Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!mintaka!churchy.gnu.ai.mit.edu!rjc
From: rjc@churchy.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Some WB2.0 Peeves
Message-ID: <1991Jun25.112729.27772@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>
Date: 25 Jun 91 11:27:29 GMT
References: <1991Jun23.210647.20152@news.iastate.edu> <1991Jun24.000524.378@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> <1991Jun25.032545.7153@marlin.jcu.edu.au>
Sender: news@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 61

In article <1991Jun25.032545.7153@marlin.jcu.edu.au> cpca@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Colin Adams) writes:
>In article <1991Jun24.000524.378@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> rjc@churchy.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes:
>>In article <1991Jun23.210647.20152@news.iastate.edu> taab5@isuvax.iastate.edu writes:
>>>
>>>   My question is: why can't this be so on an Amiga?  With WB2.0 (or 1.3
>>>or whatever), when you pull down a menu or drag a menu or icon or whatever,
>>>all animation in motion on the current screen stops.  I guess I don't quite
>>>understand why this has to be on a computer with such awesome animation as
>>>an Amiga.  
>>
>>  It has nothing to do with processor power, it has to do with design.
>> [stuff deleted explaining why]
>>the current screen is affected. More often than not, I am irrated by
>>programs that update the screen while a requester up, so menu's would
>>probably be worse. Imagine a program outputting lots of text while you
>>choosing a menu option, you'd have to let go of the menu so you can read the
>>stuff before it scrolls off the window. Also, I use the right mouse
>>button to pause scrolling! This is the #1 reason not to change it.
>
>I find this LockLayer call very annoying.  If you are using WB to
>copy files to a disk using the slow FFS (fu*cked/fraged file system), the
>files are displayed in a window as they are copied.  Also I may be
>formating a disk in another window.  Everything stops if you move a
>window, or access a menu.  Put simply it sucks, and I hope it gets 
>fixed sometime in the distant future (C= have more important things to
>do I'm sure). (I know I could copy files with the quiet option, but
>it's nice to know where you're up to)

  This seems like a matter of opinion, but how long do you stay in
menus or dragging a window? Do you move windows around and can't decide
where to put them? (Does it look good here? no maybe it will look good
over in that corner, nah, it looks better at the bottom)

>
>BTW, Why on earth didn't C= come up with a decent file system? The FFS
>is no better (I can't tell any difference) for floppies and is the
>worst file system I have ever seen.  Having studied and implemented some
>real file systems I'd like to know where C= copied their's from and
>WHY?

  Hmm, the FFS seems much faster for floppies in 2.0. The filesystem has
had many improvements. Why don't you tell us why it sucks? The Amiga
filesystem is slower at scanning directories than it is at locating
a file (e.g. a cp file1 file2 file3 file4 file5 file6 ... file40 destdir
will locate all the files very quickly, but a "list" will take a while.
On the opposite end, IBM dirs come up quickly, but sometimes they take a
long time to open a file, like on a locate bbs with over 500 files
in one of the dirs, it takes 5-9 seconds to "lock" the file down downloading.
) Also, file notification has been added.


>Colin Adams                                  
>Computer Science Department                     James Cook University 
>Internet : cpca@marlin.jcu.edu.au               North Queensland
>'And on the eighth day, God created Manchester'


--
/ INET:rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu     *   // The opinions expressed here do not      \
| INET:r_cromwe@upr2.clu.net  | \X/  in any way reflect the views of my self.|
\ UUCP:uunet!tnc!m0023        *                                              /