From: johnsd2@jec316.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots
Reply-To: johnsd2@jec316.its.rpi.edu.its1
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 04:26:40 GMT

In article 1925@nosc.mil, discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar) writes:
>In article <r!y1nsd@rpi.edu> johnsd2@jec326.its.rpi.edu.its1 writes:
>>In article 722096841@gmd.de, strobl@gmd.de (Wolfgang Strobl) writes:
>>>In <6dv1j!j@rpi.edu> johnsd2@vccnw07.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson) writes:
>>
>>>>(why do I say its not fast enough? Because the PCheads
>>>>here seem to feel that way- otherwise they'd have blown away my comment
>>>>about Windows having a slow  GDI by demonstrating that it doens't;
>>>>instead they say you can use an accelerated graphics board...)
>>>
>>>Then let's start to compare lines/second. Your turn. :-)
>>
>>:) I dont know how many lines per second, nor does it matter terribly.
>>(what these things do a lot of its blitting, actually..) I worry more
>>about how snappy it feels.
>>
>
>Yikes!  This is so idiotic.  Here, Wolfgang is saying "ok, let's use a
>tangible metric to judge the speed of the graphical interface" and
>Daniel is saying that he prefers a totally subjective view of which one
>is "snappier"!
>
>Daniel.  My C64 is Sooooooo much faster than you Macintosh... because it
>feels so much snappier.  :)

Im sure it doesn't use a co-processor too! :) However you are misrepresenting
what I said (if indeed you know what it was); see the end of this
article about that. Certainly I dont think <adequate interface performance>
= <fast computer>; You I suspect are reading that in bacause you see
that I feel that <adequate interface performance> = <very important thing>
and you (I, once again, suspect) feel that the one important thing is
overall speed. Hence I must feel that the two things are related, so
I must really mean <adequate interface performace> = <fast computer overall>,
a rediculous assertion. Which you proceed to flame me for lightly.

Incidentally, I do count it a point in the favor of your C64 that it
feels snappy wo/ an accelerated video card. (particularly since
such things arent availiable for a C64 :) )

>Seriously, most of the misunderstandings about feelings regarding operating
>environments is due to poor definitions--including definitions based
>solely on subjective feelings.  I think that if you really DO believe
>that the Macintosh is so much faster than the PC (or vice versa), then
>a set of quantitative metrics should be run (comp.benchmarks?).

I do not so believe.

This is just about the fact that I said it would be better if windows
did not need an accelerated graphics card. I think its a Mac advantage
not to so require. (for what thats worth)

(no, I dont know what comparing line drawing rates have to do with that)

>Wolfgang seemed reasonable in suggesting line/second (scrolling a window,
>I gather)

Oh, I thought he meant # of lines the graphics system can draw per second.
You know, the straight things. That why I said blitting was a better
thing to compare anyway.

> since a lot of software (spreadsheets, telecommunications, and
>wordprocessor--not to mentional terminal emulators) use scrolling a
>*lot*.  He also said "let us begin" suggesting that -he- did not consider
>the line/second metric all-encompassing.

Well, good. Im not quite clear on the point of the test tho.
I see "fast enough" in a very subjective sence; do you have
a objective way to tell if something is fast enough?

Presumably you'd want to prove that windows is indeed "fast enough"
wo/ acceleration. This is a real subjective thing, imho. Perhaps you
disagree.

>So, suggest your own metric... but don't say that Wolfgang's methodology
>is worse than "which one feels snappy."

Its not very pointfull to deciding if a GUI is "fast enough" wo/ acceleration,
and thats all Im arguing about.

>Sheesh.

[tastefully deleted rude remark] There, that made me feel better.
---
			- Dan Johnson
And God said "Jeeze, this is dull"... and it *WAS* dull. Genesis 0:0

These opinions have had all identifiying marks removed, and are untraceable.
You'll never know whose they are.
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy