shevett@labii.UUCP (Dave Shevett) (03/26/89)
A few months back, there was an article in Computer Shopper outlining a set of cards available that would allow several graphic terminals to connect to a 386 box running a variety of multi-user/multi-terminal systems (Xenix, Unix, Concurrent DOS, etc). In this article, they review a system from SunRiver that allows up to 4 graphic terminals per controller card . Has anyone ever used/seen/purchased this system? It seems the ideal solution to the Unix/Dos stigma. Terminals functioning identically to PC's, with the performance of a 12mghz AT, at the cost of a stripped PC. What I'd like to know is this: 1 - Our company is an SCO dealer. Can I use the SunRiver system to run a DOS graphics application on these terminals. The supposedly will support mice and local printers - CAN I RUN PAGEMAKER? <-- important q... 2 - What applications will run with this, and what will I need? I assume VP/ix is in there somewhere. Do I need Multiview? (not sure at all). 3 - If not the SunRiver system, which looks fantastic, what CAN I use to get this kind of functionality? Thanx for your help - this type of system seems horribly important to the Unix-on-a-pc world, so post your views on this.... +---------------------------------------------------------------+ | Dave Shevett ~---------------------~ Labyrinth II BBS | | W. Trenton, NJ | Have you made your | shevett@labii.UUCP | | (609) 883-9352 | saving throw today? | -------------------- | | 1200/2400 ~---------------------~ 3b1ish and proud of it | +---------------------------------------------------------------+
evan@telly.UUCP (Evan Leibovitch) (03/28/89)
In article <174@labii.UUCP> shevett@labii.UUCP (Dave Shevett) writes: >[...] >In this article, they review a system from >SunRiver that allows up to 4 graphic terminals per controller card . Has >anyone ever used/seen/purchased this system? >It seems the ideal solution to the Unix/Dos stigma. Well, one thing it won't be is a cheap way to implement multiple Xwindow servers on a 386. Most of the people at SunRiver's Uniforum booth had never heard of X windows. The one person who had heard of it said [surprise] that there are 'no foreseeable plans' to implement X on this system. From what I saw, if you're deeply committed to lots of DOS-under-Unix, SunRiver may be a good route to go. I'm not sure about how appropriate it is for native Unix applications (as opposed to an intelligent serial card and semi-intelligent terminals). -- Evan Leibovitch, SA of System Telly, located in beautiful Brampton, Ontario evan@telly.on.ca / {uunet!attcan,utzoo}!telly!evan / (416) 452-0504 You can lead a herring to water, but you have to walk really fast or he'll die
jim@applix.UUCP (Jim Morton) (03/29/89)
In article <866@telly.UUCP>, evan@telly.UUCP (Evan Leibovitch) writes: > > ...Well, one thing it won't be is a cheap way to implement multiple Xwindow > servers on a 386. Most of the people at SunRiver's Uniforum booth had never > > ...SunRiver may be a good route to go. I'm not sure about how appropriate > it is for native Unix applications (as opposed to an intelligent serial > card and semi-intelligent terminals). > I would think the germane remark would be "I think having X up on 4/8/12 386 consoles like the SunRiver system offers will drive the 386 machine into the ground." I'm still waiting to see decent X performance on ONE 386 console! What we're seeing now with the advent of Xsight, PC-Xsight, X-terminals, and SunRiver stations are a variety of ways to configure multiple graphics stations on a single machine. Depending on whether you have DOS under Unix users, text-mode versus graphic applications, and existing PC hardware should determine which of these solutions is best for you. Some things to consider: 1) SunRiver gets you additional consoles, multiscreens, and 2 serial and 1 parallel port per station - a nice "work center" configuration 2) X with EGA resolution just gets in your way - there really is not enough "desktop" area to do much window type stuff in. VGA, or things like Bell Technologies BLIT or Compaq's new high-res card are much better. 3) If you don't have graphic applications, VP/ix, or a psychotic need for ANSI color, SunRiver stations are kind of overkill - use an asynch. terminal. 