[sugar] Shared Terminal Idea

[Walter Bender]

Etoys has a DMX-like feature built in -- you can tile workspaces or
share a single workspace -- but it is more than what I was thinking.
The idea is not so much to make a large virtual space -- although
there could be times when that could be useful -- but rather to simply
break an activity out into multiple views across different machines,
e.g., using a remote machine to serve as the debugging console for
something you are building in Pippy, etc. I don't think these sorts of
things need be bandwidth intensive at all.

-walter

On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 3:54 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
<bmschwar at fas.harvard.edu> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  Hash: SHA1
>
>  Walter Bender wrote:
>  | In general, it'd be great to be able to share like this for most
>  | activities. Another way of thinking about sharing would be to share
>  | resources of multiple laptops to get a bigger workspace, e.g., some
>  | times it is useful to have multiple xterms open. This would seemingly
>  | be simple to do in the context of the X Window System if we wrap the
>  | appropriate Sugar/Collaboration model around it. I can think of lots
>  | of activities that are someone space constrained at times--having the
>  | option of a larger or multiple screens--putting the debugging output
>  | on a separate laptop, for example. Future feature wish list.
>
>  What you are describing is very similar to the Distributed Multihead X
>  system (DMX, also called Xdmx).
>  See, for example, the pictures in
>
> (http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/library/os-mltihed/index.html)
>
>  There has been renewed interest in DMX among X developers, especially in
>  the context of Multiple-Pointer X (MPX) and the new rendering plans.  If
>  you think this is of interest to Sugar, it might be worth talking to an X
>  expert.
>
>  For the record, I think that this is probably not a good idea for Sugar.
>  DMX requires a potentially huge amount of network bandwidth, with little
>  tolerance for latency or packet loss.  It also seems inevitably,
>  tremendously complicated for a user to manage.  But don't listen to me;
>  talk to someone who actually knows where the DMX work is headed.
>
>  - --Ben
>
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>  Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
>  Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
>  iD8DBQFIKfICUJT6e6HFtqQRAvBfAJkBxjAd1TofcLBAaS3Os+aCNhamHQCgmEe6
>  Wum2SQFNByhhuXN6zHTNCRc=
>  =/2lk
>  -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>