Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcsun!ukc!strath-cs!expya!exua!SAMcinty
From: SAMcinty@exua.exeter.ac.uk (Scott McIntyre)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: Quick ST vs Turbo ST
Message-ID: <1183@exua.exeter.ac.uk>
Date: 28 Feb 91 11:30:32 GMT
References: <alanh.666879747@krypton> <1991Feb19.235931.21308@ecst.csuchico.edu> <1991Feb20.190155.1854@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>
Distribution: comp
Organization: Computer Unit, Exeter University
Lines: 33

In article <1854@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> Christopher M Mauritz writes:
>When I had my ST, I tried both programs.  The speedup is virtually
>the same for both of them.  The only difference I noticed at the
>time was that TurboST seemed to be a little more robust (this was
>about a year ago).  Since the original poster said that his machine
>has 2.5megs of RAM, I don't think size is an issue, but last I checked
>TurboST was a LOT larger than QuickST.  In the end, I chose TurboST
>since I also had 2.5megs of RAM.
>
>ciao,
>
>Chris

A few days ago I got my copy of TurboST from a distributor here in
the UK...and I am amazed.  They are up to version 1.84, if those of
you that have it didn't know...and it can make a drastic improvement
to the working environment of the ST.
 
I've got 4megs, and like Chris, I doubt that size of memory will effect
the running speed much, if at all...but the improvement over no TST
is stunning, especially for file opens and closes, and other simple
things like that.
 
I think the main improvement in this version is that it has been split
into a mono or colour or both program, which you install according
to your system.  I've only got the SM124 so I can't say on speed
increases for the other options.
 
Running on NeoDesk 3.01 it dramatically improves the speed....
 
Highly reccomended...
 
Scott