Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uupsi!sugar!peter From: peter@Sugar.NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva) Subject: Re: Some WB2.0 Peeves Message-ID: <1991Jun24.103732.29528@Sugar.NeoSoft.com> Organization: Sugar Land Unix -- Houston, TX References: <1991Jun23.210647.20152@news.iastate.edu> Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1991 10:37:32 GMT In article <1991Jun23.210647.20152@news.iastate.edu> taab5@isuvax.iastate.edu writes: [screen not locked while doing window handling under X windows] > My question is: why can't this be so on an Amiga? In a word: overhead. There are good reasons why the Amiga window system is more responsive on an Amiga 500 than X on a SparcStation 1. This is one of them. On the Amiga, menus are handled specially to cut down layer creation and screen fragmentation. Moving the window outline is done similarly, for the same reason. > I guess I don't quite > understand why this has to be on a computer with such awesome animation as > an Amiga. There are slight performance differences between a MIPS R3000 and a 7 MHz 68000. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' . 'U` "Have you hugged your wolf today?"