Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!ucsd!ucbvax!agate!eos!data.nas.nasa.gov!mustang!nntp-server.caltech.edu!woody
From: woody@nntp-server.caltech.edu (William Edward Woody)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: Not another NeXT defector???!!!
Message-ID: <1990Nov10.192652.29728@nntp-server.caltech.edu>
Date: 10 Nov 90 19:26:52 GMT
References: <1990Nov9.195958.15383@midway.uchicago.edu>
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Lines: 22

In article <1990Nov9.195958.15383@midway.uchicago.edu> gft_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu writes:
>----- 
>[...]
>> 
>>Nope.  A NeXT with an 040 may draw its screen slower than a Mac with an 040.
>
>Q.E.D.  And since the Mac is having to spend less time NOT running Postscript,
>it can do other mosre useful things.

Gosh, I remember people saying things like:  The IBM PC/AT 386 at 16 mhz
runs so *much* faster than the Macintosh because the Macintosh has so
*much* overhead redrawing it's windows and the graphics, that the processor
only spends 10% of it's time doing number crunching.

(No, I didn't make this up; this was JPL's reason why they desided to
implement my simulator on a 386sx with 640K of memory than a Mac IIfx.)

-- 
	William Edward Woody		   | Disclamer:
USNAIL	P.O.Box 50986; Pasadena, CA 91115  |
EMAIL	woody@tybalt.caltech.edu	   | The useful stuff in this message
ICBM	34 08' 44''N x 118 08' 41''W	   | was only line noise.