Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!H.CS.CMU.EDU!Rick.Busdiecker
From: Rick.Busdiecker@H.CS.CMU.EDU.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: X on a VT220?
Message-ID: <545682039.rfb@h.cs.cmu.edu>
Date: Fri, 17-Apr-87 13:20:00 EST
Article-I.D.: h.545682039.rfb
Posted: Fri Apr 17 13:20:00 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 18-Apr-87 08:02:58 EST
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Distribution: world
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 13


    Let me ask a (perhaps foolish) question:  Why would you want to port
    X to a VT220?  An X implementation on a VT220 is likely to suffer
    because of bandwidth, resolution, etc.  If you sold the VT220's
    to an MIS shop and purchased bitmapped terminals (cheap nowadays) or
    diskless workstations (not so cheap--yet), the relative ease of the
    port would more than make up the cost differential.
    
How cheap is cheap?  In other words, what's the cheapest thing that one
could buy to use as a bitmap terminal to run X applications using a
modem to a Vax or RT?

			Rick