Re: [TCLUG:12935] Remote X (client/server rant)

["Eric M. Hopper" <hopper@omnifarious.mn.org>]

On Thu, Jan 27, 2000 at 02:22:10PM -0600, Philip C Mendelsohn wrote:
> 
> Um, I'm geezing enough to slightly resent the "mainframe" people
> comment.  UNIX descended from "mainframes" in the first place -- at
> least from the minicomputer users viewpoint... (maybe I just resent
> geezing!)

	*grin*

> To offer a suggestion, it seems to me that if you view the server as
> the machine that *has* the resources and the client as the one that
> remotely uses them, then all consistency is maintained, and that's
> exactly what happens in both the X case, and the other cases.  The
> print server is connected to the printer.  The X server is connected
> to the display.  etc...  It's just that graphics are such a
> bandwidth hog that it makes more sense to give everyone their own
> server.

	*nod* Yes, my point exactly.  People seem to have this mindset
that the machine they're typing on isn't in possession of any resources
that anything else might want, that they're the clients, meekly
requesting things to happen.  IMHO, I'd prefer a much more enlightened
view of the world.  Largely because of the Windows client, UNIX server
mindset actually.  :-)

Have fun (if at all possible),
-- 
Its name is Public Opinion.  It is held in reverence. It settles everything.
Some think it is the voice of God.  Loyalty to petrified opinion never yet
broke a chain or freed a human soul.     ---Mark Twain
-- Eric Hopper (hopper@omnifarious.mn.org  http://omnifarious.mn.org/~hopper) --

PGP signature