cah@pdx.csd.mot.com (Chris Huey) (06/28/91)
I checked the FAQ and couldn't find an answer there, sooooo...
Does anybody, anywhere know of an X server (preferably network attachable,
like NCD or HDS or Tek or ???) capable of supporting multiple screens?
Each screen should be able to support 1280x1024 resolution. Color or
monochrome is acceptable.
Thanks for your help.
Chris
--
Chris Huey Motorola Inc., Computer Systems Division
cah@pdx.csd.mot.com . . . tektronix!reed!cvedc!mcspdx!cah
Voice: (503) 643-6247 . . . . uunet!apple!motcsd!mcspdx!cah
"Still crazy after all these years..."rthomson@mesa.dsd.es.com (Rich Thomson) (06/28/91)
In article <906@pdxvme.pdx.csd.mot.com> cah@pdx.csd.mot.com (Chris Huey) writes: >Does anybody, anywhere know of an X server capable of supporting multiple >screens? Each screen should be able to support 1280x1024 resolution. I'm not sure if your asking about a server capable of supporting several screens, or several physical displays. The two are distinct, because one can support multiple video interfaces to a single frame buffer (e.g. monoscopic or stereo) via screens, while multiple physical monitors are usually implemented through multiple displays. In other words: host:0.0 Display 0, Screen 0 host:0.1 Display 0, Screen 1 host:1.0 Display 1, Screen 0 host:1.1 Display 1, Screen 1 etc. We use multiple screens in our server implementation to provide a stereo screen (for PEX rendering with full 3D effect via LCD shutter glasses activated by an infrared unit on top of the monitor), as well as different root window visual classes (8-bit PseudoColor, 24-bit TrueColor, 24-bit DirectColor). In fact, the number of screens is configurable as an MxN array at server startup time. The server I'm running at the moment is using a 2x3 array of screens, with 3 of them having TrueColor roots, 1 with a DirectColor root, 1 with a PseudoColor root, and 1 stereo screen [TrueColor root]. We even support two stereo modes -- one with square pixels and the other with "skinny" pixels. I haven't seen any servers in operation that support multiple physical displays, but I remember reading something about Intergraph's workstation supporting two physical displays for CAD applications. I am pretty sure Intergraph runs X, but they might be running it on top of a proprietary window system since they've been in the market longer than X has been. Perhaps someone from Intergraph can comment on this. -- Rich -- ``Read my MIPS -- no new VAXes!!'' -- George Bush after sniffing freon Disclaimer: I speak for myself, except as noted. UUCP: ...!uunet!dsd.es.com!rthomson Rich Thomson Internet: rthomson@dsd.es.com PEXt Programmer
dwig@b11.ingr.com (David Wiggins) (06/28/91)
rthomson@mesa.dsd.es.com (Rich Thomson) writes: >I haven't seen any servers in operation that support multiple physical >displays, but I remember reading something about Intergraph's >workstation supporting two physical displays for CAD applications. I >am pretty sure Intergraph runs X, but they might be running it on top >of a proprietary window system since they've been in the market longer >than X has been. Perhaps someone from Intergraph can comment on >this. Our workstations do support two physical monitors. In this configuration, the X server can create one screen on each monitor, so the two screens are addressed as :0.0 and :0.1. I am using such a setup at this very moment. If you only have one physical monitor, our X server can create two screens on that one monitor. The two screens are still addressed as :0.0 and :0.1. A special key toggles which screen is displayed. On most of our platforms, the X server does currently run on top of another window system. However, we do support a native X server (meaning it doesn't run on top of another window system) on the most recent addition to our workstation line, the Interpro 2020. Call your local Intergraph sales office for details. > -- Rich >-- > ``Read my MIPS -- no new VAXes!!'' -- George Bush after sniffing freon > Disclaimer: I speak for myself, except as noted. >UUCP: ...!uunet!dsd.es.com!rthomson Rich Thomson >Internet: rthomson@dsd.es.com PEXt Programmer David P. Wiggins dwig@ingr.com or uunet!ingr!dwig (205)730-6365 Intergraph Corporation, One Madison Industrial Park, Huntsville, AL 35807
bob@jupiter.UUCP (Bob Schulman) (06/29/91)
