Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!decvax!decwrl!labrea!rocky!ali
From: ali@rocky.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Blitters again
Message-ID: <188@rocky.STANFORD.EDU>
Date: Sat, 14-Mar-87 00:01:00 EST
Article-I.D.: rocky.188
Posted: Sat Mar 14 00:01:00 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 14-Mar-87 20:06:29 EST
References: <8703110056.AA23131@cory.Berkeley.EDU> <828@vaxb.calgary.UUCP>
Reply-To: ali@rocky.UUCP (Ali Ozer)
Distribution: world
Organization: Stanford University Computer Science Department
Lines: 16

In article <828@vaxb.calgary.UUCP> radford@calgary.UUCP (Radford Neal) writes:
>The real question is whether the blitter is worth its cost. Machines like
>the Mac and the Amiga don't run at the limits of speed for the 68000 family.
>Would you rather have a blitter, or have the processor run 30% faster for
>all operations? The cost may be comparable.

That's true only if you're not multitasking. In a multitasking OS
the CPU might get a lot of use, even if it is faster. The blitter will
assure that the CPU will not be interrupted for various simple but
necessary tasks (such a windowing, sizing, menu operations, etc...).
Of course, if you get a Mac II just to run Mac software than the 68020 is
fast enough such that you won't need a blitter. But, a blitter will be
necessary when running multiple Mac applications under A/UX (if such a thing
will ever be possible).

Ali