simnet@ssc-vax.UUCP (Mark R Poulson) (10/31/89)
I'm looking for ways to develop X-Windows application software and run it on an IBM PC or compatible (possibly under the Xenix OS). My final product should also need to be portable e.g. to a SUN. Any idea or comment will be greatly appreciated. A. Hsu
madd@world.std.com (jim frost) (11/12/89)
simnet@ssc-vax.UUCP (Mark R Poulson) writes: >I'm looking for ways to develop X-Windows application software and run it on >an IBM PC or compatible (possibly under the Xenix OS). My final product >should also need to be portable e.g. to a SUN. Any idea or comment will be >greatly appreciated. Well-written X applications are highly portable, so that shouldn't be a major problem. If you make use of UNIX-flavor-dependent functions, such as tty control, it's a little harder. This kind of thing is generally unnecessary under X. If you want to do this, I recommend using Interactive Systems Corp's 386/ix instead of Xenix. They have the best 386 X windows I've ever seen, period. ESIX's X had poor performance relative to Interactive even though they were running on exactly the same hardware. Xenix, last I heard, was still R2. Xenix also uses the flaky Microsoft compiler. Pcc isn't great but it's fairly reliable. If you want to write X applications on a 8086 or 80286 machine, good luck. There are fairly useful servers that run on those machines but no good systems to run servers and clients. jim frost software tool & die "The World" Public Access Unix for the '90s madd@std.com +1 617-739-WRLD 24hrs {3,12,24}00bps
chasm@attctc.Dallas.TX.US (Charles Marslett) (11/14/89)
In article <1989Nov11.175220.25696@world.std.com>, madd@world.std.com (jim frost) writes: > simnet@ssc-vax.UUCP (Mark R Poulson) writes: > >I'm looking for ways to develop X-Windows application software and run it on > >an IBM PC or compatible (possibly under the Xenix OS). My final product > >should also need to be portable e.g. to a SUN. Any idea or comment will be > >greatly appreciated. > > Well-written X applications are highly portable, so that shouldn't be > a major problem. If you make use of UNIX-flavor-dependent functions, > such as tty control, it's a little harder. This kind of thing is > generally unnecessary under X. > > If you want to do this, I recommend using Interactive Systems Corp's > 386/ix instead of Xenix. They have the best 386 X windows I've ever > seen, period. ESIX's X had poor performance relative to Interactive > even though they were running on exactly the same hardware. Xenix, > last I heard, was still R2. Xenix also uses the flaky Microsoft > compiler. Pcc isn't great but it's fairly reliable. As a corollary, I have been trying to get support from any of the Unix vendors for 256-color X-windows drivers. None offered to provide them, but Interactive has been working diligently, and has been testing my code for me against their applications, so I am very pleased with their support for X11. On the other hand, I have tried several times to discuss what I have to do to support X11 in 8-plane mode, and I have yet to talk to the same person twice at SCO (and I haven't really tried to talk to anyone at Everex yet). In general, I think Interactive is much more committed to Xwindows than the other vendors. [And our 256-color 800x600 and 1024x768 drivers will work there, too;^)] > jim frost > software tool & die "The World" Public Access Unix for the '90s > madd@std.com +1 617-739-WRLD 24hrs {3,12,24}00bps =============================================================================== "Those who would sacrifice ** Charles Marslett liberty for security, ** STB Systems, Inc. <-- apply all std. disclaimers deserve neither." ** Wordmark Systems <-- that's just me -- Benjamin Franklin ** chasm\@attctc.dallas.tx.us -------------------------------------------------------------------------------