Dave McGuire skrev:
>On October 1, Iggy Drougge wrote:
>> OTOH, the main strength of the DECstation is that it's a graphical
>> workstation. Running it through a terminal would mean losing the graphics,
>> and running it then wouldn't make much sense (it might at home, but we've
>> got enough machines without any proper uses at the UG anyway =).
> Uhh, what?
> No way.
> *A* strength of a DECstation is that it's a graphical workstation.
>But it's certainly quite useful as a headless machine as well. I'm
>not running any anymore, but as recently as a year ago I had a few
>headless DECstations doing a great deal of real work.
As I said, if it was mine, I'd run it (I'm running a 5000/200 headless right
now), but in the environment at the UG, its purpose was that of a graphical
client. We already have a lot of things to connect terminals to, and another
one would just be a waste of electricity.
--
En ligne avec Thor 2.6a.
Vi m?ste vara r?dda om varandra
- det ?r det enda reciproka pronomen vi har.
Received on Mon Oct 01 2001 - 05:59:43 BST