Re: Command line vs KDE
From: David Wright (david_c_wright_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 11/06/04
- Next message: Geoff F.: "Re: Suse 9.2 a waste of money............."
- Previous message: Abdullah Ramazanoglu: "Re: Suse 9.2 a waste of money............."
- In reply to: filesiteguy: "Re: Command line vs KDE"
- Next in thread: filesiteguy: "Re: Command line vs KDE"
- Reply: filesiteguy: "Re: Command line vs KDE"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 01:11:20 +0100
filesiteguy wrote:
> On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 10:37:11 +0100, David Wright wrote:
>
>
>>
>> The advantage of leaving it in X mode (RL 5) is that you can have
>> multiple terminal sessions open at the same time. When you are learning,
>> this could be useful, you could, for example, have the "man" pages open
>> in one terminal window and an active command line in another to use the
>> command you are reading about.
>
>
> Um, I'm stuck in Windows-land right now, but I believe this can be done.
> IIRC, you switch between up to six virtual terminals by hitting CTRL+ALT+
> PF1/PF2/PF3...
Yes, that is true, but you can't read the parameters in the man session,
whilst you type the command in another, leaving it in X Windows and having
several terminal windows open, you can see both at the same time.
>
> In that sense, you don't have to load X to have multiple screens. I think
> even Dr DOS did this back in the '90s. (Gawd, did I just write, "back in
> the '90s"??)
Never used Dr DOS, we were CP/M (and CP/M86), VMS (multiple sessions using
VT220's and a terminal server, breaking out we could have multiple sessions
on one machine or single sessions on several machines - or multiple
sessions on multiple machines), George, VME, MVS, HP9000, Mac and Windows.
I first started programming for Windows in 1988! I even used Prime back at
college in 86-87.
I particularly hated System/34 and System/36 and RPG III :-/ the AS/400
wasn't much more fun, although I was sort of getting used to IBM's methods
when I was programming on a 3070 in the early 90's. But it never felt
right....
That is excluding all the small machines "without" an OS I owned/used, those
you programmed directly in BASIC or loaded a program using the BASIC Load
command (ZX81, Vic=20, Memotech MTX512, C64, Amstrad CPC6128, CBM Pet,
Acorn Atom/BBC/Electron, Dragon, Tandy TRS80, Apple II, Apple III...). My
first Unix experience was a cut down, single user version running on a Z80
processor around 1982.
>
>> If you are going to be in a mainframe environment, then I guess you will
>> probably be using SSH from a PC running Windows or Linux to talk to the
>> host (unless they are still using hardwired dumb terminals).
>
> Which of course, is in support of your argument and kind of aginst the
> OP's argument. I'd agree that X would be good here. We load up mulitple
> terminal emulators at work to login multiple times to the host.
>
> --
> kai
I use PuTTY from my Windows PC or ssh from linux, it is more secure than a
plain terminal session, although if you aren't on a public network... A
plain terminal/telnet session is frowned upon in most circles these days.
It is nice sitting at one central PC and shutting down all the other
workstations before going to bed ;-)
Dave
- Next message: Geoff F.: "Re: Suse 9.2 a waste of money............."
- Previous message: Abdullah Ramazanoglu: "Re: Suse 9.2 a waste of money............."
- In reply to: filesiteguy: "Re: Command line vs KDE"
- Next in thread: filesiteguy: "Re: Command line vs KDE"
- Reply: filesiteguy: "Re: Command line vs KDE"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|