Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!munnari.oz.au!murdu!ucsvc!wehi!baxter_a
From: BAXTER_A@wehi.dn.mu.oz
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Amiga mentality
Message-ID: <6700@wehi.dn.mu.oz>
Date: 12 Apr 90 15:24:28 GMT
References: <16296@snow-white.udel.EDU> <11059@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> <6647@wehi.dn.mu.oz> <3452@newton.physics.purdue.edu>
Organization: Walter & Eliza Hall Institute
Lines: 28

In article <3452@newton.physics.purdue.edu>, sho@maxwell.physics.purdue.edu (Sho Kuwamoto) writes:
> 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?


Thanks for the info on the mac. The amiga os CAN manage the repair to
screens, and does so if requested to by the program. The os DOES manage
repair to the workbench screen ( which was what I meant in the orriginal post).

Regards Alan