Path: utzoo!attcan!hjespers From: hjespers@attcan.UUCP (Hans Jespersen) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: amiga 2500UX Message-ID: <3808@attcan.UUCP> Date: 24 Jan 89 16:04:34 GMT References: <974@cc-krs.UUCP> <11280@swan.ulowell.edu> <37@snll-arpagw.UUCP> <1394@dretor.dciem.dnd.ca> Reply-To: hjespers@attcan.UUCP (Hans Jespersen) Organization: AT&T Canada Inc., Toronto Lines: 23 In article <1394@dretor.dciem.dnd.ca> chk@dretor.dciem.dnd.ca (C. Harald Koch) writes: >In article <37@snll-arpagw.UUCP> paolucci@snll-arpagw.UUCP (Sam Paolucci) writes: >>Why Commodore does not use X as the windowing system I cannot understand. > >My understanding is that Amiga Unix supports the Amiga screens concept. Thus >you can have a screen running the Amiga window system, and a screen running >X-windows, and a screen running NeWS, and a screen running CMU windows, and >and and.... .. and a CPU so bogged down it can't run anything else. >At the moment, Amiga Unix is SysVr3. This does not have a BSD socket library, >which X-windows requires. It will take some time to port X-windows to the >Amiga. but the hooks are all there. I'm no BSD guru, but X runs on many SysVr3 machines that (I assume) don't have sockets. Streams is a comparable (in my understanding) product that gives even more functionally than its Berkley counterpart. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Jespersen UUCP: uunet!attcan!hjespers AT&T Canada Inc. or ..!attcan!nebulus!arakis!hans Toronto, Ontario #include