home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.apollo
- Path: sparky!uunet!ukma!darwin.sura.net!spool.mu.edu!cserver!edsi!chuck
- From: chuck@edsi.plexus.COM (Chuck Tomasi)
- Subject: Re: Need Some Advice..
- Organization: Enterprise Data Systems Incorporated, Appleton WI
- Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 12:54:52 GMT
- Message-ID: <1992Nov10.125452.16921@edsi.plexus.COM>
- References: <1992Nov5.163551.2615@ttsi.lonestar.org> <1992Nov5.201427@helix.nih.gov> <1992Nov9.192837.17737@bcars6a8.bnr.ca>
- Lines: 29
-
- djf@bnr.ca (Duane Fowler) writes:
-
- :)In article <1992Nov5.201427@helix.nih.gov>, rvenable@helix.nih.gov (Richard M. Venable) writes:
-
- :)So what sorts of thing could DM do that X can't?
-
- For the most part I agree with your statements that X is superior in
- many ways (including documentation) to DM. The consistency in look and
- feel between applications is a major advantage. True, not all
- applications act the same under X, but having the same pull downs,
- pushbuttons, etc. from toolkits makes it a lot easier to write programs
- in that motif.
-
- DM has a few nice things that X doesn't. You mentioned scrollback.
- Xterm has a limit on scrollback. DM pads are darned near infinite.
-
- DM also has a way of breaking a pad into multiple independently
- scrolling windows. Those who use TBR from Workstation Solutions know
- what I'm talking about when they see the Op. Ex. window in action.
- /etc/nfs/lb_admin is also another variation of this.
-
- I'm all for going to X, but there are a few things I will miss about DM.
- Once I get all my stations from Domain to HP-UX I'll be even happier,
- but that is a long time and a lot of work down the road...
- --
- Chuck Tomasi | "A munk a clone and a Ferengi
- chuck@edsi.plexus.COM | decide to go bowling together..."
- spool!cserver!edsi!chuck | -Data "The Outrageous Okana"
- ------<Enterprise Data Systems Incorporated, Appleton Wisconsin>------
-