Path: utzoo!attcan!lsuc!ncrcan!hcr!jim
From: jim@hcr.UUCP (Jim Sullivan)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix
Subject: Re: SunRiver information...
Keywords: xenix, graphics, fiber optics
Message-ID: <172@hcr.UUCP>
Date: 5 Apr 89 16:50:09 GMT
References: <174@labii.UUCP> <866@telly.UUCP>
Reply-To: jim@hcrvax.UUCP (Jim Sullivan)
Organization: HCR Corporation, Toronto
Lines: 34

In article <866@telly.UUCP> evan@telly.UUCP writes:
>In article <174@labii.UUCP> shevett@labii.UUCP (Dave Shevett) writes:
>
>>[...]
>>In this article, they review a system from
>>SunRiver that allows up to 4 graphic terminals per controller card .  Has
>>anyone ever used/seen/purchased this system?
>
>>It seems the ideal solution to the Unix/Dos stigma.
>
>Well, one thing it won't be is a cheap way to implement multiple Xwindow
>servers on a 386. Most of the people at SunRiver's Uniforum booth had never
>heard of X windows. The one person who had heard of it said [surprise] that
>there are 'no foreseeable plans' to implement X on this system.
>
>From what I saw, if you're deeply committed to lots of DOS-under-Unix,
>SunRiver may be a good route to go. I'm not sure about how appropriate
>it is for native Unix applications (as opposed to an intelligent serial
>card and semi-intelligent terminals).
> Evan Leibovitch, SA of System Telly, located in beautiful Brampton, Ontario

Well, at UNIFORUM, HCR was demonstrating Motif on our SunRiver terminal.
The X11 distribution for 386/ix includes support for the SunRiver Terminals.
So the SunRiver terminals can be used as X Workstations, although there is
no local processing involved.

I'd agree with the statement that the SunRiver is really geared towards the
DOS-under-UNIX crowd, but only because most UNIX applications make little
to no use of graphics, since they are designed to run on dumb/semi-intelligent
terminals, not CGA/EGA/VGA consoles.


Jim Sullivan.
HCR Corporation