Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uwm.edu!csd4.csd.uwm.edu!gblock From: gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: NeXT Press Release Message-ID: <11007@uwm.edu> Date: 13 Apr 91 03:07:12 GMT References: <2323@pdxgate.UUCP> Sender: news@uwm.edu Reply-To: gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu Distribution: comp Lines: 55 Originator: gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu From article <2323@pdxgate.UUCP>, by hal@eecs.cs.pdx.edu (Aaron Harsh): > In article <10922@uwm.edu> gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu writes: > My term program isn't slowed down by PostScript. The serial port is the > bottleneck here. My spreadsheet isn't slowed down by PostScript. Processor > speed is the bottleneck here. These are really horrible examples. I wonder > what Gregory has against DPS? I wonder what he wants to run at blinding > speeds that DPS won't let him do? Ya, right. Okay, let's take the spreadsheet on in particular. DISPLAYING the spreadsheet. It's the processor's fault? It's the fault of the slow, obtrusive, and generally dumb 040. Maybe you should rethink this. I'm talking about anything display intensive. And frankly, it's faster on the amiga because there ISN'T dp. > > I think I've found my answer. Well, Greg, on an old '030 NeXT running 1.0, > DPS was fast enough to run a reasonable flight simulator. But if you're a > serious gamer, and you need a serious game machine, buy an Amiga. Flight simulators don't display much. They just calculate. And since DP takes up little cpu time if it's NOT displaying, it won't get in the way of calculations, will it??? > I don't think it was a hypothetical situation. Thien was saying that it > _did_ slow down and he _did_ notice the difference. Uh, I don't experience any slowdown, how many windows are we talking about here? 14? 15? 20? How many people really use that many windows? And what was running in the background at such a high priority? > Well, yes I have run Mach without DPS. Why? Because I can. When I first > got my system I decided to test it out and see how much DPS would slow > everything down. I wish I had saved the exact timings, but a 45 minute ray- > trace took about 30 seconds less in single user mode (with no Window > Server running). Oh, and I imagine a raytrace is just SOOOOOOO display intensive, huh? I didn't say that DP took up cpu time like a pig when it WASN'T being used, did I??? Duh. > What do you think it is about DPS that slows things down? You can't draw as > many polygons/minute as you could on an Amiga (unless you've got a > NeXTDimension), but it doesn't bring every application you try to run to a > crawl. Interpreted language slows it down. Period. No, you can't draw as many polygons per minute, and I doubt it will, unless you're running a 68090 over a stock 68000. And whether or not it brings it to a crawl doesn't mean it doesn't help to degrade the performance of an otherwise lightningly-wicked computer. -- - gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu - | IBM's brain is on overload, and Apple Gregory Block | needs to be potty-trained. C= may not Toaster+Amiga=The One True DTV | be marketing geniuses, but theyre the ________________________________| best engineers I've seen... -Wubba