Y'know, that's the first time I've ever seen anyone use X as an example of simple. I suppose I should have elaborated. The simple IT solution, is almost always unacceptable for 'business reasons'.
X is the only system I know of that the server is on the client, and the client is on the server.
Which is oddles of fun, but that back connection trick makes it irritating to NAT.
X wasn't quite the first window system I used, but it was the first I had to use in a 'professional' environment. Troubleshooting X across firewalls is ... entertaining.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Re: No !
Date: 2007-11-06 09:25 pm (UTC)Re: No !
Date: 2007-11-06 09:28 pm (UTC)X was the first windows system I ever used, on a ginormo Sun Computer in a uni lab :) I guess I view it as simple because of that.
Yes I will agree with that the simple solution is always unacceptable. My guys won't give Unbutu a chance and it's so so so spanky and nice :(
Re: No !
Date: 2007-11-06 09:32 pm (UTC)Which is oddles of fun, but that back connection trick makes it irritating to NAT.
X wasn't quite the first window system I used, but it was the first I had to use in a 'professional' environment. Troubleshooting X across firewalls is ... entertaining.