home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- From: Julian Reschke <reschke@GOEDEL.UNI-MUENSTER.DE>
- Subject: Re: GEM/X
- Date: Fri, 21 Jan 94 18:54:41 MET DST
- In-Reply-To: <9401210940.ae02894@ncrhub1.NCR.COM>; from "Chris Herborth" at Jan 21, 94 9:39 am
-
- >
- > What you wrote:
- > > What about NeXT ? X uses by far the most CPU resources, and GEM the least,
- > > so what about something in between .. like the NeXT GUI? It could be
- > > simulated either by adding to GEM, or rewrite GEM to call NeXT-like objects.
- >
- > NeXTstep would he even worse than a simple X server on an ST or Falcon;
- > Display PostScript is computationally expensive, and we don't have enough
- > computrons to spread around. Have you seen how slow Ghostscript and
- > Ultrascript (two PostScript emulators) are on a 68k? *shudder*
- >
- > I wonder if a virtual desktop for MGR would be possible, and how "slow"
- > it would be? MGR is a pretty minimal (ie, fast and not too memory hogging)
- > graphical environment... Maybe someone who's actually been using it
- > (is Howard Chu on this list?) has been doing some work at making it more
- > attractive to users?
-
- MGR should work fine with BigScreen, my virtual screen manager (version >= 2.0
- are commercial).
-
- >
- > It's a pity Atari decided to put such a brain-dead MMU into the original
- > ST. 4M isn't enough for all of this and a C compiler, let alone a C++
- > compiler. :-(
- >
- You can buy memory expansion boards with up to 12MB. But I think a TT
- or Falcon would make more sense.
-
- --
- ---------------------------------------------------
- Julian F. Reschke, Hensenstr. 142, D-48161 Muenster
- eMail: reschke@math.uni-muenster.de jr@ms.maus.de
- ___________________________________________________
-