. . . .
One could conceive of a server for the server which would monitor
the incoming data stream for extensions, font requests, etc. and handle
them before passing the simplified stuff on to the dumber x terminal.

I have nothing against DEC making potentially useful extensions to the
X windows standard.  Although this can tend to "lock one in" to a particular
vendor, if the benefits are great enough this is tolerable. . . . but 
if the extension is not even compatible with current DEC equipment 
why pay any attention at all? I might as well buy an NCD or GraphOn or
Tektronix X terminal. . . or buy a HP xxx/720 for higher performance.

	-castor fu
	castor@embezzle.stanford.edu