From article <1991Jun28.034016.9875@dsd.es.com>, by rthomson@mesa.dsd.es.com (Rich Thomson): > I haven't seen any servers in operation that support multiple physical > displays, but I remember reading something about Intergraph's > workstation supporting two physical displays for CAD applications. I > am pretty sure Intergraph runs X, but they might be running it on top > of a proprietary window system since they've been in the market longer > than X has been. Perhaps someone from Intergraph can comment on > this. Can't really say about Intergraph. Jupiter Systems sells a multi-screened X terminal (that is, one with multiple monitors). Each monitor is 1280x1024. We can support up to 8 monitors...if you want more than that, it's no big thing...we can talk to you about it (nobody's been up past eight yet). The terminal is 8 bit color. bob schulman bob@jupiter.com
mouse@thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu (der Mouse) (06/29/91)
In article <1991Jun28.034016.9875@dsd.es.com>, rthomson@mesa.dsd.es.com (Rich Thomson) writes: > In article <906@pdxvme.pdx.csd.mot.com> > cah@pdx.csd.mot.com (Chris Huey) writes: >> Does anybody, anywhere know of an X server capable of supporting >> multiple screens? Each screen should be able to support 1280x1024 >> resolution. > I'm not sure if your asking about a server capable of supporting > several screens, or several physical displays. The two are distinct, > because one can support multiple video interfaces to a single frame > buffer (e.g. monoscopic or stereo) via screens, while multiple > physical monitors are usually implemented through multiple displays. They shouldn't be, unless each monitor has its own keyboard and pointer device. An X display consists of one keyboard, one pointer, and one or more screens. These screens are conceptually different monitors. While it's possible to multiplex multiple screens onto a single monitor, this is an ugly kludge; simply supporting multiple visuals on one screen is probably a better fit to the X model. The sample server for Suns, for example, supports the cg4 overlay plane as a distinct screen, but the associated documentation (a comment in the code, I think) mentions that the right way to do it would be to support both a 1-bit and an 8-bit visual instead.... der Mouse old: mcgill-vision!mouse new: mouse@larry.mcrcim.mcgill.edu
rthomson@mesa.dsd.es.com (Rich Thomson) (07/01/91)
In article <1991Jun29.104006.18467@thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu> mouse@thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu (der Mouse) writes: >[...] While >it's possible to multiplex multiple screens onto a single monitor, this >is an ugly kludge; simply supporting multiple visuals on one screen is >probably a better fit to the X model. There are several reasons for this multiplexing. In our implementation, each screen provides *all* the visuals supported by our server, but each screen has a different visual class for the root window. Why? Because lots of X software out there makes bad assumptions about the characteristics of the machine based on properties of the root window. That's right, they don't use XMatchVisualInfo, etc. They expect that the root window is a pseudocolor 8-bit visual, for instance. Even though you can provide this visual in the list of visuals supported, they won't find it if the root window isn't using that visual. For instance, our root window is a TrueColor visual. This software would just crash and burn if we didn't provide a screen with an 8-bit PC visual. Also, multiple video modes on the same frame buffer are better merged into the X world by multiplexing another screen (different resolution) onto the physical one. After using it for a while, I find it to be a great convenience by allowing my an array of work areas where I can arrange the X windows by groups. Of course, this is a side benefit -- there already is software that does this function -- the main point is to integrate poorly written applications and different video scanout resolutions into a single system. Life would be alot easier if applications were written with portability across different X implementations with respect to visuals. This still wouldn't solve the stereo problem, though. [Multibuffering doesn't address the video resolution issue either, I believe] -- Rich -- ``Read my MIPS -- no new VAXes!!'' -- George Bush after sniffing freon Disclaimer: I speak for myself, except as noted. UUCP: ...!uunet!dsd.es.com!rthomson Rich Thomson Internet: rthomson@dsd.es.com PEXt Programmer