Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!wuarchive!psuvax1!news From: melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: NeXT/Amiga Flamage: Get a life. Message-ID: Date: 8 Apr 91 21:30:33 GMT References: <46833@ut-emx.uucp> <1991Apr8.183809.16056@cs.cornell.edu> Sender: news@cs.psu.edu (Usenet) Organization: Penn State Computer Science Lines: 25 In-Reply-To: johnhlee@CS.Cornell.EDU's message of Mon, 8 Apr 1991 18:38:09 GMT Nntp-Posting-Host: sunws5.sys.cs.psu.edu In article <1991Apr8.183809.16056@cs.cornell.edu> johnhlee@CS.Cornell.EDU (John H. Lee) writes: I use the Unix shell, vi, VMS DCL and LSE for almost all of my for-pay and school work. You can't tell me that I'm just as productive on a NeXT (that I'm forced to use for a class) as I am on a X Window workstation or my A2000. Almost everybody in my class (Practical Distributed O/S Systems) develops the solution to assignments on other computers (workstations) and then does the final execution on the NeXTs. Why do you even run your program on the NeXT if you develop it on another system, and why would you be more productive on a X Window workstation? When you're dealing with multiple windows for interacting processes, your edit session(s) windows, and your compile window, a slow GUI is a slow death. I used Emacs so I really don't have multiple windows for development. I bagged vi several years ago. I do have several shells opened up, though, so I can log onto other machines. The slowness of the GUI is attributed to swapping to disk, it isn't a reflection of Display Postscript. If you lauch 5 different things and you run out of real memory, there is no alternative except for the system to page. -Mike