Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ncis.llnl.gov!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ucbvax!decwrl!labrea!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!EXPO.LCS.MIT.EDU!rws
From: rws@EXPO.LCS.MIT.EDU (Bob Scheifler)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: X and Display Postscript
Message-ID: <8901202129.AA02321@EXPIRE.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Date: 20 Jan 89 21:28:59 GMT
References: <184@ncr-fc.FtCollins.NCR.COM>
Sender: daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 20


    Screen displays were *much* faster than X on my Sun 3/60.

As has been pointed out many times before on this list, comparing the
untuned MIT-distributed Sun server against *anything* is one of the
least useful comparisons you can make.

    I've heard rumors the HP is coming up with something similar for X.

There are a number of "interface builder" and UIMS type products for X either
on the market or very close to it.  Several products in this area were
submitted to the OSF, for example.

    How does Big Blue fit into the picture?  They have licenced NeXT's
    interface.  Will this damage the X standard's acceptance?

Have you seen anything official from IBM which states that they *won't* be
using the technology in the X environment?  If much of this stuff is based
on "vanilla" Display PostScript, then Adobe's Display PostScript extension to
X should carry it just fine.