Image Map Image Map
Page 16 of 19 FirstFirst ... 61213141516171819 LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 189

Thread: Anybody here actually collect Unix stuff?

  1. #151
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,072
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bifo86 View Post
    Which RDP is that? The only one I'm familiar with is the Windows version.

    There are several remote terminal laptops from the 80s, but they're mostly telecom-oriented I believe. The oldest that comes readily to mind is the TI Silent 700, but I don't know what that was actually compatible with. Maybe the TRS-80 model 100 is the best example, I think the TERM program on that was VT-52 compatible. Portable X11 terminals wouldn't have ever been considered necessary for a traveling Unix guru, surely, so the Tadpole workstation laptops would be the closest you'd get unless you dropped Linux on a compatible 90s laptop.
    Any laptop could be a terminal.
    Thomas Byers (DRI)- "You'll have a million people using the A> [MS-DOS prompt] forever. You'll have five million using [nongraphic] menu systems such as Topview, Concurrent PC-DOS, Desq, and those types. But there'll be 50 to 100 million using the iconic-based interfaces."

  2. #152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ivelegacy View Post
    That thing is a "RDP" terminal (SunRay2 uses the RDP protocol) in "laptop shape".
    Isn't there any "vt100" terminal in "laptop shape" ?
    Isn't there any "X11" terminal in "laptop shape" ?
    I built an X11 terminal with an old 486 notebook many years ago.
    A VT100 terminal could be made with any laptop-shaped device.

    But: Any of these devices strictly require a cabled connection and a managed infrastructure. They are useless otherwise, which contradicts the idea of a portable device. Now, with ubiquitous WiFi and mobile connectivity, things might be possible - but the concept of a thin client or terminal has been suspended (unless you see in-browser-apps as the new iteration).

  3. #153

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowen View Post
    For use with a Linux/*BSD box, you can put xrdp on the server and run the RDP client attached to it.
    Yup. Regarding the SunRay2 with the Java App JOpenRay, it supports RDP as well as ssh, but first, you have to "unlock" a special menu. This procedure is described in the project mail-list (it's dead, but still available), where they say that in order to do that you need to load and execute the original Sun application made for Solaris and somehow ported to Linux.

  4. #154

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Svenska View Post
    A VT100 terminal could be made with any laptop-shaped device.
    I have been using my old IBM/T23 (it's a PentimIII) laptop as VT100, X11, and RDP terminal for years, but it's not the same as something that doesn't need Linux to give you a terminal.

  5. #155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Svenska View Post
    I built an X11 terminal with an old 486 notebook many years ago.
    Any of these devices strictly require a cabled connection and a managed infrastructure.
    I don't like the wifi. I want a wired connection. Ethernet, or Optical Fibre.

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Salt Lake City, UT, USA
    Posts
    367

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bifo86 View Post
    There are several remote terminal laptops from the 80s, but they're mostly telecom-oriented I believe. The oldest that comes readily to mind is the TI Silent 700, but I don't know what that was actually compatible with.
    The Silent 700 series are just serial terminals. I don't think I'd consider a Silent 700 to be a "laptop", really. They're generally considered portable, but since they have a printer and not a screen, they're generally not thought of as "laptops". The earlier ones are quite heavy, I wouldn't want them on my lap, even back in the day. It was more typical to lug them home, plug them in and set them on a desk surface. The Model 707 is small enough and light enough that you could use it on your lap without too much discomfort, but it's still a thermal printer based model. Generally people expect a screen when they use the term "laptop".

    Maybe the TRS-80 model 100 is the best example, I think the TERM program on that was VT-52 compatible.
    Interesting. I hadn't heard that before, but given that it only has a 4 line display I don't see how it's going to be useful for most screen oriented applications. Did it have a 24-line screen buffer and use the 4-line display as a window into that buffer?

    Portable X11 terminals wouldn't have ever been considered necessary for a traveling Unix guru, surely, so the Tadpole workstation laptops would be the closest you'd get unless you dropped Linux on a compatible 90s laptop.
    Yeah, I don't recall anyone ever using a portable X terminal, ever. It would have been a laptop running a terminal program in most circumstances. If you actually needed a graphical display, the display resolution on a comparable laptop of the day would give you quite a very small environment as X window systems were generally considered to need pretty beefy resolutions at the time, even for monochrome displays. Even the NCD16 had 1024x1024 resolution monochrome.

  7. #157
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Outer Mongolia
    Posts
    1,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by legalize View Post
    Interesting. I hadn't heard that before, but given that it only has a 4 line display I don't see how it's going to be useful for most screen oriented applications. Did it have a 24-line screen buffer and use the 4-line display as a window into that buffer?
    Minor correction: The Model 100 has an eight line screen. But only 40 characters wide, so I suppose it's the same amount of text as a four line 80 column display.

    My vague understanding is that the built-in TELCOM software on those machines is *minimally* VT-52 compatible in that it uses mostly compatible command codes to reposition the cursor, but it lacks any kind of "virtual screen" functionality so if you were going to run anything screen oriented the remote system would still need to know about the limits of your window size. Which is certainly possible to configure if you're using it to access a UNIX system. Here's a UNIX termcap configuration for the Model 100. Some software won't like to run in a 40 column window, but it'll work for the sufficiently agnostic .

  8. #158
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Outer Mongolia
    Posts
    1,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Caluser2000 View Post
    Any laptop could be a terminal.
    In the 90's I knew more than one computer science professor who used PowerBooks (back when "PowerBook" might still mean a Motorola 68k-powered laptop) with MacX as portable Xterms for lectures, etc. This of course was the good old days when it was still considered acceptable to use open telnet and naked X11 across the campus network.

    X11 is actually a pretty terrible protocol to use on a remote terminal because it wants a lot of bandwidth and does not handle connectivity issues gracefully. A lot of state lives in the client Xserver itself and if something times out the whole house of cards falls down. (There are proxies to try to solve that issue, like Xpra, but I don't think they really existed back in the day.) This is why protocols like RDP have largely replaced X11 forwarding even on UNIX platforms.

  9. #159

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eudimorphodon View Post
    protocols like RDP have largely replaced X11 forwarding even on UNIX platforms.
    RDP exports the whole desktop screen, X11 can export just the application screen. It's better for my purposes.

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Salt Lake City, UT, USA
    Posts
    367

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eudimorphodon View Post
    X11 is actually a pretty terrible protocol to use on a remote terminal because it wants a lot of bandwidth and does not handle connectivity issues gracefully.
    Yeah, raw X11 isn't good over a slow or unreliable link.

    However, I thought they had introduced some extensions and socket front/back end processing programs that improved X11 over a serial line to be usable (although a serial line is still significantly slower than ethernet). I wasn't able to dig anything up with a quick google search right now, but I'm pretty sure I've come across these things before.

    A project I toss around in my head once in a while is to take the current X server sources and target a graphics terminal back end....

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •