30 Sep
2001
30 Sep
'01
11:20 p.m.
On October 1, Iggy Drougge wrote:
OTOH, the main strength of the DECstation is that
it's a graphical
workstation. Running it through a terminal would mean losing the graphics,
and running it then wouldn't make much sense (it might at home, but we've got
enough machines without any proper uses at the UG anyway =).
Uhh, what?
No way.
*A* strength of a DECstation is that it's a graphical workstation.
But it's certainly quite useful as a headless machine as well. I'm
not running any anymore, but as recently as a year ago I had a few
headless DECstations doing a great deal of real work.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Laurel, MD
1 Oct
1 Oct
5:59 a.m.
Dave McGuire skrev:
On October 1, Iggy Drougge wrote:
> OTOH, the main strength of the DECstation is that it's a graphical
> workstation. Running it through a terminal would mean losing the graphics,
> and running it then wouldn't make much sense (it might at home, but we've
> got enough machines without any proper uses at the UG anyway =).
Uhh, what?
No way.
*A* strength of a DECstation is that it's a
graphical workstation.
But it's certainly quite useful as a headless machine as well. I'm
not running any anymore, but as recently as a year ago I had a few
headless DECstations doing a great deal of real work.
As I said, if it was mine, I'd run it (I'm running a 5000/200 headless right
now), but in the environment at the UG, its purpose was that of a graphical
client. We already have a lot of things to connect terminals to, and another
one would just be a waste of electricity.
--
En ligne avec Thor 2.6a.
Vi m?ste vara r?dda om varandra
- det ?r det enda reciproka pronomen vi har.
8492
days inactive
8493
days old
1 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
mcguire＠neurotica.com -
optimus＠canit.se