Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!ucsd!sdcsvax!ucsdhub!hp-sdd!hplabs!hp-pcd!hpcvlx!jason
From: jason@hpcvlx.HP.COM (Jason Su)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.hp
Subject: Re: Xwindows display server for Vectra, etc.
Message-ID: <101950033@hpcvlx.HP.COM>
Date: 20 Apr 89 20:27:01 GMT
References: <434@oetl1.oetl.UUCP>
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Co., Corvallis, OR, USA
Lines: 24

X/PC being "embarassingly slow" is a matter of opinion.  Although performance 
was a critical factor in the demise of X/PC, (lack of) capability and 
(expensive) cost played as much a part if not more.  

Original goals specified that X/PC would be HP's low cost "X" terminal.  
Unfortunately, the configured cost of a Vectra running X/PC was about the same 
as a low end S300 running discless.

Our market audience was originally "managers" who would run two to three term
clients to read their mail, etc.  It wasn't until alpha/beta release when that
idea was trashed.  Everyone, including manager's want to run xtrek and every
new whizzy application that comes along.

As for practicality, I use my X/PC as a "terminal" into my S300 hub.  I usually
run uwm, one or two xterms and xload.  Xterm reminds me of about a 2400-4800
baud terminal.  Xterm does afford me with cut and paste, an advantage over my
2622 terminal.  To summarize, it performs satisfactorily as a console to submit
small jobs and report status.

All in all, a 286 running 8mhz just doesn't have enough poop by itself to push
all that data around.
			Cheers,
				Jay Su
				jason@hp-pcd