Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!mips!pacbell.com!ucsd!ucrmath!hubbell!rhyde
From: rhyde@hubbell.ucr.edu (randy hyde)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: Re: Geoworks
Message-ID: <15187@ucrmath.ucr.edu>
Date: 12 Jun 91 00:18:40 GMT
References: <289.285469A9@weyr.FIDONET.ORG> <1991Jun11.122522.26314@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> <1991Jun11.210447.18721@actrix.gen.nz>
Sender: news@ucrmath.ucr.edu
Reply-To: rhyde@hubbell.ucr.edu (randy hyde)
Lines: 7

>> Why not C++?

If you're willing to live with such inefficiencies, why not stick to
windows 3.0?
GEOWORKS got its speed by code (well) written in assembly.  If people starting
writing apps in C or C++ for it, the performance of those apps would be nowhere
near as good as the GEOWORKS apps.