To: All Message #: 3206
From: Larry Schneider Submitted: 08 Mar 91
Subject: speed compairsons Status: Public
Received: No Group: APPLE (14)
In a recent message to all, Robert Hardman wrote:
"In a variety of word processors, they replaced 1300
occurrences of "Mac"with "Macintosh". Their
-- presumably averaged -- speed results ranged from
a low of 219 seconds on the Mac Classic (8 Mhz 68000)
to seconds on the Mac IIfx (40 Mhz 68030)."
And a little further along in his message he writes:
"As I see it, there are three possible explanations:
1) They didn't report their test and/or results correctly.
If this was the case, the benchmark was
irreproducible even for a Mac owner.
2) the over-engineered software of the Mac
slows things down a hell of a lot.
I think this is very likely, considering the
differences between AW and FW.
3) The 68--- series is hideously overrated.
I think this is also likely. Ask Bill Mensch!"
I decided to do a little testing of my own. As you should
expect, I used Apple Writer. I did three tests: The symbol
"^M" indicates a carriage return
A) MacMacMacMacMac......(1300 of the worthless buggers
with NO carriage return)
B) Mac Mac Mac Mac .....(1300 of the worthless buggers
with 10 to a line)
C) Mac^M
Mac^M
Mac^M (1300 of the worthless buggers)
.
.
.
D) Mac ^M
Mac ^M
Mac ^M (1300 of the worthless buggers)
.
.
.
The results were of ten 'tests' averaged. All times are in
seconds. For the larger numbers, I did not bother to include
decimals as I felt them to be meaningless. For the smaller
numbers - my watch goes to 1/100 ths of a second; however,
I'm a fat old man whose reflexes are not that great; I'll
just give the results as I've indicated.
TEST A B C D
IIgs 129 7.3 4.4 5.3
8 meg ZIP IIe 46 2.6 1.9 2.1
First thing to note is: much depends on how the word "Mac"
is placed in the text file. I'll not bother with showing a
display of what the replacement of Mac by Macintosh in test
"A" looked like, but will tell you that Apple Writer needed
to do a lot of formating in test "A". From this experience,
I would like to know how "Mac" was formated in the original
tests done by MacWorld! Next, I'll agree with #2 of Robert's
conclusions. Just imagine what a Mac IIfx could be without
that worthless GUI!!!!!! Just imagine what the IIgs would
be without emulating that same worthless GUI. I'll disagree
with #3 however; 68xxx does graphics very nicely. I would
bet that Apple Writer could be ported over to a 68xxx very
easily. I believe my own testing puts #1 into further
question; i.e. MacWorld or Robert need to be more careful
as to how results are reported.
--
Dennis McClain-Furman...@resq.fidonet.org
(Please insert a '.' in the name; we've run run out...)
