Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!amdahl!pyramid!prls!philabs!sbcs!root
From: root@sbcs.sunysb.edu (root)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.news
Subject: Re: X vs NeWS - was --> is news loosing the battle?
Summary: NFS/NeWS without ref port
Message-ID: <1396@sbcs.sunysb.edu>
Date: 15 Jul 88 00:14:27 GMT
References: <20091@wlbr.EATON.COM> <10250003@hpfclp.SDE.HP.COM>
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Lines: 73

In article <10250003@hpfclp.SDE.HP.COM>, diamant@hpfclp.SDE.HP.COM (John Diamant) writes:
> to get some of the vendors to look at NeWS was to provide it on the AT&T
> tape in the X11/NeWS merge (due to the large source licensing fee).  Until it
> was clear that X11 was here to stay, Sun kept trying to make NeWS the standard
> and kill X.  Only when it was clear that it wasn't going to work, did they join
	I've been to a couple rah-rah seminars for NeWS; its creators have 
	shown considerable restraint towards bashing X.  More so than I would 
	have if I created a great product like NeWS.  
	
	As for the "large source license fee", one hat I wear besides
	the one at Stony Brook is that of a small company.  My partners
	and I were able to afford a NeWS license - I can't see why anyone
	else would have a problem.  Especially HP :-).

	I've not spoken to anyone on the NeWS project that had the attitude
	that they're out to build NeWS to foist it on the world, kill X11, 
	etc.  It seems that they have their view of what a network window 
	system should look like and they've been pursuing it.  

> the bandwagon.
> 
> > I think sun's attitude seems to more "may the best
> > one win". sun's policy on NeWS is pretty much like NFS , if you want
> > a reference source kit you hand over your XXXX amount of dollars and
> > you get it.  
> 
> Yes, that is true now.  However, it is virtually impossible to implement either
> NFS or NeWS without the reference source.
> 
	Untrue about NFS.  We implemented an NFS client for the Amiga from 
	the protocol spec.  No problem at all.  We will shortly introduce 
	an NFS server product that was built, once again, from the publicly
	available specs.  NeWS would be a tougher nut to crack, but I think
	it is doable.  I've done my share of Sun bashing, but one area you
	really can't touch them on is they do make their technology available,
	and for pretty reasonable fees.

> 
> I believe I have seen X product announcements for X on an IBM PC (8088).  I'm
> pretty sure I've seen recommended configurations as low as 286 at least.  I'm
> thinking in terms of dedicated X or NeWS terminals.  The problem with NeWS
> terminals is that someone might try to run large portions of their program
> in the terminal, and it won't be able to handle it.  It could probably handle
> reasonable client/server mixes, but there is nothing to prevent a NeWS program
> from attempting to run almost entirely in the server, which I'm sure would
> fail miserably on a NeWS terminal.

	NeWS running on the Amiga isn't terribly fast compared to even
	NeWS on a 3/50.  The important point to remember here is that a small
	machine running X or NeWS is delivering price performance rather
	than graphics performance.  As to whether one needs less machine to
	run X, here is a suprising result:  The alpha binary for one X11 
	server on the Amiga is actually 40Kbytes larger than our current 
	NeWS binary.  The performance seems to be similar.  Both ports 
	require similar machine resources to run, eg ~2-3 mBytes ram, 
	~10 mBytes fonts, etc.  Both ports are roughly at the same stage
	of maturity.  Draw your own conclusions - the one I like is that
	it is just too early to say that either X or NeWS inherently require
	less machine than the other.

> John Diamant
> Software Development Environments
> Hewlett-Packard Co.		ARPA Internet: diamant@hpfclp.sde.hp.com
> Fort Collins, CO		UUCP:  {hplabs,hpfcla}!hpfclp!diamant

	Let me just say that despite my obvious bias towards NeWS, I
	most certainly not anti X.  All of this X vs NeWS vs etc nervous
	energy ought to be directed towards standardizing user interfaces
	so that we can get on with getting reasonable computers into
	mass markets.  In the end, does the customer really care whether
	it is PostScript, X RPC, etc on the wire?  Of course not.

					Rick Spanbauer
					SUNY/Stony Brook