Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!bu.edu!m2c!viewlog.viewlogic.com!peter
From: peter@suntan.viewlogic.com (Peter Colby)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: TicksCount
Message-ID: <1991Jun12.184613.3650@viewlogic.com>
Date: 12 Jun 91 18:46:13 GMT
References: <5721@hemuli.tik.vtt.fi> <1991Jun11.092513.14329@cs.uri.edu>
Sender: news@viewlogic.com
Organization: Viewlogic Systems, Inc., Marlboro, MA
Lines: 29
Originator: peter@hari
Nntp-Posting-Host: hari


In article <1991Jun11.092513.14329@cs.uri.edu>, reynhout@cs.uri.edu (Andrew Reynhout) writes:
|> In article <5721@hemuli.tik.vtt.fi> aku@tik.vtt.fi (Arto Kujala) writes:
|> >Is there a way to get more accurate time than function TickCount
|> >gives?
|> >
|> >1/100 sec precision would be appropriate.
|> 
|>    Unfortunately, you'd need discrete hardware to do this.  The Mac gets its
|> clock signals from the 60Hz AC input.  Of course, it would be very *simple*
|> hardware...perhaps there is something out there.
|> 
|>    Hmm.  In europe, where the freq of the AC is 50Hz, does TickCount() have a
|> 1/50sec resolution?

	huh?????
	Sorry, but the mac doesn't get anything from the 60HZ AC input but
raw power. The logic - including the clock - all runs on filtered DC! How do
you think the poor machine manages to keep accurate time off the battery when
disconnected from an AC source? Sheesh!!
	Tickcount() is based off the internal clock which is driven by a DC
crystal oscillator so it still delivers 1/60sec resolution. I believe the
time manager offers a timer resolution of 1/1000 sec or better.
	No electronics wizard here, I am
	PC
-- 
      (O)(O)(O)(O)(O)(O)(O)(O)(O)     (O)(O)(O)(O)(O)(O)(O)(O)(O)
      (O) !the doctor is out! (O)     (0) peter@viewlogic.com (0)
      (O)(O)(O)(O)(O)(O)(O)(O)(O)     (O)(O)(O)(O)(O)(O)(O)(O)(O)