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.