[9fans] X terminals would be an ideal platform for Plan 9 terminals.

[9fans] X terminals would be an ideal platform for Plan 9 terminals.

[Digby]

> As the discussion goes on Plan 9 adoption, and the difficulty to obtain
> technical specifications for hardware, I think it's not completely out
> of topic to mention an old idea : X terminals would be a very good
> platform for Plan 9 terminals ; when I see the processing power, memory
> and display that we use here on our X terminals to display mostly fixed
> pitch fonts in xterms (and images from the web), I think that Plan 9
> terminals would be a much better use for this material.
>
> Moreover, X terminals usually have no disk, so one doesn't feel that a
> part of the machine is left unexploited by the system, and it is much
> easier to convince the user that it's not by bad design that the machine
> has to be rebooted when he logs in.
>
> Do you think there is any chance to obtain the necessary technical
> specifications from NCD?
>
I would certainly love to see this. I have often wished I had the
documentation to let me experiment with downloading code into my
NCD HMX. It is so frustrating having a MIPS machine on my desk, and
having no control over the software that runs on it.

Being able to make it a Plan9 terminal would be great! It is
certainly has better specs than any of the PC or Sun displays
I have at my disposal...

Regards,
DigbyT
--
Digby R. S. Tarvin                                              digbyt@acm.org
http://www.cthulhu.dircon.co.uk

[9fans] X terminals would be an ideal platform for Plan 9 terminals.

[Digby]

> As the discussion goes on Plan 9 adoption, and the difficulty to obtain
> technical specifications for hardware, I think it's not completely out
> of topic to mention an old idea : X terminals would be a very good
> platform for Plan 9 terminals ; when I see the processing power, memory
> and display that we use here on our X terminals to display mostly fixed
> pitch fonts in xterms (and images from the web), I think that Plan 9
> terminals would be a much better use for this material.
>
> Moreover, X terminals usually have no disk, so one doesn't feel that a
> part of the machine is left unexploited by the system, and it is much
> easier to convince the user that it's not by bad design that the machine
> has to be rebooted when he logs in.
>
> Do you think there is any chance to obtain the necessary technical
> specifications from NCD?
>
I would certainly love to see this. I have often wished I had the
documentation to let me experiment with downloading code into my
NCD HMX. It is so frustrating having a MIPS machine on my desk, and
having no control over the software that runs on it.

Being able to make it a Plan9 terminal would be great! It is
certainly has better specs than any of the PC or Sun displays
I have at my disposal...

Regards,
DigbyT
--
Digby R. S. Tarvin                                              digbyt@acm.org
http://www.cthulhu.dircon.co.uk

[9fans] X terminals would be an ideal platform for Plan 9 terminals.

[Anthony]

//Would you share?

...i would, yes, if i knew where this all was. i'll
look for it, but i'm not optimistic about finding any
useful material. i also didn't get very far into it
with them (damn day jobs...). the most useful thing
would probably be my contacts. i'll let you know if i
find any of those. i had to social-engineer my way
past the front desk people to talk to techies.
: anothy;

[9fans] X terminals would be an ideal platform for Plan 9 terminals.

[bwc]

Gee, I spent many hours on the phone to get
the same information and I couldn't get anywhere with them.
My hats off to you.

Would you share?  I have a MIPS base system sitting
on the shelf unused.

Brantley Coile
bwc@borf.com

------ original message follows ------

>From cse.psu.edu!owner-9fans Sun May 14 16:27:22 EDT 2000
Received: from cse.psu.edu (majordom@claven.cse.psu.edu [130.203.3.50])
	by new.borf.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA06038;
	Sun, 14 May 2000 16:20:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (majordom@localhost)
	by cse.psu.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id QAA09204;
	Sun, 14 May 2000 16:24:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by claven.cse.psu.edu (bulk_mailer v1.5); Sun, 14 May 2000 16:24:50 -0400
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by cse.psu.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA09173
	for 9fans-outgoing; Sun, 14 May 2000 16:24:45 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: claven.cse.psu.edu: majordom set sender to owner-9fans using -f
Received: from er6.rutgers.edu (52508@er6.rutgers.edu [165.230.180.134])
	by cse.psu.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA09168
	for <9fans@cse.psu.edu>; Sun, 14 May 2000 16:24:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from anothy@localhost)
	by er6.rutgers.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA28777
	for 9fans@cse.psu.edu; Sun, 14 May 2000 16:24:39 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sun, 14 May 2000 16:24:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: Anthony Sorace <anothy@eden.rutgers.edu>
Message-Id: <200005142024.QAA28777@er6.rutgers.edu>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] X terminals would be an ideal platform for Plan 9 terminals.
Sender: owner-9fans@cse.psu.edu
Reply-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Precedence: bulk

i made a cursory effort about a year and a half ago
towards getting some of the relavant documentation
from NCD; geoff and i were looking at the port. it
took a while to find people at NCD who understood
what i was asking, but after that, they were
reasonably forthcoming with at least some material.
i agree that some of the NCD boxes are great
potential targets for Plan 9, and it looked at
least doable (PowerPC and MIPS boxes, last i
checked, and we've got compilers for those).

it'll probably be worth waiting until the release
gets out, rather than having to redo the port.

we eagerly await your results :-)
: anothy;

[9fans] X terminals would be an ideal platform for Plan 9 terminals.

[Anthony]

i made a cursory effort about a year and a half ago
towards getting some of the relavant documentation
from NCD; geoff and i were looking at the port. it
took a while to find people at NCD who understood
what i was asking, but after that, they were
reasonably forthcoming with at least some material.
i agree that some of the NCD boxes are great
potential targets for Plan 9, and it looked at
least doable (PowerPC and MIPS boxes, last i
checked, and we've got compilers for those).

it'll probably be worth waiting until the release
gets out, rather than having to redo the port.

we eagerly await your results :-)
: anothy;

[9fans] X terminals would be an ideal platform for Plan 9 terminals.

[Jean]

As the discussion goes on Plan 9 adoption, and the difficulty to obtain
technical specifications for hardware, I think it's not completely out
of topic to mention an old idea : X terminals would be a very good
platform for Plan 9 terminals ; when I see the processing power, memory
and display that we use here on our X terminals to display mostly fixed
pitch fonts in xterms (and images from the web), I think that Plan 9
terminals would be a much better use for this material.

Moreover, X terminals usually have no disk, so one doesn't feel that a
part of the machine is left unexploited by the system, and it is much
easier to convince the user that it's not by bad design that the machine
has to be rebooted when he logs in.

Do you think there is any chance to obtain the necessary technical
specifications from NCD?