Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uupsi!sugar!peter
From: peter@Sugar.NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Some WB2.0 Peeves
Message-ID: <1991Jun24.103732.29528@Sugar.NeoSoft.com>
Organization: Sugar Land Unix -- Houston, TX
References: <1991Jun23.210647.20152@news.iastate.edu>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1991 10:37:32 GMT

In article <1991Jun23.210647.20152@news.iastate.edu> taab5@isuvax.iastate.edu writes:
[screen not locked while doing window handling under X windows]

>    My question is: why can't this be so on an Amiga?

In a word: overhead. There are good reasons why the Amiga window system is
more responsive on an Amiga 500 than X on a SparcStation 1. This is one of
them. On the Amiga, menus are handled specially to cut down layer creation
and screen fragmentation. Moving the window outline is done similarly, for the
same reason.

> I guess I don't quite
> understand why this has to be on a computer with such awesome animation as
> an Amiga.  

There are slight performance differences between a MIPS R3000 and a 7 MHz 68000.
-- 
Peter da Silva.   `-_-'   <peter@sugar.neosoft.com>.
                   'U`    "Have you hugged your wolf today?"
