Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!csn!boulder!horton.Colorado.EDU!raney
From: raney@horton.Colorado.EDU (Scott Raney)
Subject: Re: (Ne)X(T) Terminals---a hot product idea?
Message-ID: <1991Apr29.163050.28095@colorado.edu>
Sender: news@colorado.edu (The Daily Planet)
Nntp-Posting-Host: horton.colorado.edu
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
References: <1991Apr25.084827.1475@math.ucla.edu> <SCOTT.91Apr27094820@texnext.gac.edu> <1991Apr29.021126.6444@wimsey.bc.ca>
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1991 16:30:50 GMT
Lines: 17

One thing being neglected in all this is client-side horsepower.  You
can't hang too many terminals (X or DPS) off of a workstation before
you need another workstation.  I've used Sparcstations that had a
bunch of people doing number crunching and running X-based CAD clients
on it and response time can get a little long.  If NeXT did a DPS
terminal, they would also likely have to build a multiprocessor system
with better disk bandwidth for sites that were going to hook up more
than a few terminals. A single 68040 with SCSI ain't up to much more.

That's right, NeXT in the mainframe business.

Scott
-- 
======================================================================
Scott Raney                            No other person or organization
raney@boulder.colorado.edu              can be held responsible for my
(303)499-9855                                opinions or actions
