Re: Exciting developments in Commodore world -- Ideas for GS dev?

[wsmith@NOSPAM.ctron.com (Will Smith)]

On Wed, 08 Apr 1998 10:41:15 +0200, Ole Voss <joker@on-line.de> wrote:

|>You're quite right - most things can be done without involving a GUI.... and
|>often things can be done very much faster when programming them decently -
|>take a look at Win95. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
from which point of view?  when Win95 first came out, i kinda liked
it.  i thought that (in the case of M$) if they threw enough darts at
the board, they were bound to hit the bullseye.  now that time has
elapsed and i've been able to see some of the flaws in the system (and
NT, for that matter), i know that they're going to have to keep
throwin' them-there darts....  8\

|>I use it everyday for the things I do, and although I have a PII-266 stocked
|>with 128MB RAM, 8MB Graphics and 3DFX card etc - it's quite a power system, it
|>probably ran faster when using MSDOS..... shucks. Like I say to people I know
|>laughing about the Apple II "It does what it's supposed to do faster than the
|>PC!".
|>Agree or not?

AGREED!  it would have to depend largely on the application, though.
there are some things that (on a Wintel box) require a lot of overhead
because the programmers either got sloppy or were trying to be
"clever" in how they did something.  when the Apple ][ series was
still (actively) being sold, programmers didn't have a lot of overhead
to deal with, so they were forced to write tight code.  these days, we
take the old systems, add RAM and a few other things that we've come
to EXPECT (like a hard drive!), and lo! there are more resources, so
the applications on the Apple perform a bit better....  :)

---
William Smith
#include <disclaimer.h>
Remove the obvious when sending e-mail...