The "loop and a half"

[Mikhail V]

bartc wrote:
>> But as it happens, I could make computers talk to each when I was working
>> with microprocessors, using home-made interfaces, rs232 or rs423. I
wouldn't
>> know how to do it now because it depends on other people's over-complex
>> tech.

Chris Angelico wrote:
> I don't know if you're an idiot or a troll. Using TCP/IP networking is
> pretty simple (at least if you're using a real language - your own toy
> languages might have made it unnecessarily hard, for all I know),
> hardly "over-complex" by comparison to RS-232 programming.

I suppose he is a programmer who is just not much interested in
networking and what you can do in beloved console.
And if you have remote editing you still need
to work in a line by line input?

Just for people like me who know nothing about networking,
can you popularly explain the :

> Have you ever worked on a slow remote session where a GUI is
> completely impracticable (or maybe even unavailable), and redrawing
> the screen is too expensive to do all the time?

So where does the redrawing happen? The machine youre sitting on (let's
call it 'A') and send remote commands or retrieving text files? Or the
redrawing must be synced on both A and
the remote machine? If so, then why so?
How does the bandwidth implies that you must edit stuff in the console on
A?
And not in a nice editor with normal fonts?
Am i missing something or your 'A' machine cannot use graphics? Even on 386
computers
there was graphics and keybord&mouse input. That is definitely what I would
want
for editing files. Yes I've tried line by line eding back in DOS times and
that really sucks.


Mikhail