Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!husc6!cfa!wyatt
From: wyatt@cfa.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.windows.news
Subject: Re: NeWS speed
Message-ID: <533@cfa.cfa.harvard.EDU>
Date: Fri, 15-May-87 12:59:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: cfa.533
Posted: Fri May 15 12:59:00 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 16-May-87 15:16:46 EDT
References: <1116@mit-amt.MEDIA.MIT.EDU>
Organization: Harvard-Smithsonian Ctr. for Astrophysics
Lines: 24

> 
> A friend of mine said that AI group at MIT is never going to be running
> NeWS on many workstations. One of the reasons he gave was that X will
> always be at least a factor of 3 faster than NeWS.
> 
> I started thinking about all of the atoi() that news always has to do, 
> and the fact that it is interperted, and am beginning to think that he
> might be right. Is there any truth to this?

I suspect the above factor of 3 refers to the emulation of X underneath
NeWS, which makes sense, since you are going through more layers.

I also suspect this is why Sun has since decided to provide a native X V11
system, as well as NeWS, as well as (presumeably) the X under NeWS.

As to comaprisons of native V11 and NeWS on the same hardware, does 
anyone have real tests? Can they easily be compared at all?
-- 

Bill    UUCP:  {seismo|ihnp4}!harvard!cfa!wyatt
Wyatt   ARPA:  wyatt@cfa.harvard.edu
         (or)  wyatt%cfa@harvard.harvard.edu
      BITNET:  wyatt@cfa2
        SPAN:  17410::wyatt   (this will change in June)