Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!uxc!uxc.cso.uiuc.edu!uxd.cso.uiuc.edu!uxe.cso.uiuc.edu!mcdonald
From: mcdonald@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: How does the i860 compare as a
Message-ID: <46500057@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: 27 Mar 89 16:37:00 GMT
References: <222551@<1989Mar25>
Lines: 20
Nf-ID: #R:<1989Mar25:222551:uxe.cso.uiuc.edu:46500057:000:795
Nf-From: uxe.cso.uiuc.edu!mcdonald    Mar 27 10:37:00 1989


In article <977@quintus.UUCP> lawrence@quintus.UUCP (Lawrence Byrd) writes:
>This question is motivated by the increasing complexity of window systems
>and the obvious need for ways of speeding them up.  It is depressing that
>one needs a system in the 5 to 10 MIP range before the newer window systems
>(such as various toolkits on top of X) start responding crisply...
Henry spencer replies:

>The cynic would say that we need less-baroque window systems.  The one on
>AT&T's Blit responds crisply with a lousy little 68000 running it.

>Now that we've got RISC hardware, the next thing we need is operating
>systems and window systems to match.

Ah! How about this as a discussion/flame topic:

Resolved: Layered software functionality is sluggish, and therefore
undesirable.

Doug McDonald