gil@limbic.UUCP (Gil Kloepfer Jr.) (05/12/89)
I am involved in a software development project involving GIS and interactive modification of map-based data. We have determined that PHIGS would be the graphics "standard" of choice, but are now confused as to "which PHIGS" to use. I would appreciate any help from the net on the considerations listed below. Please note that we wish our application to be as portable across various hardware platforms as possible (especially the inexpensive personal workstation platforms). 1. Suppose I were to develop under a SUN hardware platform? Why would I use TGS FIGARO over SunPHIGS or vice versa? Does one or the other support more different types of digitizing tables and plotter devices? Do any require OS-specific calls to initiate graphic "windows"? 2. Has anyone out there used FIGARO and have any success/horror stories with it? 3. Has anyone seen a PHIGS implementation on a 386-based PC running UNIX (such as Interactive 386/ix) and the Matrox graphics card under X or some other window system (??) and feel that it's worth a honorable mention? TGS says they're going to release FIGARO in this (kind of?) platform, but has not officially commented on it yet. Personally, I feel that it is a bad idea to marry oneself to a graphics package sold by a hardware vendor since it is their intention to keep you buying their hardware. For this reason, I am partial to FIGARO, and have heard good things about it. On the other hand, being a newcomer to this kind of development, I really don't know for sure if the talk about FIGARO is for real. Thanks in advance for any assistance on this subject. ------ | Gil Kloepfer, Jr. | ICUS Software Systems/Bowne Management Systems (depending on where I am) | {decuac,boulder,talcott,sbcs}!icus!limbic!gil or gil@icus.islp.ny.us | Work: (516) 746-2350 x219
jch@apollo.COM (Jan Hardenbergh) (05/15/89)
> From: gil@limbic.UUCP (Gil Kloepfer Jr.) > Keywords: PHIGS commerical implementations hardware platforms > Date: 12 May 89 14:27 GMT > 1. Suppose I were to develop under a SUN hardware platform? Why > would I use TGS FIGARO over SunPHIGS or vice versa? Does one > or the other support more different types of digitizing tables > and plotter devices? Do any require OS-specific calls to > initiate graphic "windows"? Since PHIGS is now a real standard you want to make sure the PHIGS you use complies with ANSI X3.144-1988. Template's Figaro has been aropund for years and was orginally based on earlier drafts of the PHIGS standard. The October 1987 draft became X3.144-1988 AKA PHIGS88. Now that it is a standard there should be fewer questions about protability. Another thing pulling for partability is a few heavy weight customers demanding common data record representations for common device initialization. I think vendor's native implementations will provide better integration with other system utilities. For example, Apollo's Domain/PHIGS allows PHIGS to be initialized in an X window supplied by the application. This provides the full performance of a native PHIGS along with the niceties that X can offer for building UI's. I believe other implementations provide this also. This will also be trivial when PEX becomes an X consortium approved extension. PEX is the PHIGS extension to X. But, it is not scheduled to be "blessed" until late 1990 when the sample implementation is given to MIT. -Jan Hardenbergh - jch@apollo.com - (508) 256-6600