Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!stanford.edu!neon.Stanford.EDU!pescadero.Stanford.EDU!philip
From: philip@pescadero.Stanford.EDU (Philip Machanick)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware
Subject: Re: price of accelerators (Was Re: system 7, first impressions)
Message-ID: <1991May25.052620.23582@neon.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 25 May 91 05:26:20 GMT
References: <5133@dirac.physics.purdue.edu> <3638@hsi86.hsi.com> <1991May25.013620.26769@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: news@neon.Stanford.EDU (USENET News System)
Reply-To: philip@pescadero.stanford.edu
Organization: Stanford University
Lines: 17

In article <1991May25.013620.26769@m.cs.uiuc.edu>, gillies@m.cs.uiuc.edu (Don Gillies) writes:
|> Yes, system 7.0 is sllllooooooow!  I'd say it's noticeably slower on a
|> Mac II.  Those of you SE/Classic owners thinking of upgrading --
|> consider a 25Mhz board or better yet, an 040 CPU.  The most irritating
|> thing is that boot time seems to have increased by 5-10 seconds at
|> least.  This will not be good for people developing software.

I don't notice any particular slowdown on my mere sub-16MHz
IIcx, barring movement of icons in the Finder and maybe a few
things I don't do often. Boot time doesn't seem to have changed
noticeably. I've heard this complaint about sluggishness though
from a Classic owner. I wonder if some machines are hit more
than others. Could it be that some optimizations were made for
68030 or colour machines, that don't help the lesser models?
-- 
Philip Machanick
philip@pescadero.stanford.edu