An interesting article but he never mentioned cost. Using TV available components cut cost. Dwight
________________________________ From: cctalk <cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org> on behalf of Grant Taylor via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:04 AM To: cctalk@classiccmp.org <cctalk@classiccmp.org> Subject: Re: Question about "Distributed" in the DFT name. On 11/18/19 10:37 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote: > odd message.. no body.. *facepalm* Operator error. - Multiple messages trying to start a new thread instead of polluting another thread. Let's try this again. On 11/18/19 9:47 AM, Jay Jaeger via cctalk wrote: > I am no expert on the CUT or DFT protocols. Does the "Distributed" in "Distributed Function Terminal" refer to / mean the same thing as the "Distributed" in "Distributed Systems", which are also known as "Open Systems"? > first generation displays were very dumb, later generations were > intelligent and could parse the data stream allowing the creation of > multiple virtual displays along with graphics. these are the ones with > a 25th status row Interesting. > Ken just wrote a blog post about this trying to defuse the nonsense on > the web about the reason why terminals are 80 x 25 > > https://twitter.com/kenshirriff/status/1192497422959665153 I read and enjoyed Ken's article last week. I found it to be very informative. -- Grant. . . . unix || die