Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!uxa.cso.uiuc.edu!jb10320
From: jb10320@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Desdinova)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: Re: Apple II / Mac discusson (was:Re:Official"No New Apple II's")
Message-ID: <1990Nov3.121156.7420@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: 3 Nov 90 12:11:56 GMT
References: <9624.apple.net@pro-angmar>
Sender: news@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (News)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Lines: 31

In article <9624.apple.net@pro-angmar> kgreen@pro-angmar.UUCP (Kevin Green) writes:
>In-Reply-To: message from unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU
>
>Unknown, 
> Aside from better resolution, the Mac can multitask. Processor speed is
>higher. Numerous other little things that you find out about looking at Mac
>magazines. 

   The Mac CANNOT multitask. MultiFinder is NOT multiprogramming...
  It's a major hack whose usefulness in extremently limited by the
  fact that the OS is not designed to multitask in any way.
  Which one has better resolution? They're all different!  "Processor speed
  is higher" has been proven over and over a null statement.  MHz does
  not imply speed (witness my initial attempt at a RISC processor, which
  while running 25MHz, is only about 4 times as fast as an Apple II!
  Purists, please note that there is no pipelining implemented- I'm
  simply using this as an example).


>that most of the nifty software that the the Mac has can and should be ported
>to the //gs.
 What about that nifty software Mac people would like to run, but can't!
Why? Becuase they don't have a 65816 in their box.


--
Jawaid Bazyar               | Blondes in big black cars look better wearing
Senior/Computer Engineering | their dark sunglasses at night. (unk. wierdo)
jb10320@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu    |      The gin, the gin, glows in the Dark!
   Apple II Forever!        |                             (B O'Cult)
Comp.Sys.Apple2- Home of the Unofficial Apple II Developer Support Team (DST)