Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!rutgers!ucsd!nosc!baron!ryptyde!dant
From: dant@ryptyde.UUCP (Daniel Tracy)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Amiga's Future
Message-ID: <44@ryptyde.UUCP>
Date: 10 Jun 91 08:54:38 GMT
References: <5092@orbit.cts.com> <1991Jun8.012801.22773@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> <50206@ut-emx.uucp> <6qyh!w@rpi.edu>
Reply-To: dant@ryptyde.UUCP (Daniel Tracy)
Organization: Ryptyde Timesharing
Lines: 10

Responding to the following:

"Yes, why, I wouldn't know either.  The displays would crawl.  Since only one
graphics coprocessor could be active, the six displays would just bog the
system down horrendously (at least in 24 bit and 8 bit modes).  Perhaps in
1, 2 and maybe 4 bit modes you'd get acceptable speed out of them, though."

You don't know what you're talking about. Each monitor is controlled by its
own video board and given its own portion of the bitmap only. Try not to
relate Amiga problems with the Macintosh world.