Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!pollux.usc.edu!kurtzman
From: kurtzman@pollux.usc.edu (Stephen Kurtzman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hypercard
Subject: Re: I wish to compile a list of all the short comings of SUPERCARD
Message-ID: <18303@usc.edu>
Date: 7 Jul 89 01:50:15 GMT
References: <1364@atux01.UUCP>
Sender: news@usc.edu
Reply-To: kurtzman@pollux.usc.edu (Stephen Kurtzman)
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Lines: 11

In article <1364@atux01.UUCP> jlc@atux01.UUCP (J. Collymore) writes about
SuperCard deficiencies. One of which is:

>4)  The scripts, whether converted from HyperCard or created in SuperEdit, run
>    MUCH SLOWER than the same (funtionality-wise) stack written in HyperCard.

This is surprising. So how do they justify the name adjective "Super"?
I would have thought Silicon Beach would have addressed script execution
speed since it is a common complaint about HyperCard. Perhaps HyperCard
will be similar to Algol in that it will be a vast improvement over all of
its successors.