Don.Gilbert@IUBio.Bio.Indiana.Edu (Don Gilbert) (11/06/90)
I am close to deciding on a purchase of A/UX. I probably want to incorporate XWindow technology in any unix soft that I develop. My home (development) computer has no net connection. Will I be able to run XWindow clients and server together under A/UX on a stand-alone mac? Someone, probably here, said A/UX 2.0.1, due in January (?) will include X Window System in the bundle, rather than as a separate item. Can anyone verify this and do you know if the price of A/UX will change due to this? I'm trying to fit this into a tight budget. -- Don Don.Gilbert@iubio.bio.indiana.edu biology dept., indiana univ., bloomington, in 47405, usa
abm@alan.aux.apple.com (Alan Mimms) (11/06/90)
In article <7506@cica.cica.indiana.edu>, Don.Gilbert@IUBio.Bio.Indiana.Edu (Don Gilbert) writes: |> I am close to deciding on a purchase of A/UX Good choice. |> Will I be able to run |> XWindow clients and server together under A/UX on a stand-alone mac? Yes. See below for more info. |> Someone, probably here, said A/UX 2.0.1, due in January (?) will |> include X Window System in the bundle, rather than as a separate |> item. Can anyone verify this and do you know if the price of |> A/UX will change due to this? I'm trying to fit this into a |> tight budget. Actually, what A/UX 2.0.1 includes with regard to the X Window System is an Apple product called MacX, which is an X Window System SERVER (only). (Actually, it does include a few other things, but not clients per se.) Thus, you'll need to get a complete set of X11 CLIENTS as well, in order to use A/UX as an X11 workstation and development environment. You can get a product from Apple called the X Window System for A/UX, which includes an MIT-style X11 server, as well as MacX, and a full set of clients and development libraries and etc. for $350. You can get this from the Apple Programmers and Developers Association (APDA). I do not believe the price of A/UX will change due to the inclusion of MacX. An alternative to purchase of the X Window System for A/UX to use as a cost-savings measure would be to take the MIT X11R4 sources and compile them on A/UX. This is fairly straightforward, if somewhat time-consuming. (Note that our X Window System product is NOT a straight port; very significant enchancements -- especially with regard to performance -- are built into the software, and an excellent set of manuals above and beyond the normal MIT manual pages is included.) (To be strictly accurate, A/UX 2.0.1 DOES include an X11 client: xcalc.) |> -- Don |> |> Don.Gilbert@iubio.bio.indiana.edu |> biology dept., indiana univ., bloomington, in 47405, usa Alan Mimms (alan@apple.com, ...!apple!alan) | My opinions are generally A/UX X group | pretty worthless, but Apple Computer | they *are* my own... "Laugha whila you can, monkey boy..." -- John Whorfin in Buckaroo Bonzai "Never rub another man's rhubarb" -- The Joker in BatMan
rickf@Apple.COM (Rick Fleischman) (11/06/90)
In article <11116@goofy.Apple.COM> abm@alan.aux.apple.com (Alan Mimms) writes: >Thus, you'll need to get a complete set of X11 CLIENTS as well, in order >to use A/UX as an X11 workstation and development environment. You can >get a product from Apple called the X Window System for A/UX, which >includes an MIT-style X11 server, as well as MacX, and a full set of >clients and development libraries and etc. for $350. You can get this >from the Apple Programmers and Developers Association (APDA). > Actually, X Window System for A/UX is NOT available through APDA. I believe it is only available through A/UX-Authorized Apple Dealers. The only A/UX-related Apple products available through APDA are: A/UX Device Drivers Kit, Version 2.0 cdb Interactive Debugger A/UX Guide to POSIX, Version 2.0 A/UX Network Applications Programming Rick Fleischman Developer Programs/APDA Apple Computer, Inc. e-mail: rickf@apple.com AppleLink: FLEISCHMAN@applelink.apple.com
coolidge@cs.uiuc.edu (John Coolidge) (11/06/90)
abm@alan.aux.apple.com (Alan Mimms) writes: >An alternative to purchase of the X Window System for A/UX to use as a >cost-savings measure would be to take the MIT X11R4 sources and compile >them on A/UX. This is fairly straightforward, if somewhat >time-consuming. (Note that our X Window System product is NOT a >straight port; very significant enchancements -- especially with regard >to performance -- are built into the software, and an excellent set of >manuals above and beyond the normal MIT manual pages is included.) In fact, I've done this (with significant enhancements --- the use of shared libraries), and the results can be ftp'd from wuarchive.wustl.edu. Out of curiousity: will Apple's enhancements be in X11R5 (i.e. will the changes be released to the world at large)? --John -------------------------------------------------------------------------- John L. Coolidge Internet:coolidge@cs.uiuc.edu UUCP:uiucdcs!coolidge Of course I don't speak for the U of I (or anyone else except myself) Copyright 1990 John L. Coolidge. Copying allowed if (and only if) attributed. You may redistribute this article if and only if your recipients may as well.
