// COMPLETE THREAD

Re: "Any of the mailers that you can use on a shell are oxen"

2 expanded posts ยท every known parent and child

NODE cb708df6Re: "Any of the mailers that you can use on a shell are oxen"
L. Futplex McCarthy wrote:


>Lucky Green writes:
>> Any of the mailers that you can use on a shell are oxen.
>
>So after my dept. tosses all its DECstations in the dumpster tomorrow,
>following your advice, what OS should the new machines support ?  System 7 ?
>AmigaDOS ? VMS ? Windows 95 ? What's the fabulous alternative to Unix about
>which I've inexplicably missed hearing ?

I was afraid of this...

I _love_ UNIX. I do not want to see it replaced. What I claim is that 7bit
terminals and terminal emulators are a piece of history. My message is that
the use of non-ASCII displayable data on the net is growing and that
character based terminals are unable to handle the way information will
(is) be(ing) presented. UNIX can handle graphics just fine, just VT100
can't.

There can be no other lasting solution but to abandon VTwhatever in favor
of bitmaped output devices. Since running X over a dial-up connection is
rather inefficient, and considering the significant computing power of the
PC's that are now being underused as dumb terminals, processing the data
locally seems to be a sensible solution.



-- Lucky Green <shamrock@netcom.com>
   PGP encrypted mail preferred.
NODE 0a8ac392Re: "Any of the mailers that you can use on a shell are oxen"
> 
> L. Futplex McCarthy wrote:
...
> There can be no other lasting solution but to abandon VTwhatever in favor
> of bitmaped output devices. Since running X over a dial-up connection is

Have you ever done it?  It isn't too bad.  Especially if you are
running well-behaved apps (most are) that aren't too graphical.
Really only large images are a problem.

Oddly, I've even seen better performance with xterm shells than telnet
through a firewall.

I haven't even seen the new version of X over slip protocol compression.

> rather inefficient, and considering the significant computing power of the
> PC's that are now being underused as dumb terminals, processing the data
> locally seems to be a sensible solution.
> 
I agree.
> 
> -- Lucky Green <shamrock@netcom.com>
>    PGP encrypted mail preferred.

sdw
-- 
Stephen D. Williams    25Feb1965 VW,OH      sdw@lig.net http://www.lig.net/~sdw
Senior Consultant      510.503.9227 CA Page 513.496.5223 OH Page BA Aug94-Dec95
OO R&D AI:NN/ES crypto     By Buggy: 2464 Rosina Dr., Miamisburg, OH 45342-6430
Firewalls/WWW servers ICBM: 39 38 34N 84 17 12W home, 37 58 41N 122 01 48W work
Pres.: Concinnous Consulting,Inc.;SDW Systems;Local Internet Gateway Co.29Nov94