tay@hpcvlx.cv.hp.com (Mike Taylor) (02/02/90)
>Also, it appears that UIMX has been factory recalled. >I tried to obtain it earlier, but found that at the end >of the primary beta-test, it was going back to the factory. >If the stuff is truly broke (UIMX was), then I don't want it till >it's right. On the other hand, how does it happen that something >can be announced and then recalled. Although UIMX has been shown at several trade shows, it has never been formally announced nor has it been added to the HP's Corperate Price List. UIMX is still in development and should be available sometime in the second half of 1990. Anything else you have been told is a rumor. >I think that this points >to a more fundamental problem. One is internal management of releases. >The other is lack of widespread beta-testing. Currently, each >division is responsible for obtaining/utilizing beta sites. >I believe that this really means that betas are ad-hoc. >I think a more formal and enlarged program would reduce incidents >like the above. With respect to your comments on the UIMX beta-testing, we are not even to that stage yet. We had an early customer program where we received development feedback, but we have not yet started formal beta testing. Beta testing is meant to be conducted during the last phase of the project, after the formal Q & A is completed and after the last release before customer shipments. I would tend to say that the large number of early customer sites we have for UIMX makes us particularly vulnerable to the rumor mill that generates customer complaints and misconceptions. >I have never been approached by anyone about >being a beta site, even though my group regularly calls >in significant problems with products to Atlanta support. If you feel strongly about being a beta site, email me and I will see what we can do when the appropriate time comes. > My personal opinion (as always) > John... Mike Taylor UIMX Team ITO Technical Support Hewlett-Packard
raveling@isi.edu (Paul Raveling) (02/03/90)
In article <11584@venera.isi.edu>, I wrote: > > BTW, it was mildly shocking to find that the 1st Interleaf > TPS product for HP's requires Starbase. With a few day's experience under our belts now it seems that Interleaf TPS is fairly decent when using HP-UX 6.5's integrated Starbase/X11R3 server. Starting it with "tps -w" to get Starbase graphics in an X window works well. On the other hand we have some minor dilemmas to face if we want to upgrade users to have BOTH TPS and X11R4... ---------------- Paul Raveling Raveling@isi.edu
ian@io.UUCP (Ian Poynter) (02/07/90)
In article <11584@venera.isi.edu> raveling@isi.edu (Paul Raveling) writes: > > BTW, it was mildly shocking to find that the 1st Interleaf > TPS product for HP's requires Starbase. > >Paul Raveling >Raveling@isi.edu This is not strictly true, although TPS does *use* Starbase (for full screen support without X) we do not require all of Starbase to be loaded in order for TPS to run. We have recently loaded an HP-UX 7.0 system and tested this out by not loading the "graphics" file set. Note that we are just finishing qualifying TPS 4.0 with HP-UX 7.0, and we will be making an official statement that we support 7.0 sometime soon. TPS 4.0 also runs on the HP under X windows by using the "-w" option, although this obviously requires the X11 file set to be loaded. Ian -- Ian Poynter ian@ileaf.com Interleaf, Inc.
davew@hp-ptp.HP.COM (Dave_Waller) (02/24/90)
ian@io.UUCP (Ian Poynter) writes: > In article <11584@venera.isi.edu> raveling@isi.edu (Paul Raveling) writes: > > > > BTW, it was mildly shocking to find that the 1st Interleaf > > TPS product for HP's requires Starbase. > > > >Paul Raveling > >Raveling@isi.edu > > This is not strictly true, although TPS does *use* Starbase (for full screen > support without X) we do not require all of Starbase to be loaded in order > for TPS to run. We have recently loaded an HP-UX 7.0 system and tested > this out by not loading the "graphics" file set. Note that we are just > finishing qualifying TPS 4.0 with HP-UX 7.0, and we will be making an > official statement that we support 7.0 sometime soon. > > TPS 4.0 also runs on the HP under X windows by using the "-w" option, > although this obviously requires the X11 file set to be loaded. However, TPS under X-windows *is* using Starbase compatibility mode, therefore when running TPS under X, the window cannot be sent to a remote client. In other words, the window MUST run on graphical hardware that is in the same physical machine that the TPS software is running on. In discussing this with some folks from Interleaf, the reason cited was performance -- much, much better performance can be achieved implementing the blitting algorithms directly to display h/w rather than going through X libraries. > > Ian > -- > Ian Poynter ian@ileaf.com > Interleaf, Inc. > ---------- Dave Waller \ The opinions expressed are solely my own, and in no way Hewlett-Packard Co. \ represent those of my employer (but we all know dave@hpdstma.ptp.hp.com | hplabs!hpdstma!dave \ they should!)