pke@public.BTR.COM (Peter Espen pke@btr.com) (11/08/90)
> ............................................ Will I be able to run > XWindow clients and server together under A/UX on a stand-alone mac? > > -- Don > Yes, you can. You simply need to be able to rlogin to your own system. A/UX, of course, supports this. I purchased A/UX 2.0 and the X-Windows system from Apple. If I had to do this again today, I would not buy th X-Windows system from Apple. For one thing, Apple's X-Windows systems comes with Release 4 server and fonts, but all the libraries, manual pages, and include files are Release 3. Also, Apple does not include all the clients from MIT's release 4, and many that are included are older versions. This means that you can run release 4 clients, but you cannot compile or build any release 4 clients of your own (or compile anyone elses release 4 code). A really good X-Windows release 4 build for A/UX 2.0 is available FREE from wuarchive.wustl.edu. I have downloaded this and have found it to be a complete and stable release 4 build. There were a few minor bugs early on, but they are all fixed now. So, just my opinion, of course, but why would anyone want to buy an outdated and crippled X-Windows system from Apple, when you can get the most up-to-date X-Windows system FREE from wuarchive.wustl.edu?? Don't make the same mistake that I did. Peter Espen pke@btr.com peter@sophia.com
peters@Apple.COM (11/08/90)
In article <911@public.BTR.COM>, pke@public.BTR.COM (Peter Espen pke@btr.com) writes: |> So, just my opinion, of course, but why would anyone want to |> buy an outdated and crippled X-Windows system from Apple, when you can |> get the most up-to-date X-Windows system FREE from wuarchive.wustl.edu?? |> Don't make the same mistake that I did. |> One of the reasons Apple *contributes* the macII ddx layer to the X Consortium is so that "leading-edge" A/UX customers can have immediate access to the latest bits. Its discouraging to see this strategy "boomerang" at the hands of Mr. Epsen. Long publication and testing lead times prevented us from shipping all the R4 components in the June '90 release. We did, however, think it important to deliver the vastly superior R4 server at that time (along with MacX). Its worth noting too that since the January 1990 MIT release, about 400 "blessed" X11R4 bug fixes have been distributed within the X Consortium. These have been incoporated into Apple's next X release. That's one reason many customers may choose to buy Apple's X Window System product; three others are QA, the books, and the support team. -- Steve Peters X Project Leader Apple Computer, Inc. peters@apple.apple.com
chn@lanl.gov (Charles Neil) (11/08/90)
In article <11116@goofy.Apple.COM>, abm@alan.aux.apple.com (Alan Mimms) writes: > In article <7506@cica.cica.indiana.edu>, Don.Gilbert@IUBio.Bio.Indiana.Edu (Don Gilbert) writes: > |> I am close to deciding on a purchase of A/UX > > Good choice. [words of encouragement deleted] > (Note that our X Window System product is NOT a > straight port; very significant enchancements -- especially with regard > to performance -- are built into the software, and an excellent set of > manuals above and beyond the normal MIT manual pages is included.) > > Alan Mimms (alan@apple.com, ...!apple!alan) | My opinions are generally > A/UX X group | pretty worthless, but > Apple Computer | they *are* my own... I have to respond to this performance statement. Here on a MacIIfx with 16 M memory, I have both Apple's commercial MacX for A/UX 2.0 and MIT's standard X11R4 (with patches 1-19) distribution compiled under gcc 1.37.91. In doing large nos. of vector draws on a Tektronix xterm, I roughly gauged the MIT server to operate twice as fast as the MacX server. So I ran x11perf on each server in one-bit mode to check it out. Here are the results of the first few x11perf tests: Repetitions/sec Test Name MIT MacX Factor --------------------------------- --- ---- ------ Dot 97300 26800 