There you go. 15 years ago and things<div>are "great" already. 15 years later one has</div><div>1TB drives for $65 - until Singapore went</div><div>under water anyway - 8GB of memory for</div><div>$50 to $100, quad core CPUs, BIG displays,</div>
<div>etc.. Soon no one will remember what a </div><div>floppy is - any nice meaning for it anyway -</div><div>and Malox sounds like something you'd</div><div>take after eating and drinking too much at</div><div>a party. And now one freely accesses OSes</div>
<div>that are comparable to anything 10 and </div><div>more years ago.</div><div><br></div><div>Beyond the bigger, cheaper, and more</div><div>reliable, attributes to describe today's </div><div>versions of the hardware of those halcyon</div>
<div>days of 15 and more years ago, what are</div><div>the big new ideas since then? What does</div><div>one have today that one didn't have 10</div><div>years ago, if in a more crude, more </div><div>expensive, form? Don't get me wrong.</div>
<div>Things are better today, but mostly because</div><div>of hardware advances and cost reductions.</div><div> </div><div><br></div><div> -- Bob</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Adam Tauno Williams <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:awilliam@whitemice.org">awilliam@whitemice.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im">On Sun, 2012-01-08 at 05:50 -0500, Robar Philip wrote:<br>
>> Probably wouldn't be true today, and X is open, but there’d<br>
> > still be the bandwidth issue for many remote users.<br>
> Today, bandwidth is a non-issue for the X Window System*. One of the<br>
> major advantages of X11 is that it doesn't ship around bits. It’s a<br>
> client/server system. You run a graphics server locally and the remote<br>
> client just sends you drawing instructions—no bits. Back in the day<br>
</div><div class="im">> accessed remote clients over a modem to work from home. It was a<br>
>tolerable experience.<br>
<br>
</div>+1 Over local ethernet it works *GREAT*. That is the whole idea behind<br>
X-terminals and LTSP. About 15 years ago I had 7 NCD X-terminals and a<br>
couple of LTSP boxes - they accessed a dual-80486DX2/66 [64MB RAM] host<br>
for running applications. Performance was *really* good. Clients<br>
handled all the GPU stuff and the server just ran the applications. The<br>
LTSP boxes[1] had accelerated GPUs [Matrox] and NCD's were primarily<br>
bit-blitter's. The performance difference was noticeable when doing<br>
things like minimizing or moving windows; but just entering data in a<br>
word processor or spreadsheet cells was instantaneous either way. Video<br>
playback worked very well on the LTSP boxes but would stutter on the<br>
NCDs. That was 15 years ago using shared [non-switched] ethernet and<br>
bottom of the rung GPUs.<br>
<br>
[1] LTSP boxes were Pentium 133s with 8MB of RAM, Matrox II GPUs, and<br>
Linksys PCI NICs. They booted from a floppy disk containing a kernel<br>
image and mounted their filesystem from the server via NFS.<br>
<br>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
grlug mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:grlug@grlug.org">grlug@grlug.org</a><br>
<a href="http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug" target="_blank">http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug</a><br></blockquote></div><br></div>
<br />--
<br />This message has been scanned for viruses and
<br />dangerous content by
<a href="http://www.mailscanner.info/"><b>MailScanner</b></a>, and is
<br />believed to be clean.