Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!lethe!yunexus!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!helios!bcm!convex!linac!att!cbnews!nrc
From: nrc@cbnews.att.com (N. Richard Caldwell)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: Quick ST vs Turbo ST
Message-ID: <1991Feb28.200806.15390@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 28 Feb 91 20:08:06 GMT
References: <5440158@hplsla.HP.COM>
Organization: AT&T Network Systems  -  Columbus, Ohio
Lines: 45

From article <5440158@hplsla.HP.COM>, by andyc@hplsla.HP.COM (Andy Cassino):
> 
> Just last night (Feb25) I was on GEnie and checked out the TurboST and
> CodeHead topics for grins. I learned a few things I was not aware of, 
> and apparently darekm@microsoft.UUCP (Darek MIHOCKA) is not either, for 
> he writes:

Darek Mihocka is not the best source of information about SoftTrek or
Turbo ST.  This is not the first time he has been mistaken about
the features or compatibility of Turbo ST.  I don't believe he does 
so purposely but his hype does get a bit thick at times.

I recommend that anyone who is looking for a software accelerator
obtain the latest version of the demos for the various software
accelerators and and run controlled benchmarks on their own
applications.  Benchmarks obtained from a dedicated benchmarking
program - particularly one written by one of the companies who's
product is being compared - may have little relation to your real 
world results.

I found that all of my applications were faster with Turbo ST by a
much wider margin than the benchmarks might lead you to expect.  This
was something like Turbo ST 1.8 vs. Quick ST 2.0.  Don't take my word 
for it, I'm a long time Turbo ST beta tester and no less biased than 
Derek, try it for yourself.  Find out for sure which one is better for
_you_, not for some benchmark.
  
> | Considering that Softrek (and other software developers
> | such as the Codeheads) have told the ST community to not expect any
> | new software from them, I find it difficult to understand how you could
> | recommend their product.
> 
> Wayne Buckholdt (who *is* SofTrek) is acquiring a TT and hi-res multisync 
> monitor to support these new systems.

It may be that Wayne meant not to expect any _new_ software, as
opposed to updates to old software.  Considering that the TT is
supposed to be ST compatible I wouldn't call a program tweeked to 
run on it "new software".   


"Don't drive too slowly."                 Richard Caldwell
                                          AT&T Network Systems
                                          att!cbnews!nrc
                                          nrc@cbnews.att.com