🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Oct6.121213.20420@porthos.cc.bellcore.com> jona@iscp.bellcore.com (Jon Alperin) writes:
>
> Yeah,, but try to explain that the X Client runs on the network server,
>talking to the X server running on a workstation client. 8-}
>
> Client/Server is at best ill-defined, since it assumes a host/terminal
>paradigm, where the client is simply performing some (few) tasks that 
>used to be handled by a host. 


Wellllllll, sort of.  I've had the most success explaining any notion
of client-server (including file servers and X Window) by using the
simplifying definition that the server controls some resource and the
client makes request of the server for the resource.  (I don't believe
this restricts the definition to host/terminal systems.) In fact, the
true test is when it's used to describe an X-capable device running
jobs on a compute server while reading and writing files to file
servers.  I've used the above definition and system description with 
success in a number of Intro. UNIX courses I've taught when I describe some
of what people may see in the real world outside of a single-host system.

The definition also seems to work when I use it to describe the
client-server applications we're currently developing; mostly data query
and update from desktops (Macs & PCs) to SQL RDBMS servers.  Anybody want
to talk about trying to develop, debug, profile, and test applications that
span two distinct platforms/OSs over a communications/connectivity link?
(I sure do! :-)

_______________________________________________________________________________
Steve Boyle                  |     "...Actually, FORTRAN was the language
sboyle@mitre.org             |      of choice for the same reason that
The MITRE Corporation        |      three-legged races are popular."
Burlington Road              |
Bedford, MA. 01730           |             - Ken Thompson
(617) 271-2977               |               1984 Turing Award Lecture