Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uupsi!grebyn!ckp
From: ckp@grebyn.com (Checkpoint Technologies)
Subject: Re: PC X Windows
Message-ID: <1991Mar18.212345.21221@grebyn.com>
Organization: Grebyn Timesharing
References: <9103112137.AB17929@expo.lcs.mit.edu> <1991Mar17.180104.1653@grebyn.com> <N025FC.91Mar17154641@tamuts.tamu.edu>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1991 21:23:45 GMT

In article <N025FC.91Mar17154641@tamuts.tamu.edu> n025fc@tamuts.tamu.edu (Kevin Weller) writes:
>In article <1991Mar17.180104.1653@grebyn.com> ckp@grebyn.com (Checkpoint Technologies) writes:
>> What you could do if you're really looking for application source
>> portability between PCs and Unix/X is to use an interface lib like XVT.
>> Then it's really MS Windows on the PC, but that's not so bad.
>
>Why not just get Unix and X for the PC?
>
>Well, we've been using the terms "PC" and "Unix" somewhat loosely
>around here, haven't we? :-)  Almost as if the two are mutually
>exclusive and MS-DOS is the only operating system for PC's!  They
>aren't and it isn't.

OK, I'm guilty of assuming much about the original poster's intent that
he didn't actually say.  I did assume that he would know that, if he had
enough RAM and enough disk and a 386, then he could run real Unix and
X. I assumed that he was really interested in a way to write MS-DOS
applications, using Xlib or Xt, on his 8088. I apologise.

Incidentally, I'm writing this from a PC running Unix, so I did indeed
know.  But it's true that for many people, running Unix is not an option.
-- 
First comes the logo: C H E C K P O I N T  T E C H N O L O G I E S      / /  
                                                ckp@grebyn.com      \\ / /    
Then, the disclaimer:  All expressed opinions are, indeed, opinions. \  / o
Now for the witty part:    I'm pink, therefore, I'm spam!             \/