3.6 1x1 rectangle 28200 12600 2.2 10x10 rectangle 14700 9120 1.6 100x100 rectangle 1320 1000 1.3 500x500 rectangle 108 36 3.0 1x1 stippled rectangle 24800 10600 2.3 10x10 stippled rectangle 13000 7310 1.8 100x100 stippled rectangle 944 792 1.2 500x500 stippled rectangle 62 32 1.9 1x1 opaque stippled rectangle 7000 6390 2.6 10x10 opaque stippled rectangle 5290 2500 2.1 500x500 opaque stippled rectangle 68 25 2.7 These figures support the rule my fingers already knew: don't do graphics under MacX; use X11R4 for that. The beauty is we can have both; it takes me maybe 30 sec. to switch from X11R4 to the Macintosh desktop. -- -Charlie Neil (chn@lanl.gov) Los Alamos National Laboratory (505) 665-0978
alexis@panix.uucp (Alexis Rosen) (11/08/90)
In article <5268@lanl.gov> chn@lanl.gov (Charles Neil) writes: >In article <11116@goofy.Apple.COM>, abm@alan.aux.apple.com (Alan Mimms) writes: >> (Note that our X Window System product is NOT a >> straight port; very significant enchancements -- especially with regard >> to performance -- are built into the software, and an excellent set of >> manuals above and beyond the normal MIT manual pages is included.) > >I have to respond to this performance statement. Here on a MacIIfx with >16 M memory, I have both Apple's commercial MacX for A/UX 2.0 and MIT's >standard X11R4 (with patches 1-19) distribution compiled under gcc >1.37.91. In doing large nos. of vector draws on a Tektronix xterm, I >roughly gauged the MIT server to operate twice as fast as the MacX server. >So I ran x11perf on each server in one-bit mode to check it out. >Here are the results of the first few x11perf tests: > [much substatiation of this claim deleted.] You're misinterpreting Alan's claim. (Or perhaps he mistyped. But in a number of discussions, nobody at Apple has ever made this claim, to my knowledge.) What he and others have been saying is that the _native_ X server which is included in MacX is faster than the native X from MIT. I haven't tested this personally but just by eyeballing it I think they're right. >These figures support the rule my fingers already knew: don't do >graphics under MacX; use X11R4 for that. The beauty is we can have >both; it takes me maybe 30 sec. to switch from X11R4 to the Macintosh >desktop. Which ever native X you use, this is certainly true. BTW, Apple is including MacX with A/UX 2.0.1. They have also stated that they'll be sending their changes for the native X back to MIT for inclusion in R4. No time frame on this yet. --- Alexis Rosen Owner/Sysadmin, PANIX Public Access Unix, NY {cmcl2,apple}!panix!alexis
pke@public.BTR.COM (Peter Espen pke@btr.com) (11/09/90)
In article <1990Nov7.131404@springer.Apple.COM>, peters@Apple.COM writes: > In article <911@public.BTR.COM>, pke@public.BTR.COM (Peter Espen > pke@btr.com) writes: > |> So, just my opinion, of course, but why would anyone want to > |> buy an outdated and crippled X-Windows system from Apple, when you > can > |> get the most up-to-date X-Windows system FREE from > wuarchive.wustl.edu?? > |> Don't make the same mistake that I did. > |> > > One of the reasons Apple *contributes* the macII ddx layer to the X > Consortium is so that "leading-edge" A/UX customers can have immediate > access to the latest bits. > > ............ Its worth noting too that since the January 1990 MIT > release, about 400 "blessed" X11R4 bug fixes have been distributed > within the X Consortium. These have been incoporated into Apple's next X > release. That's one reason many customers may choose to buy Apple's X > Window System product; three others are QA, the books, and the support > team. > It is a good thing that Apple contributes the macII ddx layer to the X Consortium. If, however, a "leading-edge" A/UX customer wants to have "immediate access to the latest bits" it is necessary to get the latest source code and compile it. This is not possible if you only have the libraries and include files that come with Apple's X-Windows. You