Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!jarthur!petunia!csuchico.edu!ekrimen
From: ekrimen@ecst.csuchico.edu (Ed Krimen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: Quick ST vs Turbo ST
Message-ID: <1991Feb25.222300.8324@ecst.csuchico.edu>
Date: 25 Feb 91 22:23:00 GMT
References: <1991Feb22.182952.16058@ecst.csuchico.edu> <1991Feb25.182842.6162@uvm.edu>
Sender: news@ecst.csuchico.edu (USENET)
Distribution: comp
Organization: California State University, Chico
Lines: 60

In article <1991Feb25.182842.6162@uvm.edu> pegram@kira.UUCP (Robert B. Pegram) writes:
>From article <1991Feb22.182952.16058@ecst.csuchico.edu>, by
>ekrimen@ecst.csuchico.edu (Ed Krimen):
>
>Previously quoted article deleted, Ed replies:
>
>> Here's what I'd tell any person who's interested in TST and QST: 
>> 
>>If you want all the other goodies that QST has, like background pics 
>>and fills and the file viewer and stuff, then go for it.  However, if
>> you use something like NeoDesk that already has background pics, 
>>fills, and a file viewer, and you like the little bit of screen speed
>> increase that TST gives over QST, then get QST.  
>> 
>> Also keep in mind that QST takes up less memory than TST (if you 
>> don't have the picture installed on QST).  
>> 
>> I bought QuickST and now I don't use it.  I use Turbo ST 'cause it's
>> faster.
>
>Ed, I have both also.  Only one thing confuses me - if TST is faster
>for replacement mono fonts, why is it *much* slower for GDOS fonts and
>fonts using attributes such as italic and bold?  I find the difference
>in speed maddening when I use WordUP 3.0 (still need the last upgrade
>disk 8-) and therefore stick to QST for now.  
>

Hmm, I didn't know QST was faster than TST with GDOS fonts.  Thanks for the
info.

>Try the QST test for text with attributes and/or GDOS to see what I
>mean.  Oh yeah I, run *both* the QST background picture and the
>NEODESK one (that's one reason why I got 2.5 Meg, for frills 8-) that
>way - or if I used the QST fills - I can get a picture (or fill)
>behind my Gem programs as well as on the Desktop.
>

I tried the text with attributes benchmarks included on the QST disk and
QST blew TST away.  I think I mentioned this in my original comparison.

RE 2.5meg: yeah, that's mostly the reason why I have two megs in my STe.
I think I need 2 more meg though. :^)

RE: QST fills: good idea.  Now I've found a reason to use QST. :^)

>Finally (I know, RTFM 8-) is there a way to store and reread NeoDesk
>fill patterns - a RSC file perhaps?
>

Like if you create a fill pattern and want to save it?  I don't know of a
feature especially for saving fills, but you may be able to save a custom
fill pattern in a NIC file.



-- 
         Ed Krimen  ...............................................
   |||   Video Production Major, California State University, Chico
   |||   INTERNET: ekrimen@ecst.csuchico.edu  FREENET: al661 
  / | \  SysOp, Fuji BBS: 916-894-1261        FIDONET: 1:119/4.0