russ@prism.gatech.EDU (Russell Shackelford) (10/06/89)
buddy of mine in the restaurant biz bought a 386 about a year ago. he bought a 386 vs 286 in large part due to the hype about 286- obsolenscence, etc. he likes it great, but mainly just does word processing, spreasheet, accting, etc. on it, so the cpu is obviously spending most of its time waiting.... now, he wants to add capability for a 2nd user. choice is between getting another standalone box and arranging to zip files back and forth between the two VS. hanging a terminal off the 386. he has asked me for help and guidance, he's a good guy, so i'm trying. But I need help in order to help him. He sez he is clear that he is NOT after concurrent access to the same files or applications, that all he is after is two concurrent dos sessions by 2 different users in the same room. 2 questions: 1. HOW does one go about hanging a terminal off a 386 box, allowing 2 concurrent DOS users. What are the options? Pro's and con's? 2. Is this smart or dumb? thanks -- Russell Shackelford School of Information and Computer Science Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, 30332 russ@prism.gatech.edu (404) 834-4759
davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM (Wm E Davidsen Jr) (10/10/89)
In article <2344@hydra.gatech.EDU>, russ@prism.gatech.EDU (Russell Shackelford) writes: | 2 questions: | | 1. HOW does one go about hanging a terminal off a 386 box, allowing | 2 concurrent DOS users. What are the options? Pro's and con's? There are two ways to do this. You can run a DOS splitter like Desqview, start a 2nd session and do "CTTY COM1" to allow the 2nd user. Going that way will only allow you to run a limited number of applications. The other way is to get UNIX software and run DOS under UNIX. This will probably be more reliable and allows you to use the UNIX system administration software. I would suggest Xenix from SCO because it uses a little less memory than other flavors of UNIX, it is older and more mature, and I have had better luck teaching non-programmers to use the administration tools for backup, etc. | | 2. Is this smart or dumb? You have tradeoffs of complexity and reliability. With two machines you have a better chance that at least one will be up at any given time, but you also have twice the chance that one will be down. With two machines you always have the chance that the files will get out of sync, or that you will move files in the wrong direction and copy the older version on top of the new. You will need a terminal to operate for the 2nd user. You can have anything from quite dumb to a full emulation of a PC running at fiber optic speeds. Speed co$ts. -- bill davidsen (davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen) "The world is filled with fools. They blindly follow their so-called 'reason' in the face of the church and common sense. Any fool can see that the world is flat!" - anon
russ@prism.gatech.EDU (Russell Shackelford) (10/11/89)
earlier, I asked about how to hang a terminal off a 386 box to achieve 2 concurrent DOS users. so far, have received few responses (THANKS to you folks who DID respond). to date, answers seem to be of 4 flavors: 1. you can't do it 2. use unix 3. use a software product whose name I forget (but have stored elsewhere) designed for this purpose 4. use Desqview, start a 2nd session, use CTTY COM1 (or something similar) think I'll try 4 1st, then 3, then 2 as a last resort, since my buddy who needs this is poor. THIRD QUESTION: what are the essential options re: terminals themselves. smart vs dumb? what's the diff? what's the $$$$? THANKS TO ALL who have/will help!!! -- Russell Shackelford School of Information and Computer Science Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, 30332 russ@prism.gatech.edu (404) 834-4759
timothym@tekigm2.MEN.TEK.COM (Timothy D Margeson) (10/11/89)
Hi, multiple users on a 386? Sure... VM/386 and Concurrent DOS. CC/386 DOS from Digital Research, and VM from somewhere. Most magazines have ads from both. -- Tim Margeson (206)253-5240 PO Box 3500 d/s C1-022 @@ 'Who said that?' Vancouver, WA. 98668 e-mail replies to: timothym@tekigm2.MEN.TEK.COM
mcmiller@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu (Michael C Miller) (10/13/89)
In article <2406@hydra.gatech.EDU> russ@prism.gatech.EDU (Russell Shackelford) writes: > >earlier, I asked about how to hang a terminal off a 386 box to achieve >2 concurrent DOS users. so far, have received few responses (THANKS to >you folks who DID respond). to date, answers seem to be of 4 flavors: > >think I'll try 4 1st, then 3, then 2 as a last resort, since my buddy who >needs this is poor. > >THIRD QUESTION: what are the essential options re: terminals themselves. >smart vs dumb? what's the diff? what's the $$$$? > >THANKS TO ALL who have/will help!!! > > >-- Yo, Russ,, I tried to reply but the mailer didn't like the address or something.. If I understand your query correctly, then there is a very simple and inexpensive solution. At simtel there is a program called ------>> pd1:<msdos.sysutl>vmix221.arc <<-------. This is all you need. (well, this and a dumb terminal if you really want two people to each have their own terminals). Vmix is a multi-user ,multi- tasking sort of thing. The operators terminal can run concurrent windows and processes and other users can login through a comm port. This newest version will allow every user/process to have their/its own 640K dos shell.Neat trick, huh? I have tried the package on a 286 and it is really sweet, but for the multiple 640's you'll need the '386. (Thats the target machine anyway, right?). The "evaluation" copy on simtel will run 3 processes, the beefed-up registered version will handle 4 remotes and 4 local processes. If your trying to save some bucks, this is the way to go ( *nix is still to expensive for me). You can get a cheap/used terminal just about anywhere.. I hope this helps you..... .....sans -- < sans => mcmiller@uokmax.UUCP or mcmiller@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu > < '..this one goes up to eleven. Its ONE louder.' >