Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!mips!spool.mu.edu!olivea!uunet!cbmvax!amix!ag
From: ag@amix.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.amiga
Subject: Re: U Lowell board question (was Re: AMIGA 3000UX)
Message-ID: <2777@amix.commodore.com>
Date: 28 Jun 91 04:11:19 GMT
References: <1991Jun24.143831.21403@swbatl.sbc.com>
Organization: Commodore-Amiga Unix Development
Lines: 39

jburnes@swbatl.sbc.com (Jim Burnes - 235-7444) writes:
> Geee...after running X on a an A3000 UXD anything would be an improvement
> over the blit algorithms you guys have installed now.

Our R4 server is much better.  We have run it along side GfxBase's
X server that uses the blitter under AmigaDos and find it to be
very close (maybe faster) in the blitting.

> I know X is a resource hog, but Amigados /Intuition runs rings
> around it.

They are two entirely different beasts.  X could be castrated to
intuition's functionality and programmed in assembler then you 
what would you have?  ... well, intuition.

This is not to say intuition is not good and useable.  It is
to say that it is more contricting than X and can take advatages
of such things.  Intuition is also much more tied to the Amiga Hardware
than X will every be.

> The other question is, of course, why
> hasnt CBM stepped up the blitter performance to match the rest of the
> system architecture.

Sounds like a good idea.

> BTW: Why doesnt somebody compile a virtual window manager for Amix.
> With the seriously limited screen real-estate without the lowell card,
> anything would be an improvement.

You mean like the virtual terminal screens, or X?

There are alternatives to a 1950 monitor and the lowell card.  The
A2024 monitor is quite useable and has 1024x1024 resolution.

Pax, Keith
-- 
Keith Gabryelski                                 Advanced Products Group
ag@amix.commodore.com                                 ...!cbmvax!amix!ag