Xref: utzoo comp.windows.x:13808 comp.windows.ms:980 comp.windows.misc:1206 Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!hellgate.utah.edu!helios.ee.lbl.gov!epb2.lbl.gov!envbvs From: envbvs@epb2.lbl.gov (Brian V. Smith) Newsgroups: comp.windows.x,comp.windows.ms,comp.windows.misc Subject: Re: popular window packages on non-graphics terminals Message-ID: <3873@helios.ee.lbl.gov> Date: 27 Sep 89 18:20:17 GMT References: <8313@megatest.UUCP> <44@bohra.cpg.oz> Sender: usenet@helios.ee.lbl.gov Reply-To: envbvs@epb2.lbl.gov (Brian V. Smith) Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory Lines: 27 In article <8313@megatest.UUCP>, palowoda@megatest.UUCP (Bob Palowoda) writes: < < From article <44@bohra.cpg.oz>, by ejp@bohra.cpg.oz (Esmond Pitt): < > Are there any non-graphics terminals (standard terminal) < > implementations of X, MS/windows or PM (subsets, of course) out there, < > either commercial or public domain? < > < > WARNING: PROBABLY DUMB QUESTION FOLLOWS. If there aren't, is there a < > compelling reason why not? < > < < Funny you should ask. I while ago I checked up on a company < who offered a X11 client with MS-Windows. They didn't have < the product ready. Couple of days ago I got another ad from < them with alot more detailed info so they may have the < product out. < This isn't what Esmond asked. What he wants is an implementation of X, MS/windows or PM on a DUMB (character only) terminal. I believe that the resolution (80x24 or 132x24) would make for a pretty poor emulation of any of those windowing systems. ______________________________________ Brian V. Smith (bvsmith@lbl.gov) Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory I don't speak for LBL, these non-opinions are all mine.