Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!noose.ecn.purdue.edu!newton.physics.purdue.edu!maxwell.physics.purdue.edu!sho
From: sho@maxwell.physics.purdue.edu (Sho Kuwamoto)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Amiga mentality
Message-ID: <3452@newton.physics.purdue.edu>
Date: 11 Apr 90 04:35:38 GMT
References: <16296@snow-white.udel.EDU> <11059@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> <6647@wehi.dn.mu.oz>
Sender: news@newton.physics.purdue.edu
Reply-To: sho@maxwell.physics.purdue.edu.UUCP (Sho Kuwamoto)
Organization: Purdue Univ. Physics Dept., W. Lafayette, IN
Lines: 20

In article <6647@wehi.dn.mu.oz> BAXTER_A@wehi.dn.mu.oz writes:
>In article <11059@bsu-cs.bsu.edu>, mithomas@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Michael Thomas Niehaus) writes:
>> So the Amiga feels faster.  Can anyone answer the question of "why"?
>My guess is the blitter repairs the holes in uncovered windows a whole
>lot faster than refreshing the whole screen.
>Regards Alan

Heh?  I agree, the blitter is probably the reason.  However, the mac
does *not* refresh the entire screen when a window is uncovered.  It
updates only the portions of the window which were uncovered, even
if that portion is oddly shaped (semi-circular, say).

When windows are obscured on the Amiga, does the OS keep around a
bitmap of the covered area, or is the program responsible for
remembering what was there?  The mac uses the latter technique which
saves on memory, but loses on speed.

-Sho
--
sho@physics.purdue.edu  <<-- the *whole* screen?