Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!violet.berkeley.edu!steve
From: steve@violet.berkeley.edu (Steve Goldfield)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: SuperPaint 2.0 impressions...
Message-ID: <21373@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: 9 Mar 89 16:08:33 GMT
References: <5952@bsu-cs.UUCP> <9799@ihlpb.ATT.COM>
Sender: usenet@agate.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 22

In article <9799@ihlpb.ATT.COM> hardy@ihlpb.ATT.COM (Hardy) writes:
#>
#>Can anyone tell me how big SuperPaint 2.0 is compared to 1.0?  When I
#>upgraded to MacWrite 5.0, I was shocked to see that it had grown from
#>70K to 170K!  (As if things weren't ALREADY getting tight on my floppies.)
#>I'd like to know if I would have a similar problem with SuperPaint 2.0.
#>My impression is that this would NOT be an appropriate program to use
#>on a 512KE.
#>
#>thanks -- mark

SuperPaint 2.0 is 516,017 bytes. 

SuperPaint 1.0 was 165,034 bytes.

However, the suggested memory size has increased from 582K to
700K.

So, yes, if you are using floppies, you'll have to dedicate one
to SuperPaint 2.0, unless you have one of the new 1.6M drives.

Steve Goldfield