Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!cs.dal.ca!ug.cs.dal.ca!dewolfe From: dewolfe@ug.cs.dal.ca (Colin DeWolfe) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: A3000UX - Born to run UNIX SVR4 Message-ID: <1991Feb17.184144.13175@cs.dal.ca> Date: 17 Feb 91 18:41:44 GMT References: <1991Feb9.032953.14709@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> <1519@pdxgate.UUCP> <8651@gollum.twg.com> Sender: news@cs.dal.ca (USENET News) Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada Lines: 22 Nntp-Posting-Host: ug.cs.dal.ca In article <8651@gollum.twg.com> david@twg.com (David S. Herron) writes: > >Yes, but ... comparing OS architectures says that AmigaDOS will get more >out of any CPU than any Unix-y system. That is .. in both Unix and Mach >the user process scribbling on the screen is isolated in its own virtual >address space away from the virtual address space where the screen >hardware is location. Ergo, any data to be scribbled onto the screen >has to be _copied_ between (at least) two address spaces. This, >all by itself, is quite a CPU drain. > This is not necessarily true. Most of the graphics workstations I've seen implement it as a public area in memory with a fixed address. The IRIS does this, as I'm sure the NeXT and Amiga 3000UX do. > >-- ><- David Herron, an MMDF & WIN/MHS guy, ><- Formerly: David Herron -- NonResident E-Mail Hack ><- ><- MS-DOS ... The ultimate computer virus. -- Colin DeWolfe dewolfe@ug.cs.dal.ca