Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ukma!gatech!bloom-beacon!oberon!cit-vax!ucla-cs!zen!ucbvax!QUABBIN.SCRC.SYMBOLICS.COM!DCP From: DCP@QUABBIN.SCRC.SYMBOLICS.COM.UUCP Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip Subject: SUPDUP protocol Message-ID: <870930102609.9.DCP@KOYAANISQATSI.S4CC.Symbolics.COM> Date: Wed, 30-Sep-87 10:26:00 EDT Article-I.D.: KOYAANIS.870930102609.9.DCP Posted: Wed Sep 30 10:26:00 1987 Date-Received: Fri, 2-Oct-87 03:27:43 EDT References: <12338315541.10.BILLW@MATHOM.CISCO.COM> Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Distribution: world Organization: The ARPA Internet Lines: 23 Date: Mon 28 Sep 87 15:31:31-PDT From: William Westfield ... What it amounts to is that most operating systems are STILL dealing with the terminal as if it were a printer, and that this probably has to change before a smarter virtual terminal protocol can be defined. That's an interesting point. I can name at least two operating systems that natively know about display terminals and considered printing terminals as a (crippled) subset. I believe they knew this as long as 15 years ago. They are: ITS (developed at the MIT AI lab) and, if memory serves, WAITS (developed at Stanford). There are things in ITS that are profound even today, since as you say, "most OSs are STILL" wedged about terminal==printer. SRA and JTW aren't talking through their teeth; they are familiar with and have access to existing systems that know about display terminals and have for many years. The cynic in me says you won't see much real improvement in Unix or VMS or whatever unless and until their owners bite the bullet, commit to entering the 1980s (from the 1960s), and pour money into the development hole. I would actually suggest they try to be visionaries and enter the 1990s.