From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265437AbTFMRWs (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jun 2003 13:22:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265452AbTFMRWr (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jun 2003 13:22:47 -0400 Received: from 81-2-122-30.bradfords.org.uk ([81.2.122.30]:8320 "EHLO 81-2-122-30.bradfords.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265437AbTFMRWm (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jun 2003 13:22:42 -0400 Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 18:43:23 +0100 From: John Bradford Message-Id: <200306131743.h5DHhNdv000312@81-2-122-30.bradfords.org.uk> To: john@grabjohn.com, jsimmons@infradead.org, terje_fb@yahoo.no Subject: Re: Real multi-user linux Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > The next stage will be non PC boards supporting more than > > one graphics display output. Every now and then you see such a > > board. I seen a 8 graphics chip board with 8 video outputs. > As the number of terminals increases you might want to investigate the > possibility of terminal driving units connected to the main box, like > this: [snip diagram] Of course, those terminal driving units could actually then just be replaced with multiple-display-and-keyboard-enabled X servers. So, instead of trying to add more and more terminals to a single box, you could stick with four-headed X servers, which would probably be more scalable. John.