Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!tinman.cis.ohio-state.edu!bob
From: bob@tinman.cis.ohio-state.edu (Bob Sutterfield)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: -host option (was Re: NeXT alternatives)
Message-ID: <BOB.89Apr10144750@tinman.cis.ohio-state.edu>
Date: 10 Apr 89 18:47:50 GMT
References: <12192@reed.UUCP> <245300010@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu> <688@garcon.cso.uiuc.edu> <BOB.89Mar30124012@allosaur.cis.ohio-state.edu> <41358@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> <8277@polya.Stanford.EDU> <4683@umd5.umd.edu>
Sender: news@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu
Distribution: usa
Organization: The Ohio State University Dept of Computer & Information Science
Lines: 22
In-reply-to: feldman@umd5.umd.edu's message of 10 Apr 89 14:54:42 GMT

In article <8277@polya.Stanford.EDU> aozer@NeXT.com writes:
   You can run an application on one NextStep machine and have the
   windows appear on another simply by specifying the destination host
   with "-host".

Does this use Berkeley sockets or Mach ports?

In article <4683@umd5.umd.edu> feldman@umd5.umd.edu (Mark Feldman) writes:
   While the visual part of the interface appears on the target
   machine, sounds are produced on the source machine

Oops! :-)  Fixed in 0.9?

   ...any application written using the application kit can be
   -hosted.

If one had sources, one could write using the application kit on any
arbitrary machine, anywhere on the internet, just like with X or NeWS.
The crunching would happen on yon Cray, and the user interface
(hopefully including the sound) would happen on the user's desk.

Is this beginning to sound like a broken record?