Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mailrus!bcm!uhnix2!uhnix1!sugar!peter From: peter@sugar.UUCP (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: AMIX? Message-ID: <1900@sugar.UUCP> Date: 29 Apr 88 19:16:48 GMT References: <466@mailrus.cc.umich.edu> <863@gethen.UUCP> <391@brambo.UUCP> Organization: Sugar Land UNIX - Houston, TX Lines: 57 It seems it's the windowing that's causing the problems, eh? In article ... mp1u+@andrew.cmu.edu (Michael Portuesi) writes: > *Excerpts from: 23-Apr-88 Re: AMIX? Peter da Silva@sugar.UUC (3262)* > > Memory... well, 4 megabytes is nice. I have that much in my Amiga. But > > it's not necessary. Let's say you need enough memory that you can run the > > rest of the stuff without swapping. Carnegie-Mellon specs 1 Meg for a > > workstation, by the way. > > [X takes more RAM than] the window manager currently in use... > Basically, Carnegie Mellon is outright lying when they say 1 > MB is sufficient memory for a workstation. I guess CMU's wimped out as well. From what I've hear of Andrew (at Usenix) it's massive overkill. It's interesting that it seems to do way more than X, yet X is larger. > > Windowing... The Amiga has windowing. The Mac has windowing (echoes of > > Jonathan Livingston Seagull: "Just flying? A mosquito can do that much!"). > > You don't need megabytes of RAM or Disk for windowing. > You do if you want to run X on your workstation. Why do I want to run X on my workstation? It's a huge monster that doesn't seem to do any more than Intuition. All I need to do is provide the X toolkit calls, right? That's the whole point of a portable standard, no? Personally, I'd rather run NeWS. But if you can emulate X under NeWS I'm sure Bill Hawes could hack up an X compatibility package in AREXX in a week or so. :-> > > Networking... that's a toughy. But do you really need it for a home > > workstation? > I don't think Chuck was defining a "home" workstation...he was defining a > workstation. OK. We have a bunch of intel 310 and 320 boxes on an ethernet with a pretty transparent common file system, and it doesn't seem to take that much in the way of resources. An 80286 is in no way shape nor form a workstation class CPU, but it seems to run Xenix and OpenNet just fine. And there is Ether for Amy, too. > And networking is one of the most useful aspects of a workstation. Funny, the first half dozen workstations I ever had an opportunity to play around with didn't have any networking. What they had was a big bitmapped screen, UNIX, and windows. -- -- Peter da Silva `-_-' ...!hoptoad!academ!uhnix1!sugar!peter -- "Have you hugged your U wolf today?" ...!bellcore!tness1!sugar!peter -- Disclaimer: These aren't mere opinions, these are *values*.