holtt@jacobs.CS.ORST.EDU (Tim Holt) (02/23/91)
Has anybody tried running X on their 386-UNIX (flavor unspecified) in concert with several X-windows terminals (via TCP/IP or Graph-On Serial(?)). These terminals could be real, dedicated X terminals, or low end PCs (ie., 286 box) running some X package. Now I'm not looking to let a bunch of users run X off one 386, but rather I'm interested in using the X terminals for "passive" display screens for showing data from a data acquisition system. That means I don't need to have super performance, as there won't be users moving windows around, displaying bit maps, scrolling, etc. All I need to do is update fairly simple displays every 30-60 seconds. Any comments on driving X terminals off a 386/UNIX box? I'll summarize if the responce warrents. Tim Holt - Marine Technician/Data Systems Specialist Oregon State University, College of Oceanography Corvallis, OR 97330 (503)757-3891 holtt@jacobs.cs.orst.edu
ptuomola@clinet.fi (Petri Tuomola) (02/26/91)
bill@unixland.uucp (Bill Heiser) writes: >What "X packages" will enable me to use my AST Premium/286-10 as an >Xterminal attached to my 386/25 Esix-D box? Or is it not worth the >cost and effort? There is a "X window package" from Quarterdesk Inc. for MSDOS-computers called Desqview/X. I have no own experiences about it, I just read about it from a local computer magazine. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Petri Tuomola OH2LJY | InterNet: ptuomola@clinet.fi or ptuomola@unidex.pp.fi Ylipalontie 10AC | FidoNet : Petri Tuomola@2:220/63 00670 Helsinki | UUCP : ...!mcsun!fuug!clinet!ptuomola
bill@ssbn.WLK.COM (Bill Kennedy) (02/27/91)
holtt@jacobs.CS.ORST.EDU (Tim Holt) writes: > > Has anybody tried running X on their 386-UNIX (flavor unspecified) in >concert with several X-windows terminals (via TCP/IP or Graph-On Serial(?)). Yes, there are several things that you need to watch out for, but I'll get to that in a moment. I'm posting this from s SunRiver workstation (one of the older ones) that I use as an additional console and X terminal. It's hooked to ssbn (ISC 2.2) via a fiber optic cable and has two serial ports, a parallel port, and VGA capable of 640x400x256 or 800x600x16. It has an RT style keyboard (function keys across the top and Esc in the upper left corner). It functions virtually identically to the main console and actually does some things better (X startup and VP/ix). The 30MHz fiber optic link make it seem every bit as fast as the local console and the vt's work exactly the same. >These terminals could be real, dedicated X terminals, or low end PCs (ie., >286 box) running some X package. Now I'm not looking to let a bunch of >users run X off one 386, but rather I'm interested in using the X terminals >for "passive" display screens for showing data from a data acquisition It might very well be that the SunRiver would be a more cost effective alternative to a PeeCee or X-terminal when you factor in the cost of the ethernet, network software, and server licenses you might have to buy. The interface card supports up to four work stations and they can be as dumb as monochrome or as smart as super VGA with embedded server. The drivers come bundled with Interactive and AT&T UNIX, so the per-station incremental expense is relatively minimal. There is also a thing called a "Light-Card" which you can plug into a DOS machine to turn it into a SunRiver workstation. What I'm getting at is that there are some ways to configure a fiber optic network to utilize existing and/or low cost additional hardware. >system. That means I don't need to have super performance, as there won't >be users moving windows around, displaying bit maps, scrolling, etc. All >I need to do is update fairly simple displays every 30-60 seconds. The scrolling on the 640x400x256 display is a little "angry". It's quite satisfactory for reasonably still images. The 800x600x16 performance is quite comparable to the local console. You will have to make some changes to the default tunable parameters for streams. I ran out of streams queues when I had NFS and two X sessions all going at once. I'll be glad to share the parameters I used to get everything happy with everything else, email. > Any comments on driving X terminals off a 386/UNIX box? I'll >summarize if the responce warrents. I have only seen, not used, the new SunRiver X terminal. It's rather impressive in that it's 1024x768 and runs the X server locally. The configuration I use requires a copy of the X server for each active display, particularly since I run different VGAs and different resultions at each X capable display. >Tim Holt - Marine Technician/Data Systems Specialist >Oregon State University, College of Oceanography >Corvallis, OR 97330 >(503)757-3891 holtt@jacobs.cs.orst.edu Before someone gets upset, I have no affiliation with SunRiver other than as a satisfied customer. I have used their (free other than phone bill) tech support BBS and have gotten prompt and precise response. I can highly recommend them as a vendor based on my experience with them as a customer. If you don't already have an ethernet or don't want one, fiber optic workstations can save you some grief and some bucks. Contact Dick Brown (uunet!sunriv!dickb or dickb@sunriver.COM) for sales information. -- Bill Kennedy usenet {att,cs.utexas.edu,pyramid!daver}!ssbn.wlk.com!bill internet bill@ssbn.WLK.COM or attmail!ssbn!bill
davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr) (03/04/91)
In article <1991Feb25.185603.25275@clinet.fi> ptuomola@clinet.fi (Petri Tuomola) writes: | There is a "X window package" from Quarterdesk Inc. for | MSDOS-computers called Desqview/X. I have no own experiences about it, | I just read about it from a local computer magazine. Is that shipping? I called them from work and told them I had 500 workstations and about the same number of PC's which could use X capability, and they told me they were not shipping yet. They claimed they'd get info to me when they were. -- bill davidsen - davidsen@sixhub.uucp (uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen) sysop *IX BBS and Public Access UNIX moderator of comp.binaries.ibm.pc and 80386 mailing list "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
leo@unipalm.uucp (E.J. Leoni-Smith) (03/05/91)
We've done a bit: It works OK. Most of the SYS V unixes weve tried (SCO Interactive INTEL V.4) have been a bit flaky on the X side: Clients tend to be stronger than servers. I would think that youre project is reasonable. My prejudice says try the INTEL V.4 (now Interactive V.4) as best starting point. And best of luck. Nearly all PC Xservers we have tried work: some break with certain xlib commands. Xceed Xview/16 are both good: alo visionware Xvision and X11/AT if you want Windows compatibility.