Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 23:53:41 -0600 From: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> To: "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> Cc: <questions@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: RE: home pc use Message-ID: <15355.16741.576076.247915@guru.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <000701c1724d$5f4525e0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> References: <15355.2770.644343.846234@guru.mired.org> <000701c1724d$5f4525e0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm@toybox.placo.com> types: > >> So are X Terminals still in common use? If not, why not? They > >sound like an > >> excellent solution to a recurring problem with Windows (namely, > >the fact that > >> users tend to screw up machines that they can fiddle with themselves). > >No, they've died. [Begin rant] They died because users want to "own" > >their things. They don't want to have to trust their data to some > >central server controlled by the IT staff, though they expect the IT > >staff to back up their machines. [end rant] > Mike, that's a gross simplification if I ever heard of one. :-) Conceded, there are lots of reasons. That *is* one of them, though. A manager who needed a desktop box for someone would have to get IT to deal with the X station, but could just sign the PO for a PC. > X terminals died for the following reasons: Some of which I agree with. > 3) The X protocol only works decently over an Ethernet LAN it sucks horribly > over slow links. Think large corporations with many far-flung WAN links that > might be 56k links because they are cheap. That depends on what you're doing with it. If you're trying to run a web browser over it, yeah, it sucks - especially if the web server is on *your* end of the 56K link :-). For running xterms and xemacs, it's just fine. I've done enough of it in my time to know. > 4) Most of the mundane X clients were rewritten to be HTML-spewing > applications. Yup. Even mundane non-X clients were so rewritten, and I did my share of it. After all, why fool with trying to maintain UI code on umpteen platforms when I can write CGI code and have it available on all of them? Since a simple web server is no more painfull than simple telnet servers, it didn't surprise me at all when network boxes that you used to telnet to to maintain started sprouting web interfaces. > 5) Ever seen a X Terminal laptop? I thought Tadpole sold one. > >> > Telling managers "I'm waiting for an answer > >> > from vendor tech support" is a *very* common > >> > occurence with them. > >> Yes, and it works well. But it only works if there _is_ a vendor > >tech support. > Pull crap like that a few too many times and your going to end up with > no job. Yes, you can stave off the immediate demands with excuses. > Another common excuse that works with FreeBSD is "I left voicemail with > the consultant and he hasn't gotten back yet" Please note that the text Ted is replying to is *not* mine. And I agree with him - if vendor support doesn't do the job, you better find some have other resources available if you want to keep your job. <mike -- Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Q: How do you make the gods laugh? A: Tell them your plans. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15355.16741.576076.247915>