Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!shadooby!samsung!usc!henry.jpl.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jpl-devvax!grieggs
From: grieggs@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV (John T. Grieggs)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: LHARC takes over?  Sure hope not!
Message-ID: <6724@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV>
Date: 4 Jan 90 02:41:21 GMT
References: <6716@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV> <5440094@hplsla.HP.COM>
Reply-To: grieggs@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV (John T. Grieggs)
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA
Lines: 19

In article <5440094@hplsla.HP.COM> andyc@hplsla.HP.COM (Andy Cassino) writes:
>Gee, I'd venture the opinion that LHARC runs lots better on the ST than 
>it does on an AT clone!

I thought about this after I posted - the speed of LHARC will depend in
part on the port and the machine it is running on.  It runs quite a bit
faster on the AT, incidentally.  When I get something in LHARC form, I
normally undo it on the AT and tranfer it over via 3.5 inch floppy (if
it fits) or 19,200 baud cable (if larger than 720K).  It seems faster to
un-LHARC on the AT and transfer serially, than to un-LHARC on the ST,
but I have not benchmarked that one...

_john

-- 
John T. Grieggs (Telos @ Jet Propulsion Laboratory)
4800 Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena, Ca. 91109 M/S 301-260A    (818) 354-1453
Uucp: {cit-vax,elroy,chas2}!jpl-devvax!grieggs
Arpa: ...jpl-devvax!grieggs@cit-vax.ARPA