Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!ficc!peter
From: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: Contents of windows
Keywords: LoTech
Message-ID: <4037@ficc.uu.net>
Date: 30 Apr 89 16:52:05 GMT
References: <4434@stiatl.UUCP>
Organization: Xenix Support
Lines: 21

In article <4434@stiatl.UUCP>, meo@stiatl.UUCP (Miles O'Neal) writes:
> Excuse this lo-tech intrusion, but what about all the 386 systems, running both
> DOS and Unix (or even - gak - the O word)? And X Display Stations, such as the
> XDS terminals from Visual?

The smallest X terminal I know of is the Acer Xebra. From its specs it sounds
like a disguised IBM-PC with 640K and a Hercules card. Given the limitations
of the hardware, 640K sounds like scads of memory. The Amiga runs in 512K
with both the application and the windows sharing that memory.

And given that 386 UNIX machines with enough RAM to run X typically burn a Meg
for disk buffers, complaining about a bit of backing store doesn't really make
a whole lot of sense.

[yes, I know UNIX is too big, X is too big, etc... but you might as well be
hung for a sheep as for a lamb.]
-- 
Peter da Silva, Xenix Support, Ferranti International Controls Corporation.

Business: uunet.uu.net!ficc!peter, peter@ficc.uu.net, +1 713 274 5180.
Personal: ...!texbell!sugar!peter, peter@sugar.hackercorp.com.