Re: METAL is painfully slow?

[bishop@acs.ucalgary.ca (Lionel R. Clark)]

In article <24321@drutx.ATT.COM> dvac@druwa.ATT.COM (Daniel Vachon) writes:
>
>All this talk about METAL...Well, I will say that if you are running on an
>un-accelerated Apple //e, or even a Transwarped //e....I would not recommend
>METAL/FV for you.  I ran a Metal BBS for about a year (used to run on ACOS),
>and the switch ended up driving away a lot of users because it took forever
>to do many things that used to be quite fast under ACOS.  If you have an
>8MHz //gs, METAL is a great way to go....But if you are on a budget with a 
>normal //e...I would not suggest METAL as it is quite slow (painfully so, 
>really...)  

	Gee.  One town, two systems running on identical GSes.
One was a METAL site, the other was a PTSE Acos site.  If your
story holds true, then the METAL site should have been TOTALLY
dead and the acos site should heva been really busy...
Unfortunately, that was NOT the case.  My metal BBS fielded ten
TIMES the calls as his Acos BBS.

>My 1 MHz ACOS system ran about 5 times faster than by 3.8MHz METAL system.
>I have a //e w/1Meg RAM, 80 meg scsi HD, Transwarp //e (SCSI port was 
>accelerated), and a USR HST.   The one thing that is REALLY nice that METAL
>has and ACOS doesn't is the really slick full-screen editor that METAL has.

	Gee.  No speed problems here.  Five times faster, you
say?  Did you measure that value, or is it just a guess?  Hmm?
Never seemed to have a speed problem here at all...

>-Dan Vachon

-- 
 - Bishop
  
         "Pain is Life" -- CF OCdt Cadieu, BOTCh 9111
    (Email replies please, as my news gate is at least 14 days behind.)