Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!s609
From: s609@cs.utexas.edu (Classroom Account)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: NeXT software size
Message-ID: <1421@saltillo.cs.utexas.edu>
Date: 6 May 91 06:33:24 GMT
References: <-?4Gl5w*1@cs.psu.edu> <11798@uwm.edu> <d*bGl.#*1@cs.psu.edu>
Reply-To: greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu.UUCP (Greg Harp)
Organization: U Texas Dept of Computer Sciences, Austin TX
Lines: 22

[Replies to greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu.  I'm using my other account and I
_never_ read the mail here...]

In article <d*bGl.#*1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes:
>
>In article <11798@uwm.edu> gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block) writes:
>
>   So I imagine that a 500k program on a 68040 3000 will run as slow as a
>   2mb program on a NeXT?  I imagine NOT.
>
>No, it will run at the same speed.  Trick question?

No, it will in fact run faster on the 040 A3000, even if the programs are
the same size.  The system architecture and OS of the A3000 is faster and
more efficient.  This doesn't even count the fact that the NeXT will
probably be swapping _something_ at the time (with NeXTStep, it seems to
always find something to swap).

Be realistic.  No Unix running on the same CPU will compare with a real
time OS like AmigaDOS.

Greg