Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!canon.UUCP!laukee
From: laukee@canon.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.windows.news
Subject: Re: NeWS on a CG8-9
Message-ID: <8912111816.AA03286@aida.canon>
Date: 16 Dec 89 13:22:33 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 20


> 
>
>>    Not that the X side could do much with 24-bits anyway!
>
>What kind of garbage is this?  The X protocol supports up to 32 bits per
>pixel.  There are several vendors shipping X on deep framebuffers.
>
Woah, sore spot there?  Let me be precise: for "X side" substitute "X side of
merged server as implemented in Sun OpenWindows 1.0"
I'm talking about XNeWS here. Are Sun shipping XNeWS for deep framebuffers??
I think not, (but maybe that's garbage too :^]).
Is it possible that the NeWS side of XNeWS could would run in 24bits pretty
much as-is, whereas the X side would require a little bit more work, or is it
the case that the port would be as difficult for both sides (or is there
effectively only one thing to port)?  Information from a contact at Sun
indicated that the NeWS side would be easy compared with the X side.  Maybe
you know different!

	-- David Lau-Kee