can't build the latest server release if you only have the older release 3 libraries and include files that are part of the Apple X-Windows distribution. The material that is covered in the books that comes with Apple's X-Windows is covered in greater and more up-to-date detail in the O'Reilly series. If you buy three of the O'Reilly books (at $35 each, retail), you essentially have everything that's covered in Apple's X-Windows documentation. You only get Apple's support for 30 days. After that, it will cost you $1000. The support you get if you already have access to USENET news is alot cheaper. Why aren't there any updates or patches on aux.support.apple.com? No one at Apple will even say when a update release of Apple's X-Windows will be available and at what cost. If patches and updates aren't made available by Apple on something like aux.support.apple.com, then the only alternative is to wait until some unknown future date for an update to a product that is already out-dated when you buy it for $350. Another alternative for someone on a limited budget, is to not buy Apple's X-WIndows release and to get it from other sources for free. Peter Espen pke@btr.com peter@sophia.com
alan@apple.com (Alan Mimms) (11/09/90)
In article <5268@lanl.gov>, chn@lanl.gov (Charles Neil) writes: |> In article <11116@goofy.Apple.COM>, abm@alan.aux.apple.com |> (Alan Mimms) writes: |> > In article <7506@cica.cica.indiana.edu>, |> > Don.Gilbert@IUBio.Bio.Indiana.Edu (Don Gilbert) writes: |> > |> I am close to deciding on a purchase of A/UX |> > |> > Good choice. |> |> [words of encouragement deleted] |> |> > (Note that our X Window System product is NOT a |> > straight port; very significant enchancements -- especially with |> > regard to performance -- are built into the software, and an |> > excellent set of manuals above and beyond the normal MIT manual |> > pages is included.) |> I have to respond to this performance statement. Here on a MacIIfx |> with 16 M memory, I have both Apple's commercial MacX for A/UX 2.0 |> and MIT's standard X11R4 (with patches 1-19) distribution compiled |> under gcc 1.37.91 [performance figures clearly showing Charles' point deleted] |> These figures support the rule my fingers already knew: don't do |> graphics under MacX; use X11R4 for that. The beauty is we can have |> both; it takes me maybe 30 sec. to switch from X11R4 to the Macintosh |> desktop. I was referring to our so-called "Native X" server (available as part of the X Window System for A/UX product from Apple), which works just like the MIT server -- and cannot be used simultaneously with the Macintosh world on A/UX (won't run on MacOS either). While you might find porting the MIT code fairly painless, many people won't. If you use the ported MIT-supplied X11R4 release you'll not get the excellent manuals our Pubs people write or the consortium code bugfixes and speedups we include or the bugfixes we include as a result of our extensive software quality assurance testing. The choice is yours to make. Our Native X11 server (especially the X11R4 based version) is faster than the MIT code by a good margin for a number of types of operations. We are CONSTANTLY working on speedups and bugfixes which are generally only available to consortium members. We are also doing some very effective optimizations which are specific to A/UX and Macintosh. Your comments about MacX 1.0 are justified. It IS a very convenient way to use X clients while working cleanly together (i.e., cut and paste) with the Macintosh world. But MacX 1.0 (like the version 1.0 release of practically anything) has a few performance issues that we're working very hard on right now. Stay tuned. -- Alan Mimms (alan@apple.com, ...!apple!alan) | My opinions are generally A/UX X group | pretty worthless, but Apple Computer | they *are* my own... "Laugha whila you can, monkey boy..." -- John Whorfin in Buckaroo Bonzai "Never rub another man's rhubarb" -- The Joker in BatMan