Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uwm.edu!ogicse!pdxgate!eecs!hal From: hal@eecs.cs.pdx.edu (Aaron Harsh) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: An interesting idea... Message-ID: <2636@pdxgate.UUCP> Date: 15 May 91 07:03:44 GMT References: <1991May7.235145.12420@sbcs.sunysb.edu> <1991May12.190016.28094@sbcs.sunysb.edu> <1991May12.201647.29549@sbcs.sunysb.edu> <91134.022556MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu> <1991May15.061512.13294@leland. Sender: news@pdxgate.UUCP Reply-To: hal@eecs.UUCP (Aaron Harsh) Organization: Roman Catholic Church Lines: 21 In article <1991May15.061512.13294@leland.Stanford.EDU> bard@jessica.stanford.edu (David Hopper) writes: >In article melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >>I keep saying that the 040 is more powerful than the blittter + 030 >>because Amiga users keep commenting that the NeXT cannot do animation. > >My good friend is a NeXT consultant. He can't come up with anything >that shows off the NeXT as a workstation to do animation on. Are those >movies in 'Scene' a standard format? Are they? No? Why not? Because >they're hardcoded into the application? So as a user, then, *I* can't >do animation on the NeXT at all. Hmm... Hardcoded into the application? They're Postscript files in NextLibrary/Images. The names of the files are probably hardcoded into the application, though. I'm not saying that any of the NeXT's are as good as any of the Amigas for doing animation (except for a NeXTDimension system which defeats them all soundly and cost 5 times as much as a A300), but if the animations from scene were good enough to fool you, Display Postscript can't be that slow. Aaron Harsh hal@eecs.cs.pdx.edu