5 ms·
am I the only one who prefers a non-framebuffer console?
by Aloha 6y ago
am I the only one who prefers a non-framebuffer console?
- throwaway2048 6y agoIts not even an option on newer UEFI machines, all consoles are a framebuffer.
- kjs3 6y agoNot the only one, but one of the few. glances at the VT-320 hooked to the OBSD firewalls
- Aloha 6y agoI have a WY-185 sitting around, I feel like I should set it up again, on a terminal server maybe
- kjs3 6y agoIt's a moral imperative. :-)
- rbanffy 6y agoAn elegant tool for a more civilized age.
- Aloha 6y agoits also alot of effort and consumes more of my limited desk space ;-)
- rbanffy 6y agoWhat is desktop space compared to having a proper console? Do it! I'm personally after a small HP terminal that was nicknamed the "munchkin" for its diminutive size. My chances of finding one that can be shipped here are slim, but from the US you could have a better chance.
- ansible 6y agoI hate the framebuffer console on most of the systems I have. In some cases, the font is way too small. Changing the font size is confusing, because it isn't clear what size of text you will end up with. And on some of the systems I have, the framebuffer scrolls so slow!!!!! Drives me up a wall. If it takes more than a tiny fraction of a second to display an entire screen of text, that is too slow!!!! Hate it, hate it, hate it.
- icedchai 6y agoSun workstation framebuffer consoles were like this. Slow scrolling! I'm thinking mainly of Sun-3's and early SparcStations...
- JdeBP 6y agoAlmost certainly not, but on the other hand there are people who conversely enjoy proper boldface and italics, as Unix text processing tools encompassed pretty much from the get-go; or more than 256 different glyphs in use at once, with none of that faffing about with loadable Unicode-to-8-bit character maps; or MouseText. (-: