Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!mcnc!rti-sel!dg_rtp!throopw From: throopw@dg_rtp.UUCP (Wayne Throop) Newsgroups: net.unix Subject: Re: windows on normal terminals Message-ID: <395@dg_rtp.UUCP> Date: Tue, 10-Jun-86 16:28:55 EDT Article-I.D.: dg_rtp.395 Posted: Tue Jun 10 16:28:55 1986 Date-Received: Wed, 11-Jun-86 06:27:01 EDT References: <363@hrc63.UUCP> <16600003@ztivax.UUCP> <522@cad.BERKELEY.EDU> Lines: 48 Keywords: terminal windows Summary: (not "Probably Not") > keppel@pavepaws.UUCP (:-D avid K eppel) >> david@ztivax.UUCP >>Therefore, it sounds like nice windowing systems for multi-user >>machines are possible. It not only sounds like it, they are indeed possible, and are in use. > [...] > In a few years most new terminals will probably be high- > performance, micros w/ high-resolution bitmap graphics and built-in > windowing OS software. Why fool with this obsolete 24-line stuff? Two reasons. First, I am developing software now, not "a few years" from now. Second, the terminal that my employer sees fit to provide for me is an "obsolete 24-line" terminal, despite my preference for a $100K workstation. I can't understand why an $n-hundred terminal and 1/mth of a $100K machine should strike my employer as any more economical than a $100K machine for each employee(*), but this provides me with quite a motivation to find a liveable software development environment which will work on "obsolete 24-line stuff", and it is not beyond the realm of possibility that there just might be one or two other developers in the same boat. "A few years" from now, I will gladly wash my hands of the tools I use now, but in the meantime, windows (and job control for very-low-bps) on my "obsolete" terminal work quite nicely, thank you. Granted, the "short" time-to-obsolete for dumb terminal windowing ("a few years" is *short* in this buisness?) calls into question this notion: > Anyone wanna make a $ million and start building some? The money-making opperknockity on dumb-terminal-windows may already be past. And then again, it may not. -- (*) This crack is literally true. I think that this "economy" is penny wise and kilogram foolish. Nevertheless, it is the status quo, and I don't have convincing figures to substantiate my position, in terms of return-on-investment. And I don't know of anyone who *does* have these figures. -- "Personal workstations are the technology of the future, and always will be." -- Wayne Throop !mcnc!rti-sel!dg_rtp!throopw