Using X-terminals with PC-UNIX. Any comments?

[Bill Kennedy]

holtt at jacobs.CS.ORST.EDU (Tim Holt) writes:
>
>   Has anybody tried running X on their 386-UNIX (flavor unspecified) in
>concert with several X-windows terminals (via TCP/IP or Graph-On Serial(?)).

Yes, there are several things that you need to watch out for, but I'll get
to that in a moment.  I'm posting this from s SunRiver workstation (one of
the older ones) that I use as an additional console and X terminal.  It's
hooked to ssbn (ISC 2.2) via a fiber optic cable and has two serial ports,
a parallel port, and VGA capable of 640x400x256 or 800x600x16.  It has an
RT style keyboard (function keys across the top and Esc in the upper left
corner).  It functions virtually identically to the main console and actually
does some things better (X startup and VP/ix).  The 30MHz fiber optic link
make it seem every bit as fast as the local console and the vt's work exactly
the same.

>These terminals could be real, dedicated X terminals, or low end PCs (ie.,
>286 box) running some X package.  Now I'm not looking to let a bunch of
>users run X off one 386, but rather I'm interested in using the X terminals
>for "passive" display screens for showing data from a data acquisition

It might very well be that the SunRiver would be a more cost effective
alternative to a PeeCee or X-terminal when you factor in the cost of the
ethernet, network software, and server licenses you might have to buy.
The interface card supports up to four work stations and they can be as
dumb as monochrome or as smart as super VGA with embedded server.  The
drivers come bundled with Interactive and AT&T UNIX, so the per-station
incremental expense is relatively minimal.  There is also a thing called
a "Light-Card" which you can plug into a DOS machine to turn it into a
SunRiver workstation.  What I'm getting at is that there are some ways to
configure a fiber optic network to utilize existing and/or low cost
additional hardware.

>system.  That means I don't need to have super performance, as there won't
>be users moving windows around, displaying bit maps, scrolling, etc.  All
>I need to do is update fairly simple displays every 30-60 seconds.

The scrolling on the 640x400x256 display is a little "angry".  It's quite
satisfactory for reasonably still images.  The 800x600x16 performance is
quite comparable to the local console.  You will have to make some changes
to the default tunable parameters for streams.  I ran out of streams queues
when I had NFS and two X sessions all going at once.  I'll be glad to share
the parameters I used to get everything happy with everything else, email.

>   Any comments on driving X terminals off a 386/UNIX box?  I'll 
>summarize if the responce warrents.

I have only seen, not used, the new SunRiver X terminal.  It's rather
impressive in that it's 1024x768 and runs the X server locally.  The
configuration I use requires a copy of the X server for each active
display, particularly since I run different VGAs and different resultions
at each X capable display.

>Tim Holt  -  Marine Technician/Data Systems Specialist
>Oregon State University, College of Oceanography
>Corvallis, OR 97330
>(503)757-3891               holtt at jacobs.cs.orst.edu

Before someone gets upset, I have no affiliation with SunRiver other than
as a satisfied customer.  I have used their (free other than phone bill)
tech support BBS and have gotten prompt and precise response.  I can highly
recommend them as a vendor based on my experience with them as a customer.
If you don't already have an ethernet or don't want one, fiber optic
workstations can save you some grief and some bucks.  Contact Dick Brown
(uunet!sunriv!dickb or dickb at sunriver.COM) for sales information.
-- 
Bill Kennedy  usenet      {att,cs.utexas.edu,pyramid!daver}!ssbn.wlk.com!bill
              internet    bill at ssbn.WLK.COM   or attmail!ssbn!bill