Re: "Any of the mailers that you can use on a shell are oxen"

[shamrock@netcom.com (Lucky Green)]

L. Futplex McCarthy wrote:


>Lucky Green writes:
>> Any of the mailers that you can use on a shell are oxen.
>
>So after my dept. tosses all its DECstations in the dumpster tomorrow,
>following your advice, what OS should the new machines support ?  System 7 ?
>AmigaDOS ? VMS ? Windows 95 ? What's the fabulous alternative to Unix about
>which I've inexplicably missed hearing ?

I was afraid of this...

I _love_ UNIX. I do not want to see it replaced. What I claim is that 7bit
terminals and terminal emulators are a piece of history. My message is that
the use of non-ASCII displayable data on the net is growing and that
character based terminals are unable to handle the way information will
(is) be(ing) presented. UNIX can handle graphics just fine, just VT100
can't.

There can be no other lasting solution but to abandon VTwhatever in favor
of bitmaped output devices. Since running X over a dial-up connection is
rather inefficient, and considering the significant computing power of the
PC's that are now being underused as dumb terminals, processing the data
locally seems to be a sensible solution.



-- Lucky Green <shamrock@netcom.com>
   PGP encrypted mail preferred.