4) If you're looking for X client machines, look for something that will offload the host machine of everything except the X protocol - do the graphics locally on an X terminal or PC with X client software. From what I've seen on the market right now, if you're going to spend $2000 on an X client system, get PC X client software - that way you still have a DOS PC in front of you, reuse potentially existing PC hardware, and have something to use if the X server machine goes down. I'll change my mind when X terminals get under $1000 and have user-loadable firmware on removable media (or downloadable). 5) As far as SunRiver support of "native Unix applications", SunRiver, SCO, and ISV's like us have gone to great lengths to make sure that EGA and VGA graphic applications work on multiple SunRiver stations - the support really is in there for all those consoles, multiscreens, serial ports, and parallel ports! -- Jim Morton, APPLiX Inc., Westboro, MA UUCP: ...harvard!m2c!applix!jim jim@applix.m2c.org
romwa@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu (Royal Ontario Museum) (03/31/89)
In article <939@applix.UUCP> jim@applix.UUCP (Jim Morton) writes: >4) If you're looking for X client machines, look for something that will > offload the host machine of everything except the X protocol - do the > graphics locally on an X terminal or PC with X client software. From > what I've seen on the market right now, if you're going to spend $2000 > on an X client system, get PC X client software - that way you still have > a DOS PC in front of you, reuse potentially existing PC hardware, and > have something to use if the X server machine goes down. I'll change my > mind when X terminals get under $1000 and have user-loadable firmware on > removable media (or downloadable). > Do you mean X server here? If the client is remote, then where's the server? Isn't the host the client and the terminal the server in X parlance? Mark T. Dornfeld Royal Ontario Museum 100 Queens Park Toronto, Ontario, CANADA M5S 2C6 mark@utgpu!rom - or - romwa@utgpu
jim@applix.UUCP (Jim Morton) (04/02/89)
| | on an X client system, get PC X client software - that way you still have | | a DOS PC in front of you, reuse potentially existing PC hardware, and | | have something to use if the X server machine goes down. I'll change my | | mind when X terminals get under $1000 and have user-loadable firmware on | | removable media (or downloadable). | | | Do you mean X server here? If the client is remote, then | where's the server? Isn't the host the client and the | terminal the server in X parlance? yup, I screwed up. I should have said "PC X server" and "client machine". -- Jim Morton, APPLiX Inc., Westboro, MA UUCP: ...harvard!m2c!applix!jim jim@applix.m2c.org
jim@hcr.UUCP (Jim Sullivan) (04/05/89)
In article <866@telly.UUCP> evan@telly.UUCP writes: >In article <174@labii.UUCP> shevett@labii.UUCP (Dave Shevett) writes: > >>[...] >>In this article, they review a system from >>SunRiver that allows up to 4 graphic terminals per controller card . Has >>anyone ever used/seen/purchased this system? > >>It seems the ideal solution to the Unix/Dos stigma. > >Well, one thing it won't be is a cheap way to implement multiple Xwindow >servers on a 386. Most of the people at SunRiver's Uniforum booth had never >heard of X windows. The one person who had heard of it said [surprise] that >there are 'no foreseeable plans' to implement X on this system. > >From what I saw, if you're deeply committed to lots of DOS-under-Unix, >SunRiver may be a good route to go. I'm not sure about how appropriate >it is for native Unix applications (as opposed to an intelligent serial >card and semi-intelligent terminals). > Evan Leibovitch, SA of System Telly, located in beautiful Brampton, Ontario Well, at UNIFORUM, HCR was demonstrating Motif on our SunRiver terminal. The X11 distribution for 386/ix includes support for the SunRiver Terminals. So the SunRiver terminals can be used as X Workstations, although there is no local processing involved. I'd agree with the statement that the SunRiver is really geared towards the DOS-under-UNIX crowd, but only because most UNIX applications make little to no use of graphics, since they are designed to run on dumb/semi-intelligent terminals, not CGA/EGA/VGA consoles. Jim Sullivan. HCR Corporation