ptran@hydra.unm.edu (Michael Burg) (02/22/91)
For some mysterous reasons, *omitted* is replaced one word because I'm doing some favors for someone.... In article <1991Feb21.092812.9746@st_nik!swindon.ingr.com> Nik Simpson answered some of my questions: >1. If any of you ever uses Intergraph workstation, how is it performance > in terms of hardware and engineer softwares? > > Yes I use them all the time :-), Since I don't use other workstations >and I work for the company you might think my remarks are not entirely >objective. Part of my jobs is supporting third party developers on >Intergraph platforms, they are generally very happy with X performance and >like the machine as a development platform. I think you should get and compile the x11fish program and will see the X performance on the Intergraph 2000 14Mips workstation. >2. Why don't they use X for their windows interface? > > The vast majority of Intergraph software is built on the Microstation >CAD package, this does not support X, the reason is that Intergraph have >been building workstations since before X was a twinkle in MIT's eye. >Accordingly along with other workstation manufacturers Intergraph developed >its own technology (Environ V), migrating such a large a software base to X >windows is not a trivial task. How about other vendors like Sun, DEC, IBM... These vendors born after MIT came out X window? Anyway, the reason is that all the Intergraphs I meet told me that Intergraph will not support X since X does not have the graphic capabilities like MicroStation which requires 2 virtual screens to run. No kidding!!! Try it out.... To my knowledge DEC is the first one implement X on their Microvax workstations. >3. They do have xwindow on their CD disk, but the X window libraries used >for programmer must be paid to get when others like Sun, DEC, HP comes with it. > > This is not strictly true, what you pay for is a compiler licence, >the Xwindow programming libraries are bundled with the compiler. You >wouldn't find the libraries much use without a compiler. The main reason >for not bundling the compiler is that most customers have no need for it >and consequently don't wish to pay for it in the base cost of the system. >Considering the size of the *omitted* labs order I would be very surprised >if you don't have a compiler licence, ask your sys admin. I'm sys. admin, net. man. Novell PCnet, 3D MCM IC design, 3D MCM thermal analysis... I've been working on various worktations most with DEC. Usually I got C, fortran, and NFS bundle with Ultrix operating system. The first time I see this type of business. Thank for your explain. Because I saw the xwinprog product on the CD which requires the key for download. That is why I ask. To me a system without a compiler cannot do any good. Anyway I do have CGH (greenhill c compiler), FGH , but some of the BSD signal calls are left out like sigvec(), sigvector()... The BSD lib needs work. >4. How about support service? So far, I gets very poor responses from >Intergraph. > > I'm surprised to here this, we are generally percieved in the >industry as having a very high quality support organisation, we are >connected to USENET worldwide so if you have questions not appropriate >to simple customer support then this is quite a good forum. Perhaps if >you indicated the nature of the questions to which you get a poor response >maybe people could help. Sure it is the power of the net, anyway I love your answere. I'll post more questions, problems and services. All of my problems and questions went to Huntvill and Dallas already; and the answers are still on the air. That is why I brought it to the net. And I believe the net will give me answers and help more quickly and appropriate than thr. the phone. You know when you call for questions on the problems which crashs the system and applications. You point out the reasons which caused the problems happened, what if I answere you like this "this is the way the Intergraph implemented, and it is our policy. We cannot take this out nor...." Well what do you think? When you cannot get your work assignment done since the system prevent you from ... We need cooperative altitude! Also I think we should have comp.sys.intergraph like hp,sun,dec.... >I don't like their own screen manager window interface, but I have to use the >Intergraph workstation since it has circuit schem. capture and hybrid eng. >design. Any of you out there knows other vendors like Sun, DEC who supports >X window interface and other engineer products running under X window. The >products I'm looking at are schematic capture, Hybrid design, and 3D thermal >analysis program. So far, I know the thermal program is from Pacific Num. >Co. however, it has a lot of bugs which I considered as poorly coded program, >buggy and I still cannot live with it. > There is no requirement for you to use the Intergraph screen manager, >you can run the X windows screen manager on top of Environ V as I do and still >be able to use your non X packages. Try looking in /usr/lib/X11/xdm for >info running X and Environ V side by side. If you still can't work it out >drop me a line by email. Yes I do have X running, I'm a deadly fan of X. I cannot live without X. The very first day I received the Intergraph 2000, my determination is to get X running on the system when it does not have. Go around and check if all systems shifting out having X on them. That is why I posted on the net to find out the REAL answere from Intergraph. I agree that most of nonX packages running under X. Why don't you try to run HYBRID THERMAL package under X, and some other packages like DESIGN ENGINEER, HYBRID ENGINEER packages to see how they behave, especially the HYBRID THERMAL package. I'll post more questions on these subjects. I do have a engineering design on Intergraph machine which I used as benchmark. If anyone is interested, I'm willingly to give a *FREE* copy to test out the INTERGRAPH workstations. It requires at least 6 1.4M diskettes for the benchmark. And the workstation must have X, Design Engineer, Hybrid Engineer, Hybrid Thermal, MicroStation products to run the benchmark. ============== Phone: 505-844-0355 (W) 505-298-5505 (H) ==============
bpendlet@es.com (Bob Pendleton) (02/26/91)
In article <1991Feb22.074055.7306@ariel.unm.edu>, ptran@hydra.unm.edu (Michael Burg) writes: |> >2. Why don't they use X for their windows interface? |> How about other vendors like Sun, DEC, IBM... These vendors born after |> MIT came out X window? Anyway, the reason is that all the Intergraphs I meet |> told me that Intergraph will not support X since X does not have the graphic |> capabilities like MicroStation which requires 2 virtual screens to run. I suspect that there is a lot of miscommunication going on in this discussion. I've never used or worked with an Intergraph machine, but adding multiple virtual screens to an X server is pretty easy. I doubt that the requirement for multiple virtual screens would stop them for long. Bob P.