Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!husc6!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!infotel!pollux!ti-csl!peters From: peters@ti-csl.UUCP Newsgroups: comp.windows.x,comp.sys.ibm.pc Subject: X on MS-DOS? Message-ID: <17364@ti-csl.CSNET> Date: Sat, 21-Mar-87 08:55:25 EST Article-I.D.: ti-csl.17364 Posted: Sat Mar 21 08:55:25 1987 Date-Received: Sun, 22-Mar-87 22:19:34 EST Organization: TI Computer Science Center, Dallas Lines: 37 Keywords: MS-DOS PC-DOS X Xref: utgpu comp.windows.x:346 comp.sys.ibm.pc:2468 Sorry for the repost. I fear my last posting got munged... We're looking into developing code for a PC (AT clone of some sort) to make it a network connected "smart terminal". What I've heard described is kind of a cross between BLT (5620) capabilities and X (from what little I know about X). Goodies would include: - The ability to download code from the host (a Unix system of some sort) across the network - Windows, color, bit map graphics, mouse, etc - Enough intelligence in the MS-DOS applications to handle routine dealings with humans and give concise commands across the network to the host. X seems a good place to start for window management, etc. Because MS-DOS isn't multi-tasking, we'll have all of those problems to deal with--if something happens involving two or more windows, it's up to our code to remember to update them all. I'm no expert on X, so I'm wondering: - Has anyone worked with X on MS-DOS? - Is there some basic structural 'feature' of X that won't work on MS-DOS? - In general, are we going to have LOTS of problems? Any input is appreciated. Please respond by E-mail. I don't follow these boards too closely. I will be happy to post summaries if there is interest. -- Patrick Peters UUCP: ut-sally!im4u!ti-csl!tifsie!pat Texas Instruments sun!texsun!ti-csl!tifsie!pat PO Box 655012 M/S 3635 uiucdcs!convex!smu!tifsie!pat Dallas, TX 75265 Voice: (214)995-2786