r1yc@VAX1.CC.UAKRON.EDU (Yutang Chuang) (02/26/90)
In article <1320033@hp-ptp.HP.COM> davew@hp-ptp.HP.COM (Dave_Waller) writes: >ian@io.UUCP (Ian Poynter) writes: >> >> TPS 4.0 also runs on the HP under X windows by using the "-w" option, > >However, TPS under X-windows *is* using Starbase compatibility mode, >therefore when running TPS under X, the window cannot be sent to a remote >client. In other words, the window MUST run on graphical hardware that >is in the same physical machine that the TPS software is running on. > >In discussing this with some folks from Interleaf, the reason cited was >performance -- much, much better performance can be achieved implementing >the blitting algorithms directly to display h/w rather than going >through X libraries. > Is the performance also suffered due to sox11 driver? I am not sure if TPS on X uses sox11 driver. But we are testing TGS's Figaro (a PHIGS implementation on top of starbase by Template Graphics System) on X and notice that when sox11 driver is used, the mouse performance in Figaro (starbase) window is poor. This is on an HP9000/370CH. I think it is generally true that when you build on top of lower layer software, the performance won't be as good. I am looking for HP's own PHIGS (built on the same level as starbase) or even better PEX? Where are they? :-( -- Yutang Chuang yt@hrg9000.civil.uakron.edu
evgabb@sdrc.UUCP (Rob Gabbard) (02/26/90)
In article <1320033@hp-ptp.HP.COM>, davew@hp-ptp.HP.COM (Dave_Waller) writes: > However, TPS under X-windows *is* using Starbase compatibility mode, > therefore when running TPS under X, the window cannot be sent to a remote Why not use the Starbase sox11 (Starbase-on-X11) driver as an option to the user ? You could have the regular Starbase-X11 merge driver which uses a native driver on that host (hp98731, hp98550, etc.) and then have an option that uses the sox11 driver when it gopen's. That way the user could have the option of running quicker locally or slower over the network and you could maintain one set of code based on Starbase. I assume Interleaf makes mostly just 2D Starbase calls and doesn't use double buffering, Z-buffering, etc. I've found that the user will appreciate it more if you enable an option and alert him to its drawbacks than just saying "All thats a nice feature but it would be too slow". I'm not criticizing Interleaf here, I really like their product, just pointing out an available option to the aforementioned problem. -- ________ _________ _______ ________ / _______| | ____ \ | ___ \ / _______| Rob Gabbard (uunet!sdrc!evgabb) | |______ | | \ \ | | \ | | / Technical Development Engineer \_______ \ | | | | | |___/ / | | Structural Dynamics Research Corp. ______| | | |____/ / | ____ \ | \_______ #include <std/disclaimer.h> |________/ |________/ |_| |_| \________|
hwt@.bnr.ca (Henry Troup) (02/27/90)
I have, however, seen TPS running on a VaxStation 3100 and putting the display on an HP9000/300 via X. So not all TPS implementations have this disability -- although the demo we ran was flaky in extermis. -- Henry Troup - BNR owns but does not share my opinions ..utgpu!bnr-vpa!bnr-fos!hwt%bmerh490 or HWT@BNR.CA