> X performance is _REALLY_ impressive!
> I run only the bare X-server on the 80386. The WM (icewm) runs on a remote box, the applications too, of course. (So the 386 is a "VGA" for the NetBSD/sgimips that does
> the real work).

i'm actually using lots of diskless PCI 486 boxes (and few low-end
pentiums, few VLB 486's) with 8-40MB RAM as graphics terminals. i have
already cut-down distribution for that job (which actually starts only
shell script that prepares everything and runs X server).

on 486/100 with matrox Millenium graphics and 32MB RAM i see only that
differences (compared to local display):

1) stupid written programs works slow on truecolor displays - especially
opera, mozilla that just put plain bitmap on display without using much
(or not at all) any protocol intelligence. truecolor bitmap of 1200x1024
takes over 3.5MB which takes about second to transmit with actual TCP/IP
performance on 486 and putting it do display.

2) there's no way to watch high resolution movies. but most realplayer
clips works smooth anyway :)

3) NAS is somewhat broken i thing - takes lot of CPU power when processing
sound. any other remote sound standard to try?

4) VERY stupid apps - like KDE works terribly slow with their "window
animation" turned on, especially it just repaint taskbar when
minimizing/maximizing instead of do remotely scrolling.



1) and 4) isn't stupid protocol, just stupid software. 4 isn't a problem
for me anyway (i jest tested it, don't use). 1 is a bit but links -g works
fine :)