Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!bu.edu!polygen!jerry
From: jerry@polygen.uucp (Jerry Shekhel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Amiga bashing
Message-ID: <1162@redford.UUCP>
Date: 27 Jun 91 18:11:45 GMT
References: <1991Jun20.200326.16487@bmerh409.bnr.ca> <1991Jun21.002542.19989@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> <1151@stewart.UUCP> <1991Jun25.123841.1186@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>
Reply-To: jerry@redford.UUCP (Jerry Shekhel)
Organization: Polygen Corporation, Waltham, MA
Lines: 57

rjc@churchy.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes:
>In article <1151@stewart.UUCP> jerry@stewart.UUCP (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
>
>Well, quoting from BYTE, it takes a 33mhz 386 with 4mb of ram to make
>the system usuable. Conclusion: OS/2 is bloated. (Im not saying
>Unix isn't, Unix is very bloated). I've read benchmarks on OS/2 1.0
>and it was slow. OS/2 has no support, Unix already has the market.
>

OS/2 1.0 was indeed slow.  However, today's OS/2 (1.3) is much, much
faster.  It requires only 2MB, but of course, 4MB is better.  It definitely
does NOT require a 33MHz 386 to be usable.  It ran quite well on my old
8MHz 286.  Trust me -- the people at Byte are spoiled by the free hardware
they get.  As far as the OS itself is concerned, it's IMHO much better than
UNIX, even if it lacks some of UNIX's standard utility programs.

>
>Every PC may have "general purpose DMA I/O" lines on the motherboard, but
>not every controller actually uses them.
>

I'm not sure about this, but I ran SCO UNIX with a 7-year-old MFM disk
controller from an original AT, and there were no significant slowdowns
associated with background I/O.

>
>No, maybe it's because this is a very low performance card. I
>wouldn't want Xwindows running in 1024x768 with no co-processor.
>Especially X11R3.
>

Well, I still say you should take a look at it before you make up your
mind.  If you still say you need a coprocessor, you should take a look
at the 8514 clones now available for not much more than VGA.  These
utilize a coprocessor and deliver smoking performance.

>
>SuperVGA without, say a 34010, on UNIX does not make sense. I guess
>I am just spoiled by the Amiga's screen update rate.
>

Too bad the Amiga does not have adequate resolution for GUI's.  Believe
me, at the lower resolutions, VGA does quite well as far as screen updates
go.

>--
>/ INET:rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu     *   // The opinions expressed here do not      \
>
--
+-------------------+----------------------+---------------------------------+
| JERRY J. SHEKHEL  | POLYGEN CORPORATION  | When I was young, I had to walk |
| Drummers do it... | Waltham, MA USA      | to school and back every day -- |
|    ... In rhythm! | (617) 890-2175       | 20 miles, uphill both ways.     |
+-------------------+----------------------+---------------------------------+
|           ...! [ princeton mit-eddie bu sunne ] !polygen!jerry             |
|                            jerry@polygen.com                               |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+